D&D General Why a PETITION: Stop Hasbro's hurtful content is a Bad Idea

[Irlo]

If I understand what's going on in our mini thread...
1) you asked a theoretical
2) I responded with a generic
3) and now you are reacting as if my response (#2) had something to do with the petition?

Is that correct? Or did I misunderstand the relevance of your statement I replied to?

I do not think your response had anything to do with the petition. I was indicating that other posters’ comments about the petition were examples of the idea that materials must be kept available. I mentioned that in response to you saying that no one was arguing that they must.

The context of this conversation is becoming muddled. I’ll drop out. Thanks though for engaging!

 

[guachi]

If you wanted to approach altering the book and still appeal to the old time fans then just go with a tonal shift. It was created during the TSR silly phase. Ethengar presents Mongol themed humanoids copying the human culture there seriously and that book is considered one of the better entries into the setting.

Bruce Heard wrote GAZ10. Bruce Heard loves Mystara. Mystara fans love Bruce Heard.

Despite this, I'm not aware of any fan content anywhere on Pandius that uses even one bit of the negative content there. There's still silliness in fan-content Mystara but fans basically act like the bad parts of GAZ10 just don't exist. That's a good thing. It tells me you are absolutely correct that fans would embrace a tonal shift because they've already made that tonal shift over, what, the last 25-30 years?

Also, about the petition. My major problem, as I mentioned in the other thread, is that of the 21 objections points 1, 2, 3, and 8 aren't even correct. Eight is egregiously wrong.

It's unfortunate that GAZ10 went astray. The Gazeteer series often did a great job of respectfully adding real-world elements to them. As an adult, I became an Arabic linguist in the Navy and knew many Persian linguists. GAZ2 Emirates of Ylaruam is shockingly respectful towards Arabs and Persian culture at a time when it would have been very easy to go the other way.

 

[Justice and Rule]

And this is exactly my point. I disagree that this is not rewritting the text. That is the express purpose of the retcon - that’s what retcon means.

And we are not going to agree on this.

But the difference is, I’m not trying to convince you to do anything. You are. Which means that just telling me that I’m wrong and I must agree with you is not going to get you anywhere.

I will not agree with your interpretation.

Yeah, I mean I really can't agree that text that is added in a separate piece later on is rewriting. To me, that's like saying A Phantom Menace is rewriting A New Hope. Further I take the petitioner at their word that they aren't going to touch the text of GAZ10. It's a very odd interpretation in my opinion, but I suppose it is yours.

Now do you think my opinion is Orwellian? That my position holds that you are committing thought-crime? Because it's been repeatedly said and I want to know if you agree.

 

[The Glen]

Bruce Heard wrote GAZ10. Bruce Heard loves Mystara. Mystara fans love Bruce Heard.

Despite this, I'm not aware of any fan content anywhere on Pandius that uses even one bit of the negative content there. There's still silliness in fan-content Mystara but fans basically act like the bad parts of GAZ10 just don't exist. That's a good thing. It tells me you are absolutely correct that fans would embrace a tonal shift because they've already made that tonal shift over, what, the last 25-30 years?

Also, about the petition. My major problem, as I mentioned in the other thread, is that of the 21 objections points 1, 2, 3, and 8 aren't even correct. Eight is egregiously wrong.

It's unfortunate that GAZ10 went astray. The Gazeteer series often did a great job of respectfully adding real-world elements to them. As an adult, I became an Arabic linguist in the Navy and knew many Persian linguists. GAZ2 Emirates of Ylaruam is shockingly respectful towards Arabs and Persian culture at a time when it would have been very easy to go the other way.

Ylaruam is a strange one because it was part of the early 'fill in the blank' design focus TSR dabbled with. It gives the culture of the Ylari, but no details on cities, NPCs, hardly any crunch at all. Players were supposed to decide if the Sultan was a good guy or bad guy, and make the vizier the complete opposite of him to balance it out. Eventually they had to give the Sultan some background, and made him indecisive and fickle. But never gave use the vizier at all, though that should make him competent and quick thinking.

TSR had a silly phase that hit Orcs of Thar. It wasn't the only one that fell victim to it, with Castle Greyhawk and Top Ballista coming to mind. Ierendi had a little silliness, and that's the closest you'll get, but even then it was just a small part of the module. Orcs did have large swathes done straight, but the art was just pure comedy almost entirely. Still it gave us Oinkmar which turned into one of the more iconic locations for Mystara. I went completely straight in the handbook, hard to have just one comedy gazetteer sandwiched between the far more serious Minrothad and Darokin. Even the Shadow Elves which was the only other World Below module was done without the comedy.

