• The VOIDRUNNER'S CODEX is coming! Explore new worlds, fight oppressive empires, fend off fearsome aliens, and wield deadly psionics with this comprehensive boxed set expansion for 5E and A5E!

Politics And Gaming Subforum or Tag?

Levistus's_Leviathan

5e Freelancer
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.
I could not agree more with this than I already do. I hate that it's somehow considered politics to talk about the inclusivity of RPGs.

Edit: I understand it's a nightmare to moderate these threads. They're too drawing for the people who want to stir the pot and troll. People have very differing opinions on the topics, and it doesn't seem to do much good talking about it online, as no one's mind seems to be changed. I apologize for this, but I personally do hope the threads remain open until this topic dies down or is resolved.
 

log in or register to remove this ad

Eltab

Lord of the Hidden Layer
It occurs to me that drawing attention to the Be Polite rule would allow EnWorld Moderators to shut off a lot of Fireballs being aimed at the guests. Including those launched during discussions of politics-adjacent subjects.

I have been an infrequent participant in those threads because I don't want to drop a comment from 10 or more pages back and discover (the hard way) there was a Red Ink post to drop the matter, somewhere in between.
 

Can we tent the site for racists like a house from termites? Sigh, someone just stated that Asian Americans don’t count as Asian.

Sorry gallows humor. I would never say a differing viewpoint is illegitimate, but when you ask some the posters to explain their viewpoints...their intent seems to provoke and incite, and not engage.
 

Lem23

Adventurer
Perhaps posts that don't treat other posters with respect with regards to origin, gender, sexual orientation, whether individually or as a group, and other such bigotry and safekeeping, should be labelled politics, deleted, and their posters warned?
 

Mistwell

Crusty Old Meatwad (he/him)
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.

I think you're using "politics" in a different way than the poster you're responding to.

If there were a thread about Thomas Hobbes' book Leviathan, it would be a political thread. The thread wouldn't be about choosing sides between two competing political parties, it would probably not resemble traditional American politics, but it would 100% be a political discussion. It's a foundational book in political science.

And it might also be discussed by way of comparison with modern politics, because that's the easiest comparison basis people have to draw from in their experience. I mean, it might also be compared to people's experience with watching Gilligan's Island or something like that, but in all likelihood you'd get people drawing comparisons to modern political topics.

Discussions about how a society should treat different groups of people and individuals, about what natural rights should and do look like and the social contract regarding natural rights of groups and individuals (which you termed "human decency") which exists on this board and in the gaming hobby, those are all political discussions. They're core political science topics. You will find those topics in every philosophy of political science course in any country where that degree is taught in universities.

And because they're core political science topics, people will frequently turn to comparisons with current more trending political topics and even the political parties which disagree about those topics. Because it's the closest basis for comparison, and a shared experience which relates to those conversations and serves as a common language to talk about them.

If you don't want people to be drawing on those modern political discourse topics to relate to a news item that's posted which is about social contracts in our community or natural rights of groups and individuals, then you probably should express that in a different way than its been expressed so far. Tell people they can relate to the topic with something fairly benign, like a comparison to Gilligan's Island would be for a discussion of Leviathan. Tell people they cannot refer to the more modern and more controversial and competitive comparisons to modern politics and political parties. And give examples of how someone can approach the topic which would be OK, and ways which would not be OK.

That, or like ccs said, just don't allow comments on topics which you know are likely to result in people reacting in a controversial and competitive way with each other where they use modern politics as a shared language to talk about that topic.

Or keep going like we're going, which sounds like it's a source of wretched daily grind for the moderation staff which will eat away at the morale of the people who run this place, and hopefully all of this will just burn itself out over time.

Or maybe there is a different way I have not considered.
 
Last edited:

dragoner

KosmicRPG.com
I hate that it's somehow considered politics to talk about the inclusivity of RPGs.

Agreed. Though it can not be rationally engaged with, as there is no reason to be against it, as the ideology against inclusion does not come from a place of rational thought, it is merely reactionary. Any attempt to engage it merely erodes the stamina of those fighting it, as well as giving the anti's a platform for their irrationality.
 

Umbran

Mod Squad
Staff member
Supporter
I think you're using "politics" in a different way than the poster you're responding to.

Mistwell, thank you for your input. Please be aware that it comes across as if it were based on a fundamental assumption of our ignorance, and our inability to think through our own statements in the current socio-political context.
 

Gradine

The Elephant in the Room (she/her)
A helpful reminder: some of us don't get to choose. My mere presence, my existence is considered political in some corners (most, honestly). Deciding that we should "ignore politics" is an inherently political choice, and one that frankly requires quite a bit of privilege.

I'm personally grateful that the moderators have done what they can to make this a place that's welcoming and inclusive and have done so while remaining relatively light-handed.
 


I think you're using "politics" in a different way than the poster you're responding to.

FWIW, we use the term "religion" in a very specific way, too. There's a no religion rule. But we still talk about the Satanic Panic, the Crusades, or the influence of Mormonism in Dragonlance without to many issues. I think Umbran was doing a good job explaining what "politics" means here.
 

Remove ads

Top