D&D General Why a PETITION: Stop Hasbro's hurtful content is a Bad Idea

[Deset Gled]

I am probably going to regret this ... but ....

I think that some of the frustration regarding the other thread is because:

1. The OP had a very-lengthy thread in the past that was about this exact same topic. So the topic is already very well known.

2. In addition, the OP is well-known for loving Mystara. Which is cool, I love Greyhawk. People like what they like.

3. Finally, the OP has had a number of recent comments and entire threads that were ... not kind ... about WoTC and about specific people at WoTC, some of which were shut down (related to the OGL).


Based upon the above, a person might think that the OP, who would like WoTC to do something with Mystara (like release a version of Thar that isn't painful), and also wants to rake WoTC in general and Kyle Brink specifically over the coals given the whole OGL thing, is bootstrapping the OGL controversy to get people riled up about this personal pet project that did not receive traction before.

Which is totally allowed! But might not be well taken by everyone.

As a point of clarification, when you are talking about the "OP" here, it seems like you mean @Dungeonosophy. However, the OP of this thread would technically be @LordEntrails. Dungeonosophy is OP of the other thread.

 

[Justice and Rule]

I would also mention this, which I found interesting-

How Copyright Laws Caused the Roald Dahl Problem

Sensitivity reading, yes, but not for old books

popula.com

I credit the delightful pull quote-
Philip Pullman was closer to the mark than most critics, on BBC’s Radio 4. He advised young readers to “read all of these wonderful authors who are writing today, who don’t get as much of a look-in because of the massive commercial gravity of people like Roald Dahl.”

As a general rule, I think that effort is much better spent leaving old works alone, and investing effort in new works. Keep GAZ10 (and the rest of the "old Mystara") as it is, warts and all - and old Mystara had a lot of warts given that large portions of it were based on real-world cultures.

But make new worlds. New lands. Heck, if you want, make a whole new Mystara using sensitivity readers. Things are always a product of their time, and whatever we are doing today, no matter how well-intentioned, will likely have things that 10, 20, 50, 100 years from now will be considered outre and offensive. It's important to recognize that products are of their time, and read them with that knowledge (or read only what is current).

Sigh

I hate having to say this, but @Dungeonosophy is not proposing to rewrite or censor anything, but to put a more specific warning about the racism that appears and wants to write a new book in the style of Volo's where you have an in-canon explanation for these misconceptions while expanding and exploring these cultures in a more modern and sensitive manner.

 

[Snarf Zagyg]

Sigh

I hate having to say this, but @Dungeonosophy is not proposing to rewrite or censor anything, but to put a more specific warning about the racism that appears and wants to write a new book in the style of Volo's where you have an in-canon explanation for these misconceptions while expanding and exploring these cultures in a more modern and sensitive manner.

Sigh

I hate having to say this, but maybe you shouldn't have big sighs and "I hate having to explain this," because it makes it seem like you're talking down to people ... which is not conducive to conversation, and is especially bad when you might not have actually considered what you're responding to.

It appears you did not read the link or understood what I said. I did not accuse anyone of censorship or rewriting. Instead, I used the pull quote to note that it is better to concentrate on new works than to keep demanding that old works live up to some other standard. Moreover, instead of trying to come up with sensitive "in-canon explanation"* for the racism of Thar, you'd probably be better off going with a completely new direction. But you wouldn't do that because, once again, this is just special pleading by a Mystara fan; at best, they should hope for a Mystara release on the same level as we've gotten for other settings so far in 5e.

But then again, I've already addressed this and other arguments when this was first brought up in the original thread in 2021 ... and I don't think that the OGL controversy has changed any of the arguments. Wait, sorry. Sigh I don't think the OGL controversy has changed any of the arguments, other than making the person who proposed them look even worse for the way that they are going after Kyle Brink. YMMV.


*See, the horrible racism is actually a FEATURE, not a BUG.

 

[Justice and Rule]

Sigh

I hate having to say this, but maybe you shouldn't have big sighs and "I hate having to explain this," because it makes it seem like you're talking down to people ... which is not conducive to conversation, and is especially bad when you might not have actually considered what you're responding to.

No, it's just me expressing my exasperation at having explained this sort of thing for... 20 pages across two threads? Forgive me if you were offended, though.

It appears you did not read the link or understood what I said. I did not accuse anyone of censorship or rewriting. Instead, I used the pull quote to note that it is better to concentrate on new works than to keep demanding that old works live up to some other standard.

