D&D General (Anecdotal) conversations with Asian gamers on some problems they currently face in the D&D world of RPG gaming


log in or register to remove this ad


Maxperson

Morkus from Orkus
Is fake news to make a profit or benefit oneself essentially fraud?

The elements of fraud are

1) misrepresentation.
2) knowledge of falsity.
3) intent to induce reliance.
4) justifiable reliance on the false statement.
5) actual damages.

It's really hard to prove fraud, and it's hard for news to result in actual damages.

Is hate speech by someone whose sought out the a lot of the right audience stochastic terrorism and thus de facto inciting imminent lawless action?
No. If someone gives their hateful opinion on a race, gender or whatever, that does not rise to the level of incitement to violence. You have to be actually trying to get them to do violence. "Hey guys, how about we all go out and..."
 

I feel one can become intimate with a specific tradition within a culture, and borrow that specifically.

For example, earlier Panda-s1 mentioned it is ok to borrow tropes from Asian pop culture. But not to cross the line to the point of misrepresentation.


Which seems like an other way of saying, dont portray something that one doesnt know about.



Consider a baseball team that used reallife cultural names of Native Americans, and appropriated reallife sacred symbols. In fact, failure to "grok" the culture turned out to be a big problem.
No. I do not have to get a PhD in Japanese studies because I want a characters like the big wild pretend samurai in Seven Samurai.

If I want to make an alien planet and borrow a bunch of Chinese cultural tropes for the alien culture there because I just need 3-5 paragraphs to quickly describe the place that I am not even sure if my players are going to visit the place, I don’t need huge research.

If I make laksa, I am not worried that I am not Malaysian or Singaporean. I ate it in both places and liked it. Good enough.
 

You can't yell fire in a crowded theater

I apologize for not being able to let it slide, but this isn't a thing. The famously misquoted line was an offhand remark in a bad decision that led to the imprisonment of a man for anti-draft activism and that was later overturned.

 

If there's real harm done or is likely be done, it's not legal. You can't yell fire in a crowded theater, because it would cause a panic and actual physical harm to people. Child porn causes harm to the kids. Inciting riots causes physical and financial harm. They key there is real harm(physical or financial), not just something offensive. For instance, you can show naked children if it's art. I don't like it and that would offend me, but it's legal free speech.
Antisemitic propaganda before the Holocaust "made harm likely to be done".

"Inciting riots" is most of hatespeech.

Dehumanization eventuates physical harm.
 

Cadence

Legend
Supporter
The elements of fraud are

Civil fraud is listed on Wikipedia as:
  1. Somebody misrepresents a material fact in order to obtain action or forbearance by another person;
  2. The other person relies upon the misrepresentation; and
  3. The other person suffers injury as a result of the act or forbearance taken in reliance upon the misrepresentation.
Even if there's not way to win the cases, that's what a bunch of the media and politicians do all the time about scientific things.

No. If someone gives their hateful opinion on a race, gender or whatever, that does not rise to the level of incitement to violence. You have to be actually trying to get them to do violence. "Hey guys, how about we all go out and..."

It kind of feels like when someone tells their 50 million twitter followers that <group x> is doing <horrible things> and needs to be stopped, that they are actually trying to get them to do violence. It's just that it's all legally fine and dandy to incite a crapton more people to a lesser degree, and get the equivalent terrorist effect.
 

Maxperson

Morkus from Orkus
Antisemitic propaganda before the Holocaust "made harm likely to be done".

There were steps in-between. The speech itself did not do that. That harm eventually happened does not mean that the speech is what made it likely.

"Inciting riots" is much of hatespeech.
No it isn't. The vast majority of hate speech is just someone giving their twisted opinion.
 

I apologize for not being able to let it slide, but this isn't a thing. The famously misquoted line was an offhand remark in a bad decision that led to the imprisonment of a man for anti-draft activism and that was later overturned.


Heh. An example, of why not to use hyperbole.

Hyperbole can help clarify the issues involved in an abstract sense.

But hyperbole is counterproductive when trying to resolve the issues in reallife.
 

There were steps in-between. The speech itself did not do that. That harm eventually happened does not mean that the speech is what made it likely.


No it isn't. The vast majority of hate speech is just someone giving their twisted opinion.

Hatespeech is the step in between that requires regulation.


A stitch in time, save the lives of nine.

While it is still speech, it can be remedied mildly − by censorship.

When the offender ceases the hatespeech, they can return to the conversation.

However, when the hatespeech becomes action and people die, it can no longer be remedied.
 

Remove ads

Top