Personalities in the Gaming Industry and Politics

[Mark]

...and to think I only came to the boards a few minutes ago to look for tidbidts about DMGII...

Most of this thread can be used in-game, as well...

 

[JacktheRabbit]

In the common usage, "education" normally mean "formal education". But I still don't see a strong correlation even with informal education. There are plenty of people who research and learn only to support what they already believe. Without the added element of wanting to challenge your own opinions, I still claim that education does not lead to open mindedness.

Far too often I see quite the opposite. The more "educated" formally someone is the more sure that they are right and less willing to change. Also I find that the more educated someone is the more important it is to them. IE they are more willing to use it as a scale to determine value and intelligence. If someone else does not possess an education beyond a certain level then they are not worthy of respect nor are their opinions.

 

[Darrin Drader]

Wow, sitting at my desk at work, reading in between job duties, I finally got caught up.

My opinion on the education issue is that it is only one factor that leads to an informed position. The other is that individual's specific situation. I'm going to try to avoid quoting specifics here, so let's just say that if a person feels that their situation will be better accomodated by one candidate over another, they may be likely to support that candidate, despite the fact that said candidate's politics might cause other consequences. The person who supports that candidate might simply not care about the other party since their needs/wants will be met. In my opinion, that person's opinion is just as valid as the person making the decision based on their morals and principles becasue it represents who they are and what they are.

So really, I think education level is just one of the axes. The other is personal situation.

 

[John Morrow]

What I don't like about that it that it can lead to "nobody can know anything and therefore I'm free to ignore your arguement". There is such a thing as an objective truth.

For the record, I believe in objective reality, as well. What I'm cautioning against is the other extreme -- the idea that knowledge and logic can solve all problems. As with most things, moderation should be the objective. A little humility goes a long way, too, but alas humility is dying as a virtue.

 

[John Morrow]

Just because one can't have all of the answers doesn't mean there's not value in (1) having more, and (2) looking for more. Right?

That can depend on the quality of answers and how you go about looking for them. If, for example, you only look for answers among friendly sources that agree with you, you are probably digging yourself into a hole. If you want to find the answers, you need to look beyond sources that simply confirm what you think you already know.

 

[AdmundfortGeographer]

My opinion on the education issue is that it is only one factor that leads to an informed position.

Indeed, and being well-educated does not equal having well-informed positions. IMO, it is self-flattery of the well-educated to think otherwise. For example of what I mean, I cannot tell you the number of times I have met an allegedly well-educated individual who uses their once having attended college (and getting good grades) for justifying positions taken based on their heart and their feelings.

 

[Mouseferatu]

Indeed, and being well-educated does not equal having well-informed positions. IMO, it is self-flattery of the well-educated to think otherwise. For example of what I mean, I cannot tell you the number of times I have met an allegedly well-educated individual who uses their once having attended college (and getting good grades) for justifying positions taken based on their heart and their feelings.

I'm going to put forth a theory here...

I don't believe anyone ever takes positions that don't have a basis primarily in their heart and feelings. They may have logic to support it, they may even have used logic and research and education to reach it. But very few people, IME and IMO, adopt positions they cannot make themselves feel good about.

 

[Mouseferatu]

I should probably clarify that I'm talking about major life-style decisions, political decisions, and moral standards, not the relatively little stuff.

 

[Wulf Ratbane]

"If you say what I like, you're cool. If you challenge my views, you're a jerk, and I'll threaten your livelihood, and the livelihood of anyone who works with you." Tell me that you don't see a problem with that.....

No, really, I don't. Honestly. I mean, it's a bit of hyperbole you got there. Choosing to purchase or not purchase your product isn't quite the same as "threatening your livelihood."

Everyday I go to game stores where I like the staff (or the customers); I eat at restaurants where they are friendly; I take my car to the shop where the mechanics aren't greaseballs; I prefer to get my hair cut by either an attractive woman or an old (maybe Italian) barber; I prefer the service at Lowe's but the 'grimy-ness' of Home Depot; and so on. None of these decisions really has anything to do with the product that I'm ultimately buying.

This doesn't directly speak to your "If you say what I like," comment but it's illustrative of the sorts of perfectly reasonable purchasing decisions that I think most folks make on a daily basis, even if they'd be difficult to justify if the only legitimate reference was the product itself.

And as far as 'challenging my views' goes, it's not as if I have a political litmus test that's pass/fail; but if I do happen to be in your shop, and you feel like you have to express a political opinion contrary to mine, then don't be surprised or offended when I choose to go someplace where I don't have to hear it. Doesn't mean you can't have your opinion, and it doesn't even mean I care one way or the other what that opinion is, just realize that if I have to HEAR it in the course of doing business with you, I might choose NOT to.

But that's partly because I have plenty of other places to go for those 'products.'

Now, my experience is that most of the leading designers in the game industry lean left to my right. (And I think any suggestion to the contrary is about as valid as polling the local newsroom and finding out that they all consider themselves 'moderates.')

Most of them also don't violate my 'don't push your crap in my face' rule, so no problem. If you want to market your products part and parcel with your very opinionated views, and use your website to protest our fascist theocracy, then don't be offended or surprised if I choose to spend my money over at the more reserved (though in all likelihood equally left-leaning) games designer's site.

Surprise or offense is unlikely. I'm quite confident that such folks, who are as outspoken as me in their own views, are as comfortable as I am to see some folks walk away, and other folks to find common identity and come back for more.

Having somebody insinuate that I'm a Nazi (or, rather, as I read it, attempt to corner me into appearing that way) is NOTHING. Water off a ducks' back.

A ha! And if I am not mistaken, sir, you keep your hair quite short. Quite. Short.

 

[Pielorinho]

Isn't the very name, though, a sign that you (or whoever runs the site) believes that the "other side" is "that way" out of "sheer ignorance"?

The board admins highly frown on evangelizing about the board, and I'm in no way an authority over at the board ,which is why I'm referring to it only obliquely (anyone that wants to find it knows enough to do so). At the same time, the board's snarky motto is not at all referring to political positions (except inasmuch as a prioritizing of formal research skills and a strong undercurrent of skepticism qualifies as a political position). The "other side" really just consists of people who accept urban legends uncritically. And yeah, I think they're ignorant .

The delight of the board is that I can go there, encounter brilliant people whose political positions are very different from mine, and have a gruelingly-intense political debate with them, full of cites to peer-reviewed research, news articles, history, formal logic, and legal opinions, without having the affair bogged down by personal insults, logical fallacies, or shallow rhetoric.

If it were an echo chamber, it'd be worthless to me; as it is, it's the single best source I have for understanding the underpinnings of political positions different from my own.

Daniel