D&D General I wish people would avoid name-dropping Gary Gygax

[Theory of Games]

And I'll go a step further since we're knee-deep. En World ToS states:

Keep it civil: Don't engage in personal attacks, name-calling, or blanket generalizations in your discussions. Say how you feel or what you think, but be careful about ascribing motives to the actions of others or telling others how they "should" think. People seeking to engage and discuss will find themselves asking questions, seeking clarifications, and describing their own opinion. People seeking to "win an argument" sometimes end up taking cheap shots, calling people names, and generally trying to indimidate others. My advice: don't try to win. You've probably heard the adage that nobody ever wins an argument on the internet.

 

[Mannahnin]

And I'll go a step further since we're knee-deep. En World ToS states:

Nothing in the OP is uncivil, and it explicitly disclaims authority.

 

[Theory of Games]

Nothing in the OP is uncivil, and it explicitly disclaims authority.

Ah, but IT IS thought-policing, by definition. Not my rule ...

 

[Azzy]

I believe he wrote all of what actually got published in Unearthed Arcana.

The demihuman and orc pantheons were written by Roger E. Moore.

 

[Mannahnin]

Ah, but IT IS thought-policing, by definition. Not my rule ...

Nah.

I've noticed a thing where the name "Gary Gygax" is sometimes brought into conversations where (IMNSHO) it doesn't belong. There are even threads where I can mark the point that it goes from a reasonable conversation to one that I know will eventually be locked when someone drops the Gygax name in the thread. That bugs me. These are my personal guidelines for when one should or shouldn't name-drop Gary Gygax, why it bugs me, and how I try to do better.

Actions, not thoughts.

These are my personal guidelines that I do my best to follow, and occasionally fail at. They are open to discussion and criticism. But I think if we can all recognize when some of these things (especially #5 above) are happening, then a few threads just might be a bit friendlier.

2nd Disclaimer: I am not a mod, I am not your mother, and I have no authority over anyone here. I have intentionally not quoted specific times I've seen things like this done on EN World to avoid making it personal. This is a discussion of things I have seen on the internet at large, not just here. I have intentionally avoided using the more inflammatory examples of issues associated with Gary Gygax to avoid turning this thread into yet another discussion of those topics. If you feel like this is a bunch of strawman arguments that don't apply to you, then they probably (hopefully?) don't apply to you. This post is roughly 10% disclaimer, and I have doubts that will be sufficient.

 

[Theory of Games]

Nah.


Actions, not thoughts.

What's cool is when people are allowed to disagree. You disagree with me. Cool.

I disagree with the OP. Why can't I be cool too (especially when the OP violates ToS)?

 

[Mannahnin]

What's cool is when people are allowed to disagree. You disagree with me. Cool.

I disagree with the OP. Why can't I be cool too (especially when the OP violates ToS)?

I can't have a firm opinion on whether you're cool. I don't know you well enough.

I* disagree that the OP violates ToS, and I think it requires a pretty tortured reading of the OP to construe it as doing so.

*(and apparently the mods, since the thread has been allowed to stand since February).

 

[Theory of Games]

I can't have a firm opinion on whether you're cool. I don't know you well enough.

I* disagree that the OP violates ToS, and I think it requires a pretty tortured reading of the OP to construe it as doing so.

*(and apparently the mods, since the thread has been allowed to stand since February).

Okay. I respect your knowledge of ttrpgs and your polite conversation. Always.

Even when you're wrong. Like now.

 

[Morrus]

Why can't I talk about THAT PART? Who does it harm? What law am I violating?

What on earth are you talking about? Who is preventing you from talking about anything? Who said it did harm? Who claimed you were violating a law? I'm not big on calling out logical fallacies on the forum, but if somebody asked me to define a strawman I'd just give them a link to your post.

 

[Umbran]

Yeah but, this is how institutionalized censorship begins: with somebody's opinion.

Mod note:

The only "institution" of relevance here is the site itself. When you see the institution - meaning the moderation staff - supporting this, then make your beef to Morrus and the mods.

"You are not allowed to voice this opinion because it might, by some unclear mechanism, at some unkown point in the future, become institutionalized, " is just as much an attempt at censorship as the OP. The irony should be obvious.

So, everyone is safe, so long as they treat each other with respect and thoughtfulness, and are not allergic to irony.