Politics And Gaming Subforum or Tag?

[Mistwell]

We're getting a lot of threads which are about the politics of gaming, or political issues and how they come in contact with gaming and/or gaming products and companies.

There is nothing wrong with these threads (at least in my view) but I do think they're starting to become their own "thing". They're not really "D&D" threads, and they're not really "Pathfinder" threads, they're more "Politics & Gaming" threads. The theme of the thread, however it starts out, pretty rapidly veers into a discussion of the political aspects of that gaming topic rather than the game discussion itself.

So I'd propose either there be a new sub-forum which would include those threads, or in the alternative a meta-tag that would label them as politics and gaming (or whatever term people think is best - "politics and gaming" doesn't seem precise enough but my imagination is failing me on a better name) so that when someone clicks on "5e" they don't get "5e as it relates expressly to political issues" but instead get "5e rules" or "5e upcoming products" or other more direct 5e game-related topics, as opposed to how the game comes in contact with political topics.

Is this something the admins would consider? What do others think, or is there a better way to do this that I have not thought of, or is this a silly idea that is trying to solve for an issue that does not exist?

 

[Snarf Zagyg]

I love the idea, but I worry that any invocation of politics (even Gaming and Politics) would invariably weaken the already-permeable barrier.

 

[Bawylie]

I’m of two minds, unhelpfully.

On one hand, a toolbox is a nice place to put tools. Without a designated space for it, you get tools everywhere and that’s not ideal. At least with a toolbox, you know where to go. Likewise a forum for the subject may help properly contain it.

On the other hand, I kind of like the “No politics” rule. I can’t remember the last constructive discussion I had on the subject.

Hm. I lean toward not having it. Or not participating in it if it exists. But with full knowledge I might fail that and get sucked in.

 

[Retreater]

I like the idea of separating it out. However, individual posts (and their responses) sometimes break out in otherwise threads intended to be non-political. Maybe we could just redirect those posters to duke it out in the Politics subforum?
However, I think such a subforum dedicated to solely such posts would quickly devolve into a place I wouldn't want to visit.

 

[Morrus]

They're bloody exhausting me, I'll tell you that. They ruin every day when I have to wade in and moderate and then get subjected to a barrage of PMs and emails and insults and accusations and lectures, and there seems to be a new thread every day right now.

I think a subforum or tag for them would actively encourage them. And a forum with a politics subform -- as I have learned -- is not a forum I want to be part of.

 

[TwoSix]

I’ve been avoiding those threads, but if they’re causing grief to the moderators, I’d rather see a topic ban than a sub forum. Moderator’s decision, of course.

 

[Snarf Zagyg]

I’ve been avoiding those threads, but if they’re causing grief to the moderators, I’d rather see a topic ban than a sub forum. Moderator’s decision, of course.

I've been mostly avoiding these forums until today. I was happier that way.

It seems hard to avoid entirely, given that WoTC and others are doing a lot of things right now (and rightfully so).

 

[aco175]

I started a time clock before I post in these. I try to wait 24 hours, but then I cannot read all the pages that have come up.

 

[dragoner]

Create a new user group and sub-forum for politics, let anybody join who wants to, then after six weeks delete the forum and all the users; sort of like a roach motel.

 

[Mistwell]

They're bloody exhausting me, I'll tell you that. They ruin every day when I have to wade in and moderate and then get subjected to a barrage of PMs and emails and insults and accusations and lectures, and there seems to be a new thread every day right now.

I think a subforum or tag for them would actively encourage them. And a forum with a politics subform -- as I have learned -- is not a forum I want to be part of.

I had not considered the possibility it would increase the number of these posts rather than decrease them. When "Warlord" discussions were given their own sub-forum it decreased the number of those discussions. But maybe that was the nature of that topic, and a political topic would result in just more of those posts since it would seem a tacit endorsement of posting about politics if it gets a special label.

Well, darn.

 

[Mistwell]

Create a new user group and sub-forum for politics, let anybody join who wants to, then after six weeks delete the forum and all the users; sort of like a roach motel.

I guess you could move all those threads to CircvsMaximvs.com.

 

[dragoner]

I guess you could move all those threads to CircvsMaximvs.com.

I'm so left I bleed red, except in facebook sfrpg group I admin, I'm strictly no politics, where even friends have been angry at me for ruthless deletion of political posts and threads. IME, forums that allow politics like tarnowski's cesspit, just become a confederacy of shtbags, after the culling of one side.

 

[Mistwell]

I'm so left I bleed red, except in facebook sfrpg group I admin, I'm strictly no politics, where even friends have been angry at me for ruthless deletion of political posts and threads. IME, forums that allow politics like tarnowski's cesspit, just become a confederacy of shtbags, after the culling of one side.

