Bix and Box
Explorer
"Your honor, sure my client committed assault. But there are other people out there committing murder! How can you fault him, in the light of that greater evil?"
It is time to forgive WOTC and get back onboard.
- Thread starter ECMO3
- Start date
"Your honor, sure my client committed assault. But there are other people out there committing murder! How can you fault him, in the light of that greater evil?"
UngeheuerLich
Legend
I don't know if we depart that much. I don't think of WotC as an entity that can earn or lose trust as a whole. I do trust the designers. I don't trust the suits.
Last edited:
UngeheuerLich
Legend
While the analogies become ever more more worrisome and hyperbolic, there is a difference beween murder and attempted murder and just threatening to murder someone.
Maxperson
Morkus from Orkus
It's the suits that are the corporation, not the designers.
Even if all the suits who initiated this fiasco leave the company, suits tend to be similarly minded people, so new suits will be just as capable of something like this as the ones there now.
How do you "forgive" a company? It feels like the framing here is wrong.
I could potentially forgive the people who made the decisions that blew everything up if they were asking me for it. But they aren't and they won't. I don't even know who those people are, and it's not like they've committed to not make another terrible decision to blow everything up again, which I consider an important element of who I forgive and who I don't personally.
I have a transactional relationship with Hasbro the company not a personal one. They make things, I buy things. There are lots of reasons I might choose to not buy things from them, and in the past month they created a new one and then walked it back. So I'll continue to buy things from them if they make things I want to buy up until they make another boneheaded decision that makes me feel that I need to stop buying from them. But I wouldn't call that "forgiveness" - that's just commerce.
Forgiving a company for making a terrible decision feels a bit like forgiving a bear that messed up my campsite. I mean I guess I could do it but the bear doesn't care and will do it again if they can get away with it. The only one who might get something out of the act of forgiveness here is me, and that is probably wrapped up more in how an individual processes anger than anything else.
I could potentially forgive the people who made the decisions that blew everything up if they were asking me for it. But they aren't and they won't. I don't even know who those people are, and it's not like they've committed to not make another terrible decision to blow everything up again, which I consider an important element of who I forgive and who I don't personally.
I have a transactional relationship with Hasbro the company not a personal one. They make things, I buy things. There are lots of reasons I might choose to not buy things from them, and in the past month they created a new one and then walked it back. So I'll continue to buy things from them if they make things I want to buy up until they make another boneheaded decision that makes me feel that I need to stop buying from them. But I wouldn't call that "forgiveness" - that's just commerce.
Forgiving a company for making a terrible decision feels a bit like forgiving a bear that messed up my campsite. I mean I guess I could do it but the bear doesn't care and will do it again if they can get away with it. The only one who might get something out of the act of forgiveness here is me, and that is probably wrapped up more in how an individual processes anger than anything else.
There was a phrase I heard years ago that I really like.
"Forgiveness isn't about letting them off the hook. Forgiveness is about no longer allowing them to have the power to affect your emotions."
What's the other phrase? "You can't have redemption without repentance?" Something like that.
As a 3PP, I'm glad they backtracked. I really am. I don't think they had to if they didn't really want to (see other various posts I've made on the topic re: the importance of branding, how most gamers aren't on forums, etc.). But I'm glad they did.
But...
And that's a big but, trust is important. Before going back, I'd need 2 things: a big carrot, and protection/peace of mind they couldn't do it again. As a 3PP, I don't see myself using the OGL 2.0 going forward. Who knows what the future looks like. But with the move to CC, I can assure you that future products won't be using the OGL 1.0(a). Why? The CC offers me protection and pretty much the same thing I had before. I never used others' Open content anyway, so it doesn't impact me.
"Forgiveness isn't about letting them off the hook. Forgiveness is about no longer allowing them to have the power to affect your emotions."
What's the other phrase? "You can't have redemption without repentance?" Something like that.
