Upgrade your account to a Community Supporter account and remove most of the site ads.

Reply to thread

Message: <blockquote data-quote="Mercurius" data-source="post: 8502722" data-attributes="member: 59082">Yet slippery slopes are a real thing. Every heard that quote "First they came for...and I did nothing, then they came for..."?This is the problem with censorship of any kind, regardless of whether it is veiled as in the "private sphere." One thing easily leads to the next. If they censor people that you don't like, then that opens to censoring people you do like. Otherwise you end up in a death by small cuts situation or, to add yet another metaphor, the frog in slowly heating water.That's because I'm not arguing against it! You could give me the benefit of the doubt, and take me on my word: I'm not being coy, I just haven't made up my mind or come to what I think is the best solution. But one thing that comes to mind is the problem with deciding what gets a disclaimer and what doesn't. There might be some works that are blatantly problematic, but the vast majority--at least among D&D products--are varying shades of gray, and subject to interpretation and how much one reads into it.I do think Orcs of Thar warrants a disclaimer - it is pretty blatant. But as you said, I think it is on a case-by-case basis, I just think it can get, um, rather slippery and depends a lot on the subjective determination of who is deciding and what their values are.I used a word and I probably should have used another because of association, but it is just a word that can be used in different contexts - not the phrase you used. Again, I merely meant expressing a certain degree of outrage. That's not what I'm comparing. I'm comparing overall views, not teased out (cherry-picked) elements of those views.I'm saying that the degree of emotional involvement and coloring of rationality by emotion isn't solely, or necessarily even mostly, weighted towards one side or the other. Or, at the least, that I've seen it on both "sides" (again, I dislike "sides" because it implies that there are only two sides, when one of my main arguments is that there are many gradations and variations of perspective).What I hear you saying is that "your side" is rational and above emotion and the "other side" is not. That is obviously problematic.</blockquote>

Verification