I think you are referring to TheRPGSite.com? CircvsMaximvs is owned by Morrus.

 

[dragoner]

Yes, though I have briefly looked at CircvsMaximvs once.

 

[doctorbadwolf]

I’m of two minds, unhelpfully.

On one hand, a toolbox is a nice place to put tools. Without a designated space for it, you get tools everywhere and that’s not ideal. At least with a toolbox, you know where to go. Likewise a forum for the subject may help properly contain it.

On the other hand, I kind of like the “No politics” rule. I can’t remember the last constructive discussion I had on the subject.

Hm. I lean toward not having it. Or not participating in it if it exists. But with full knowledge I might fail that and get sucked in.

A thing I've noticed with political discussions is that while people don't change their minds in the course of the discussion, they do change their minds later. Not usually to exactly what the other people tried to convince them of, but people inevitably affect eachother by interacting, and we don't just filedump all the information we are given in a discussion.

We just don't process it while we have our hackles up.

 

[Bawylie]

A thing I've noticed with political discussions is that while people don't change their minds in the course of the discussion, they do change their minds later. Not usually to exactly what the other people tried to convince them of, but people inevitably affect eachother by interacting, and we don't just filedump all the information we are given in a discussion.

We just don't process it while we have our hackles up.

Yeah that’s fair. There’s some perhaps involuntarily reactions (certainly speaking for myself, here) where someone might say “Hey this there’s a problem with this thing.” And I’ll go “wait I own that thing - they have a problem with me? Oh Hell Naw! I’m not the problem!” And that’s not close to what was said, but the defenses go first on initiative.

And I have to wait that out and deliberately envision the best version of the original argument. And that’s tiring but I can’t figure out how to beat the auto-defenses on initiative.

But ultimately, I agree that I have been persuaded or come around sometime after the heat dies down.

 

[doctorbadwolf]

They're bloody exhausting me, I'll tell you that. They ruin every day when I have to wade in and moderate and then get subjected to a barrage of PMs and emails and insults and accusations and lectures, and there seems to be a new thread every day right now.

I think a subforum or tag for them would actively encourage them. And a forum with a politics subform -- as I have learned -- is not a forum I want to be part of.

This is one of those things where it's hard for people to contextualize their actions in a broader context, like when people pile on on twitter and refuse to see their tweet as part of a pile on just because they didn't intend to be part of a tweet mob.

In other words, I apologise for my part in that. I do disagree vociferously with certain aspects of the moderation here, and care about being part of this forum to much to just leave over it, but perhaps a better way to deal with that is to collect my thoughts over time, and post a meta thread when I can speak to trends and patterns rather than recent and specific instances.

I had not considered the possibility it would increase the number of these posts rather than decrease them. When "Warlord" discussions were given their own sub-forum it decreased the number of those discussions. But maybe that was the nature of that topic, and a political topic would result in just more of those posts since it would seem a tacit endorsement of posting about politics if it gets a special label.

Well, darn.

The warlord discussions were decreasing by the time the subforum was made for them, anyway, to be fair. I remember thinking it was much too late to make a subforum by the time it was announced.

But yeah I think Morrus would have to either moderate that sub less, or convince someone to become a mod, and even as someone who values political debate regardless of the angry jerk posts, it's probably not worth it either way. Which is a bummer. I've rather enjoyed whole pages of the recent discussions! lol but seriously the bad pages probably do outweigh the good ones.

 

[doctorbadwolf]

Yeah that’s fair. There’s some perhaps involuntarily reactions (certainly speaking for myself, here) where someone might say “Hey this there’s a problem with this thing.” And I’ll go “wait I own that thing - they have a problem with me? Oh Hell Naw! I’m not the problem!” And that’s not close to what was said, but the defenses go first on initiative.

And I have to wait that out and deliberately envision the best version of the original argument. And that’s tiring but I can’t figure out how to beat the auto-defenses on initiative.

But ultimately, I agree that I have been persuaded or come around sometime after the heat dies down.

That reminds me of something, and I've got to go make a thread now! Thanks!

 

[ccs]

When reporting gaming news that you know have political aspects? Report it, maybe sticky it for a period so it gets seen, but do not leave it open for replies.
After all, there's a No Politics rule. So why bait people into violating it?

 

[Umbran]

After all, there's a No Politics rule. So why bait people into violating it?

Because, treating our fellow gamers - of any origin, creed, sexual orientation or gender - with proper respect is not politics. It is basic human decency. It is making our hobby as welcoming to others as it was to us. Forbidding discussion of the fact that within our hobby they don't always get the respect they ought is harmful, and doing harm to gamers is not our thing.

That some folks call this politics is really not our problem.