D&D General The Art and the Artist: Discussing Problematic Issues in D&D

[Levistus's_Leviathan]

False Equivalency.

I did not equivalate the them. I purposefully chose a variety of different situations to illustrate the fact that there are situations where it is okay to judge the morality of other peoples' actions and advise them that it's objectively bad to do those things.

Also, fallacy fallacy. You claimed something was a logical fallacy without backing up that claim or explaining how it would have negatively impacted my argument. That makes your argument flimsy and incoherent.

Literally the primary (or one of them) points of the thread is 'do you overlook the artist, for the art'.

Another point of it (and following posts) was that there's a major difference between supporting a dead author that cannot benefit in typical manners from having their works bought/read and an alive one that is actively using the money you give them to spread hate.

If you believe someone has commit a crime, I assume you have called the relevant authorities.

So, you're saying that it is not correct to say that those actions are morally wrong? "Strange" stance.

 

[Scribe]

I purposefully chose a variety of different situations

All of which are literal crimes, at least in my country.

So, you're saying that it is not correct to say that those actions are morally wrong? "Strange" stance.

No, I'm saying you are comparing actual crimes, to statements/beliefs/assumptions that unless I've missed something, have never landed Rowley in prison.

I have read no book, nor spent a dollar in a theatre to support Rowley, but the question was and remains, do you overlook the artist, living or dead, for the art?

The question is not, do you continue to funnel money at the person, because that is what 'support' in the most literal way regarding a living artist is going to mean.

Support != Overlook, and that was my initial complaint with the switch in vocabulary used by Crimson. It is putting words in Micah's mouth, in a seeming attempt to vilify or otherwise cast judgment when the context for doing so didnt exist.

And THAT has been going on here increasingly for weeks, if not months.

 

[Sacrosanct]

Times like this when I have sympathy for the moderation staff. Some of what is being said here is...pretty awful actually.

 

[Irlo]

All of which are literal crimes, at least in my country.

No, I'm saying you are comparing actual crimes, to statements/beliefs/assumptions that unless I've missed something, have never landed Rowley in prison.

I have read no book, nor spent a dollar in a theatre to support Rowley, but the question was and remains, do you overlook the artist, living or dead, for the art?

The question is not, do you continue to funnel money at the person, because that is what 'support' in the most literal way regarding a living artist is going to mean.

Support != Overlook, and that was my initial complaint with the switch in vocabulary used by Crimson. It is putting words in Micah's mouth, in a seeming attempt to vilify or otherwise cast judgment when the context for doing so didnt exist.

And THAT has been going on here increasingly for weeks, if not months.

I spent a lot of time putting that into context for you. I'm sorry you missed the point.

 

[Scribe]

I spent a lot of time putting that into context for you. I'm sorry you missed the point.

No, I saw what you did, but if you have to go to that effort to clear things up, when the words never needed to be changed going from one post to the next in the first place?

Sorry, but I've grown tired of giving people the benefit of the doubt when there are dozens of examples of people not arguing in good faith on the daily.

Context, changed. Overlook != Support.

 

[Bill Zebub]

I will temper my position a little bit. There has been so much angry backlash, and so much insistence that “orcs aren’t black people” and “I don’t confuse real life with fiction” and other such specious arguments, that I tend to lump all doubters into one group of people trying to argue why we shouldn’t have to change the game.

But if anybody is taking the position of doubting there’s a problem, but being all in on the changes anyway just in case it makes a difference, even a symbolic one, then I’m happy to debate how much actual impact it has.

 

[Malmuria]

So I will not spend one cent that has even a remotest chance of supporting that. Perhaps in hundred years Potter books are cherished fantasy classics and Rowling's odious views are just an unpleasant footnote with no real power. But today they cannot be overlooked.

I read this as CL not being willing to support Rowling, because while one day her views may be overlooked, today they cannot be.

It would be very weird to respond, "I agree that we ought not support Rowling, but everyone has the right to overlook her." But we're half way to a Seinfeld sketch here.

 

[Vaalingrade]

Black people have real issues to deal with. The D&D "racist issue" was created by a bunch of white Kevins and Karens from their basements.

Um...

Just because we have bigger problems doesn't mean we're going to sweat the small stuff or that we need white folks to find it for us. The D&D racism issue has been clear to us for decades, just like now people try to mitigate it or sweep our objections under the carpet. The difference is WotC is listening to us now and people are Real Mad.

 

[Scribe]

It would be very weird to respond, "I agree that we ought not support Rowling, but everyone has the right to overlook her." But we're half way to a Seinfeld sketch here.

I agree, we are absolutely in a Seinfeld sketch, but isnt the question of overlooking literally the point of the thread?

 

[Levistus's_Leviathan]

So go fix real systemic racism in the courts, in the police stops, in the job hiring, house sales etc.

But a bunch unemployed twitter accounts that are not real, pretending that some bullywug fairy that doesn't exist is a "problem" comparable to black lives matter, is ridiculous.

Black people have real issues to deal with. The D&D "racist issue" was created by a bunch of white Kevins and Karens from their basements.

Appeal to Worse Problems - TV Tropes

Also called: Fallacy of relative privation (its proper name). The "Children Are Starving In Africa!" Argument. Arguing that expressing concern about a (relatively) small problem means that the person doesn't care about any larger problems. The …

tvtropes.org

None of us have the power to "fix racism". If we did, we would. We don't. Just because there are larger problems (systematic racism in the USA), that doesn't mean that things you percieve to be lesser problems aren't actually problems or aren't worth addressing.

Just because there are starving children in Africa, that doesn't mean that someone else that isn't starving breaking a bone isn't a problem.