That is not how that came off given the topic we are in, especially when you talk about leaving old works alone, warts and all, since no one is really talking about removing them. No one is asking old works to live up to old standards, either, just putting more specific warnings about the kind of racism being talked about in those works. I'll take this as an honest misunderstanding.

Moreover, instead of trying to come up with sensitive "in-canon explanation"* for the racism of Thar, you'd probably be better off going with a completely new direction.

...

*See, the horrible racism is actually a FEATURE, not a BUG.

No one is calling it a "feature, not a bug", but it does actually give you an in to deal with how racism can exist in a fantasy world using what was previously there. The idea would be to recognize the past mistakes and use them to teach going forward.

But you wouldn't do that because, once again, this is just special pleading by a Mystara fan; at best, they should hope for a Mystara release on the same level as we've gotten for other settings so far in 5e.

You know, you got angry at me for a sigh, but this is really insulting and demeaning to the intentions of the OP.

 

[MGibster]

No, it's just me expressing my exasperation at having explained this sort of thing for... 20 pages across two threads? Forgive me if you were offended, though.

You undestand phrasing it that way isn't an apology, right? An apology would have looked something like, "I could see how you might be offended by what I said, but it wasn't my intention and I apologize."

That is not how that came off given the topic we are in, especially when you talk about leaving old works alone, warts and all, since no one is really talking about removing them. No one is asking old works to live up to old standards, either, just putting more specific warnings about the kind of racism being talked about in those works. I'll take this as an honest misunderstanding.

I don't think you've read the petition as it includes much more than just adding more specific warnings. In fact, the demands on the petition are so ridiculous, I'm hard pressed to believe it was a good faith effort, and the author knows WotC would never agree to the terms.

 

[Snarf Zagyg]

No, it's just me expressing my exasperation at having explained this sort of thing for... 20 pages across two threads? Forgive me if you were offended, though.

"Forgive me if you were offended ....."

Uh huh.

You know, you got angry at me for a sigh, but this is really insulting and demeaning to the intentions of the OP.

1. It wasn't just a sigh that made me think your participation was demeaning, dismissive, and not conducive to discussion. I think I was clear. To the extent I wasn't, I assume that my response, highlighting the "sighs" should indicate how that conversation is received.

2. I stated my issues in my first post, which you didn't address. It is completely the OP's right to advocate for this. I am simply pointing out that we had this identical, drama-filled 2000+ comment thread in 2021 on this exact same topic- which was, moreover, carried over from a completely different RPG forum and flagged for cross-forum drama. And is now being ressurrected after the OP had another thread shut down regarding Kyle Brink (for putting words in his mouth). Notably, the big change between 2001 and now is leveraging statements by Kyle Brink.

People can do what they want; but other people can react as they wish to as well.

 

[Snarf Zagyg]

I don't think you've read the petition as it includes much more than just adding more specific warnings. In fact, the demands on the petition are so ridiculous, I'm hard pressed to believe it was a good faith effort, and the author knows WotC would never agree to the terms.

If the petition ever gets any momentum (doubtful), then they will simply remove GAZ10 from sale.

 

[LordEntrails]

Thank you Umbran. I appreciate your time and perspective.

So, if I may...

This is a thread about why a petition is bad.

You opined that "Personally I find attempts to revise and hide the past distasteful."
and "Second, I think spending any time re-writing a legacy product that is sub-par in the first place is a waste of limited resources."
Is is true that these are your opinions. Nobody is arguing that.

This is what I would disagree with. At least the way I read Justice and Rules replies, and why I quoted them is that he specifically said that my opinions "were not true".

If an opinion is not true, then what is it? A lie? If an opinion is not true, then it simple seems to me like it is being said that I am not allowed my opinions because they are not the same opinions as his. And is that not insulting and against forum rules?

However, in reference to the topic, these are non sequiturs. The petition doesn't ask for these things! So, it is not clear why you raise those opinions in this context, as they don't speak to the petition.

There are many posts in this thread and the other that believe the petition does ask for a revision to the product (specifically request #7). Many use the term censorship. I don't think it's accurate to call such an opinion invalid.

In the context of the thread, it is not strange for people to assume that you are speaking to the petition. The result is that it reads like you are implying that the petition does ask for those things. From his side, this misunderstanding makes your statements look like misinformation.

