Asking clarification regarding moderation

[Umbran]

Sure. And I truly am not thinking that people should be free insult each other. But implying that you do not believe that a certain mythological narrative is real is not an insult.

There are many ways to be hurtful with words other than simple "insult".

 

[eyeheartawk]

I think the pushback you are seeing is more about the perceived lack of respectfulness in your post rather than what you believe.

The problem is this doesn't apply equally to all mythologies that could have followers. For example, we wouldn't be having this discussion if the point was made about Pagan traditions or about Zoroastrianism, say, since those followers don't hold primacy in the culture.

Looking at the moderated post, I very much doubt action would have been taken if the subject was a very minor religion.

Also, if somebody makes a Christian based RPG setting, that's what opened the can of worms. It's subject to the same discourse, ribbing etc that all other settings are. The OP here is not the one who decided to make a for-profit D&D setting based on a religious text (nor would he be far from the first to do so). You can't open the door, and then complain when people walk through it.

 

[FrogReaver]

Anyways I feel like this is starting to feel like gang up on @Crimson Longinus which isn’t my intent. I think I’ve said enough to provide some additional perspective and that saying more will detract rather than help my point.


@Umbran for what it’s worth, I’ve gained some respect and understanding for your moderation style.

 

[Maggan]

Also, if somebody makes a Christian based RPG setting, that's what opened the can of worms.

If I made an adventure and said "I wan't to have the PCs travel on the Bifrost bridge to Valhalla", what would it add to the discussion to chime in "the Bifrost bridge isn't real, you know?". And I've never seen anyone express a desire to add that when it comes to for example Norse mythology.

So why does that need arise when we're talking about Christianity?

 

[eyeheartawk]

If I made an adventure and said "I wan't to have the PCs travel on the Bifrost bridge to Valhalla", what would it add to the discussion to chime in "the Bifrost bridge isn't real, you know?". And I've never seen anyone express a desire to add that when it comes to for example Norse mythology.

So why does that need arise when we're talking about Christianity?

Sure, that exact same joke doesn't work when talking about Norse mythology, I agree.

Would that comment be constructive? Yeah, probably not, but then, that's not the threshold for moderation, is it? In your hypothetical, would that comment about the Bifrost being real get moderated? That's the issue.

 

[FrogReaver]

The problem is this doesn't apply equally to all mythologies that could have followers. For example, we wouldn't be having this discussion if the point was made about Pagan traditions or about Zoroastrianism, say, since those followers don't hold primacy in the culture.

I think we would. Provided there was a setting book for those traditions and a few people reported the post of course.

But honestly I don’t think that point would ever be brought up about them by anyone.

Also, if somebody makes a Christian based RPG setting, that's what opened the can of worms. It's subject to the same discourse, ribbing etc that all other settings are. The OP here is not the one who decided to make a for-profit D&D setting based on a religious text (nor would he be far from the first to do so). You can't open the door, and then complain when people walk through it.

I’m sorry, but making a religion focused RPG doesn’t open the door to anything like that. ‘You did this so you invited bad stuff to happen you’ has never been a winning argument.

 

[Crimson Longinus]

There are many ways to be hurtful with words other than simple "insult".

Sure. You may feel that me saying "I don't believe that your religion is true" is hurtful. Personally I'd argue that you chastising and punishing me for saying it is significantly more hurtful and rather noninclusive.

 

[eyeheartawk]

Provided there was a setting book for those traditions and a few people reported the post of course.

Please show me a post about Norse or any other non-dominant mythology getting moderated for being disrespectful. I think you'll find that there aren't any.

I’m sorry, but making a religion focused RPG doesn’t open the door to anything like that. ‘You did this so you invited bad stuff to happen you has never been a winning argument.’

No, I guess not. But if you happen to make a setting based on the Bible you are afforded special protection from banter not extended to others is a valid argument? So it goes one way but not the other. That's the point I was trying to make. Perhaps it wasn't totally clear there.

 

[Crimson Longinus]

The problem is this doesn't apply equally to all mythologies that could have followers. For example, we wouldn't be having this discussion if the point was made about Pagan traditions or about Zoroastrianism, say, since those followers don't hold primacy in the culture.

Looking at the moderated post, I very much doubt action would have been taken if the subject was a very minor religion.

Also, if somebody makes a Christian based RPG setting, that's what opened the can of worms. It's subject to the same discourse, ribbing etc that all other settings are. The OP here is not the one who decided to make a for-profit D&D setting based on a religious text (nor would he be far from the first to do so). You can't open the door, and then complain when people walk through it.

Indeed. There actually is a context. This is not about bringing up religion is some random unconnected thread. And the other moderated matter was another poster bringing up the atrocities and other problematic content in the source material. This is the sort of thing we talk here about a lot: how to deal with potentially problematic content. It is rather bizarre that the subject matter being connected to a religion would somehow make such an examination inappropriate.

 

[FrogReaver]

Please show me a post about Norse or any other non-dominant mythology getting moderated for being disrespectful. I think you'll find you can't find any.

There would need to be actual disrespectfulness in those conversations to show you that. Please show me disrespectfulness about Norse mythology or other non-dominant religions occurring here. I don’t believe it’s ever happened here.

No, I guess not. But if you happen to make a setting based on the Bible you are afforded special protection from banter not extended to others is a valid argument? So it goes one way but not the other. That's the point I was trying to make. Perhaps it wasn't totally clear there.

There’s no special protection here. The principal that’s being invoked is pretty clear - ‘be respectful’.