TSR TSR (2) Confirms TSR (3)'s Acquisition of Trademark (Updated!)

Doug McCrae said:

The linked comments that approvingly quote the 19th century genocidal racist, Colonel Chivington, were made by Gary Gygax in 2005 when he was 66 years old. He died aged 69.

Click to expand...

Yes. And? It's not a video game where your life levels up over time necessarily. For example, I can honestly say my mother had better views on some topics in her 20s than she had in her 60s. She had a better view on some topics 5 years ago than she has now. That's why I am saying a single comment can be obscured by time, and people can have varying views on the same topic at different points in their lives, but it's not like just one point in a life is the only meaningful one.

Doug McCrae said:

More enlightened views were being taken at the time. Sexism in rpgs was a contested topic in the 1970s and 1980s.

Click to expand...

Yes. I know. And yet, there was still a WHOLE LOT OF SEXISM in those years (as you went on to recount) while there were some (what seems to be a minority from your account) who were less sexist. And humans tend to form their opinions based on their upbringing and societal norms of the time. There was a lot of societal sexism at the time - more than there is now, I'd argue. And so saying "I wish they had been more enlightened" isn't a contradiction with "it was likely a product of their time." They're not mutually exclusive sentiments.

Bottom line, is there some reason why you feel attacking the person is more beneficial to this conversation, or to informing or persuading people on these ideas, than it would be to instead focus on the position itself?

It appears that Luke is specifying that he (and his family other than Ernest) and GaryCon are not involved with the new TSR.

OakenHart said:

It appears that Luke is specifying that he (and his family other than Ernest) and GaryCon are not involved with the new TSR.

Click to expand...

Well, Luke seems competent and savvy, so I wouldn't expect he would have wanted to go off half-cocked like this.

Mistwell said:

Bottom line, is there some reason why you feel attacking the person is more beneficial to this conversation, or to informing or persuading people on these ideas, than it would be to instead focus on the position itself?

Click to expand...

Is it attacking the person? Or is it highlighting the truth? Has he been put on so high a pedestal that pointing out the truth is an attack?

billd91 said:

Is it attacking the person? Or is it highlighting the truth? Has he been put on so high a pedestal that pointing out the truth is an attack?

Click to expand...

I gave the example specifically on the difference. We going backwards now in the conversation? If so, my response to your question is the post I made which started this line of the conversation.

Giantrollorc said:

Meh… I’m gonna grab “Giantlands”. Looks like a cool idea for a game. I might like it, maybe I won’t…. Who knows.

Click to expand...

Let's hope you actually get it. Precedent isn't good.

Morrus said:

In other news the GYGAX trademark appears to have lapsed.

Click to expand...

Retreater said:

When Disney puts blanket disclaimers in front of old cartoons or there's warnings in front of old Loony Tunes, Tom & Jerry, etc, I don't view those as "tarnishing the legacy" of the creators. I think few people do. It's not like when a studio digitally removed Kevin Spacey from a film and replaced him with another actor.
I don't think Wizards is calling out a specific designer, and if we want to look at history, late era TSR was far more "cancelling" Gygax ... Even if only for financial reasons.

Click to expand...

Their disclaimer on DriveThruRPG specifically says the views expressed were common at the time. They are very clearly not singling out the Gygaxes.

darjr said:

TSR(3) is using copyrighted images in their products and marketing. Mostly logos on t-shirts and rebranded chesssx (not sure who’s) dice as “TSR” dice. FYI.

It’s the same folks from a different business. The TSR.games page leads to that store.

View attachment 138779View attachment 138780

Click to expand...

Ugh. If they had a Morty the Wizard shirt (I think that was his name), I would be tempted, but A) I don't want to enable these guys and B) I'm not sure if the shirt would ever arrive.

imagineGod said:

But do not speak ill of the dead, is a common enough saying.

Click to expand...

Ugh. Look. I honestly couldn't care less about "clearing Gygax's name" or whatever else this recent nonsense is about, but I want to address this super fallacious support of whatever you think the situation is.

"Do not speak ill of the dead" in the proverb's entirety roughly translates into "Of the dead nothing but good is to be said", and it originates from some guy from Sparta in the 6th Century BCE.

This phrase is flat-out wrong in most cases that people try to use it in. We should absolutely speak ill of the dead, as long as what we're saying is correct and with a constructive and beneficial purpose. If someone says "Oh, [insertdeadperson] is [insertinsult]" (basically smack-talking someone behind their back, but they're dead), that's a correct place to say "Hey, don't speak ill of the dead, they can't defend themselves", because that remark isn't constructive and is just bashing on an easy target. However, if someone says "[Insertdeadperson] did bad things, here's some examples" and continues to explain why you shouldn't idolize them or otherwise praise them as people, an incorrect response to that would be "Hey! You're not allowed to speak ill of the dead! Pretend that whatever bad things they did didn't happen, because they can't defend themselves!"

I'm going to speak ill of Hitler, Thomas Jefferson, Andrew Jackson, Osama Bin Laden, and I'll continue to speak ill of my abusive grandparents when they die, and anyone else that is dead that deserves it, because criticizing the harmful things people did and said is how we progress as society, whether or not they're still alive. If we just put of a curtain down once someone dies and say "Ignore history, they're dead, no one gets to comment on what they did unless you have something good to say", that's harmful. Over 90% of the people that have ever lived are now dead, so saying "well, they're dead, so you don't get to say anything bad about them" is actively harmful and trying to prevent people from learning from the mistakes of people in the past.

As you know, there's another famous saying: "Those who cannot remember the past are condemned to repeat it."

(And, no, I'm going to stop you right here and right now. I am not comparing Gary Gygax to Hitler, Bin Laden, Andrew Jackson, Thomas Jefferson, or other awful dead people. I am merely rebutting the assertion that "Dead people are immune to being criticized", and any arguments that depend on being founded on this assertion. As I said above, I don't know enough about what is currently going on to have a real opinion on the matter (yet), I just say a logical fallacy and needed to call it out.)