I believe the concepts I expressed as my two statements are central to the discussion. They form an ethical and/or moral basis for consideration of the petition. Ignoring them, or dismissing them as not relevant, is dismissing the basis for my disagreement and is, imo, effectively arguing that the value of petition cannot be disputed.

Second, I believe the petition is asking for a re-write of the product per request #7. Yes, I agree its not a complete re-write of the product as it stands today, but it is a re-write of the concept of the product. A fine line and one I do not support.

So, with this basic misunderstanding, the two of you have started butting heads.

And I believe he has done so with personally insulting means. Hence my problem.

 

[Justice and Rule]

You undestand phrasing it that way isn't an apology, right? An apology would have looked something like, "I could see how you might be offended by what I said, but it wasn't my intention and I apologize."

I suppose the ending of their post soured me a bit, but you're not wrong. I'm sorry for putting an exasperated sigh in there because it was not meant to be something personal as much as my tiredness thinking that I had to put something in there yet again.

I don't think you've read the petition as it includes much more than just adding more specific warnings. In fact, the demands on the petition are so ridiculous, I'm hard pressed to believe it was a good faith effort, and the author knows WotC would never agree to the terms.

In regards to GAZ10, the only thing that would be changed would be the warning on it.

As to how ridiculous the demands are, making a new Mystara book is pie-in-the-sky. The other stuff, though, is honestly something I'd like to see and not as ridiculous as they are made out: Wizards donating proceeds to charity is not that wild and should just be done as a matter of course on these sorts of works. Them having someone read through their back catalog feels appropriate. That sort of stuff is probably not going to happen, but I don't think it's exactly ridiculous, either.

"Forgive me if you were offended ....."

Uh huh.

Yeah, it's not a good apology. Again, I was a bit soured by your ending. But that's on me, it should be better.

1. It wasn't just a sigh that made me think your participation was demeaning, dismissive, and not conducive to discussion. I think I was clear.

It wasn't meant to be, but I can understand how it could be taken as such.

2. I stated my issues in my first post, which you didn't address. It is completely the OP's right to advocate for this. I am simply pointing out that we had this identical, drama-filled 2000+ comment thread in 2021 on this exact same topic- which was, moreover, carried over from a completely different RPG forum and flagged for cross-forum drama. And is now being ressurrected after the OP had another thread shut down regarding Kyle Brink (for putting words in his mouth). Notably, the big change between 2001 and now is leveraging supposed statements by Kyle Brink.

I didn't really address them because I didn't have issue with much of it. I don't remember the crossforum drama, but I do remember the thread which was recently resurrected like a Street Fighter III boss.

You also didn't phrase it in this way, which I disagree with tonally a bit more, but you have a right to your opinion on the matter.

As to leveraging recent remarks by Kyle Brink, why shouldn't we? I just don't see any sort of harm in that.

People can do what they want; but other people can react as they wish to as well.

Yes, but I think we can be less insulting about it as well.

 

[Snarf Zagyg]

I didn't really address them because I didn't have issue with much of it. I don't remember the crossforum drama, but I do remember the thread which was recently resurrected like a Street Fighter III boss.

You also didn't phrase it in this way, which I disagree with tonally a bit more, but you have a right to your opinion on the matter.

As to leveraging recent remarks by Kyle Brink, why shouldn't we? I just don't see any sort of harm in that.

I will make this explicit.

I appreciate the enthusiasm of the OP (of the other thread). I think that the analysis of the problematic nature of the individual pdf is fine.

But I also remember, quite clearly, that:
1. When the original proposal was to have a review process for all the legacy products, and people (just like now) said that there was a decent chance that Wizards would simply pull them all- the exact reaction was "Well who cares? If that's what it comes to, then so be it. Pull the whole legacy PDF program."

2. Had a recent thread shutdown because of putting words in the mouth of various people at Wizards (such as Kyle Brink), including insisting that D&D be moved to a non-profit or else people will boycott it for a lifetime.

3. Is known for stating that EnWorld shouldn't even report on Hasbro or D&D because of the OGL stuff. And that is probably the least inflammatory recent post.


.... and now this is resurrected, as I mentioned. So, yeah, as someone who is tired of the OGL stuff, and doesn't want this divisive topic from 2021 brought back simply because someone can't get traction on all of their other anti-Hasbro posts ... not feeling it.

Good?