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

Reply to thread

Message: <blockquote data-quote="Justice and Rule" data-source="post: 8502902" data-attributes="member: 6778210">Let me ask you: should Wizards be making money off this sort of thing? I mean, this is blatantly racist stuff... do you think Wizards should be pocketing anything from this?I ask because I think the idea of this disappearing is unfounded. This is the internet. Nothing disappears. When we talk about this being available through DM's Guild, we're talking less about preservation and more ease of access, because at some level we can find this. This is not me advocating or condoning any sort of piracy, but simply recognition that once something is on the internet, it never leaves.So we move on to the idea that is it ethical or right that WotC should make money off something they didn't produce and is just inherently, terribly racist? Even as a joke, it's bad, right? And that's where I think maybe we differ: I actually think it's really unethical for them to make money off this. And I'm not saying that they should do this for everything, but I do love my specifics and this specific thing? I think it's necessary.Don't let perfect be the enemy of good. You may not please everyone, but you can please some people and hopefully more than those you don't. Maybe not charity for all, but at least there are big offenders that it would be worthwhile to give something up for.The past is a foreign country, but that doesn't mean you can't reexamine it and reflect on it. You don't need to have a giant press release every day you do this. Like, the OP wasn't demanding that every day you put up a new press release on a disclaimer talking about what they did that was so terrible. I mean, to me it seems like the disclaimers are not the most important thing. They have value, they should be there, but they are the easiest part.What is important is how OP frames what they want to do: It's in a paper, a serious and thoughtful examination of what they found and where things were wrong. I know they say to detail individual bad portrayals, but I'm guessing they don't mean a literal long list, but rather showing the public these bad portrayals and why they are bad. Like, GAZ10 is very easy, but I know various things about Chult (even the newer stuff) has received criticism for different things: destroying the biggest civilized hub in Chult for 4E, and the mishmash remix for a generic African culture for Chult. Now if you don't know why that last one is problematic, then that's why we need this. This isn't meant to be a gigantic flagellation of D&D and the community, but a self-examination of where we came from, and to recognize what we did wrong, both the easy stuff to see and the more difficult. And through this, to create the tools and the understanding to help people who might not know about this stuff but want to improve.We can't go back to the past, but we can look back and understand the mistakes we made so that we don't make them in the future.Look, I can't speak for OP, but I don't think they'd like their efforts and examination to be written off as worrying about something they shouldn't. They were looking at something they clearly cared about: the first link to this thread is a post about updating Mystara from <s>two</s> <s>three</s> four years ago (My God, it's been four years) started by them! This wasn't just worrying, but something out of love. Like there are always more important things to worry about, but you write lengthy examinations of different issues and ideas in D&D that I read all the time. If I told you there were bigger things to worry about than whatever topic you decided to write about... well, I don't think I have that right.And I mean, you change what you can. They love Mystara, clearly. They want to change it because they want to be comfortable there, and for them they want WotC to come to terms with the past of the pdf they are selling. I don't have to go through life seeing all the little ways that the system talks down to me (at least, not for my race or gender, at least) and for those who do, I can understand wanting to change what aspects they can, even the little ones. Given that this seems way more of a slam dunk than trying to change the chop, why not ask for it?I dunno. For me, I see what the OP wants as something positive and hopeful, not castigating. You can always keep doing other things at the same time, since it's not like this sort of thing has to occupy too much of one's time. Why not try, if only because maybe they could succeed?Again, for me it's more the ethics of should they make money off this or not. For you, it may be different. But I think that's why I'm more okay with the egregious stuff being put to charity. Not everything problematic necessarily go to charity, but I'm sure there are big things that can.</blockquote>

Verification