As a 3PP, I'm glad they backtracked. I really am. I don't think they had to if they didn't really want to (see other various posts I've made on the topic re: the importance of branding, how most gamers aren't on forums, etc.). But I'm glad they did.
But...
And that's a big but, trust is important. Before going back, I'd need 2 things: a big carrot, and protection/peace of mind they couldn't do it again. As a 3PP, I don't see myself using the OGL 2.0 going forward. Who knows what the future looks like. But with the move to CC, I can assure you that future products won't be using the OGL 1.0(a). Why? The CC offers me protection and pretty much the same thing I had before. I never used others' Open content anyway, so it doesn't impact me.
Aldarc
Legend
Yeah, regardless of whether or not WotC backtracked or opened things up even more, damage has still been done and not everyone will be eager to return to WotC's OGL harbor.
Ironically they probably have destroyed the OGL going forward faster and more completely than if they had gone through with their plans, which likely would have been a prolonged event full of potential litigation. It's a more subtle destruction, but the people who currently publish using it are going to get off of it now and not many new works are likely to be released under it.
Imaro
Legend
I don't agree with the analogy or the hyperbole around it. The OGL 1.0a being revoked is in no way comparable to someone trying to murder me. If a friend tried to take advantage of me (say trick me out of some money) and I protested his actions and he relented and gave me the money back and apologized... yeah I'd probably forgive him.
Imaro
Legend
Can we please stop equating revoking the OGL with murder... seriously they aren't comparable and it actually makes your position, in my eyes, seem even more overblown.
Imaro
Legend
But it's not all the same severity in sentencing is it?
I do not believe that this in possible. My understanding (not a lawyer) based on the legal discussion, here and elsewhere, is that the claim to de-authorise the OGL was not legally tenable. That is, a publisher that continued to publish under the OGL would ultimately prove successful in court, if they could afford to carry the case until it came to trial.
I do not think it was an absolute certainty, as the actual legal arguments, the quality of the lawyers and the judge all effect the outcome but that the case was a strong one.
Everyone believed that the OGL was rock solid before this bout of shenanigans. Again from reading what the lawyers say, I do not believe that there is any formulation of words that would be rock solid enough to be free from a threat mounted by the combination of: a novel legal approach, and a mountain of cash being thrown around as a threat.
This is more a commercial (and may be an equality o justice ) issue.
The release of the SRD under the CC-BY 4.0 licence is as rock solid as you can get. That would get a lot more than gamers mad if someone tried to break that licence.
As for Third Party Publishers:
I would leave the existing OGL stuff where it is, it is safe enough for now.
I would get my base game rules out from under the OGL and move to the CC-BY-4.0 or the new ORC licence once the independent foundation is up and running.
Maxperson
Morkus from Orkus
They tried to kill the businesses of all 3PP and VTT competitors and take away what for some was their livelihood and not just some money on the side.
I probably would as well, but it would take a very long time to fully forgive, and trust might never return. Much like with WotC.
Parmandur
Book-Friend
A corporation is not a person.
Parmandur
Book-Friend
Somebody in a suit had to sign off on solving this.
Aldarc
Legend
You're right. A corporation is more dangerous than a person.
Parmandur
Book-Friend
Sure, and that was true before. The point is that a corporation is not a being with agency, it's a network of people working towards a common goal, sometimes together and sometimes at cross purposes.
You cannot trust the network as a gestalt, but individuals maybe or maybe not.
Aldarc
Legend
This is trying to make a distinction without too much of a difference. Do you think that the people of Paizo care too much about this distinction when it comes to WotC threatening their business?
Parmandur
Book-Friend
No, pro baby not. But, as a consumer or a business, you shouldn't "trust" any corporation beyond legal obligations (and even that can be a fight). Anything more is gravy, and due to individual humans making good decisions.
Should people "truat" Paizo to do right by their employees, whixh was a bif quesrion last year? Itbetter now that they are unioinized, but that took a major public wffort to force on Paizo.
Similar Threads