 

[Hussar]

Yeah, I mean I really can't agree that text that is added in a separate piece later on is rewriting. To me, that's like saying A Phantom Menace is rewriting A New Hope. Further I take the petitioner at their word that they aren't going to touch the text of GAZ10. It's a very odd interpretation in my opinion, but I suppose it is yours.

Now do you think my opinion is Orwellian? That my position holds that you are committing thought-crime? Because it's been repeatedly said and I want to know if you agree.

No, of course not. I'm not that extreme. We're having a conversation. "Orwellian" might as well be the same as Godwinning the thread (and, to my shame, I'm the one who did that. ).

But, again, I disagree. A Phantom Menace absolutely DOES rewrite A New Hope. Our understanding of A New Hope is colored and altered by the elements revealed in A Phantom Menace - never minding the real questions that start popping up, like why doesn't Uncle Owen recognize C3PO? Or R2D2? Hell, why doesn't VADER recognize the droid he built AND NAMED? Phantom Menace brings out all sorts of questions and inconsistencies. As do all the prequels. Which, IMO, really does very clearly demonstrate how additive material alters the original.

And, to your second point about taking them (@Dungeonosophy) at their word - I agree. They believe that they are not going to touch the text of Gaz 10. I know that they believe that. I believe that they are mistaken in that interpretation. Not that they are lying. They and you, quite obviously believe what you are saying. I'm just saying that I disagree with your interpretation. It has nothing to do with taking anyone "at their word". It's not a point of trust at all.

Again, you are taking a very antagonistic position. People who disagree with you are not saying you are lying. They are simply DISAGREEING with you. And you, repeatedly, over and over and over again, agressively telling people that no, their interpretation is wrong and that they MUST only use your interpretation is not going to get you anywhere. You should simply accept that other people can and will interpret what is there differently than you do and then try to work together to form some sort of common understanding. That might mean that you drop some points out of the petition, it might mean rewriting parts of the petition, it might mean that you might win people over to your point of view.

But, standing your ground, refusing to budge an inch and insisting that everyone must agree with you is not going to achieve anything. The reason you are getting such aggressive push back and negative responses is because you are the one who wants something. It's YOUR job to convince me that I should help you. It's not my job to do anything other than give my honest response. Repeatedly telling people that they are just wrong without actually accepting the fact that maybe, just maybe, they aren't, isn't how this works.

I guess at the end of the day, my advice is to pick your battles. What, in the petition, is absolutely key? Do people agree on the bits that you feel are absolutely key? Then drop the stuff that isn't key, stick with what you can and take the win. That's how you progress. Staking out a hill and then dying on that hill is just counter productive.

 

[Justice and Rule]

No, of course not. I'm not that extreme. We're having a conversation. "Orwellian" might as well be the same as Godwinning the thread (and, to my shame, I'm the one who did that. ).

But, again, I disagree. A Phantom Menace absolutely DOES rewrite A New Hope. Our understanding of A New Hope is colored and altered by the elements revealed in A Phantom Menace - never minding the real questions that start popping up, like why doesn't Uncle Owen recognize C3PO? Or R2D2? Hell, why doesn't VADER recognize the droid he built AND NAMED? Phantom Menace brings out all sorts of questions and inconsistencies. As do all the prequels. Which, IMO, really does very clearly demonstrate how additive material alters the original.

And, to your second point about taking them (@Dungeonosophy) at their word - I agree. They believe that they are not going to touch the text of Gaz 10. I know that they believe that. I believe that they are mistaken in that interpretation. Not that they are lying. They and you, quite obviously believe what you are saying. I'm just saying that I disagree with your interpretation. It has nothing to do with taking anyone "at their word". It's not a point of trust at all.

Again, you are taking a very antagonistic position. People who disagree with you are not saying you are lying. They are simply DISAGREEING with you. And you, repeatedly, over and over and over again, agressively telling people that no, their interpretation is wrong and that they MUST only use your interpretation is not going to get you anywhere. You should simply accept that other people can and will interpret what is there differently than you do and then try to work together to form some sort of common understanding. That might mean that you drop some points out of the petition, it might mean rewriting parts of the petition, it might mean that you might win people over to your point of view.

But, standing your ground, refusing to budge an inch and insisting that everyone must agree with you is not going to achieve anything. The reason you are getting such aggressive push back and negative responses is because you are the one who wants something. It's YOUR job to convince me that I should help you. It's not my job to do anything other than give my honest response. Repeatedly telling people that they are just wrong without actually accepting the fact that maybe, just maybe, they aren't, isn't how this works.

I guess at the end of the day, my advice is to pick your battles. What, in the petition, is absolutely key? Do people agree on the bits that you feel are absolutely key? Then drop the stuff that isn't key, stick with what you can and take the win. That's how you progress. Staking out a hill and then dying on that hill is just counter productive.

Wow, we really do differ on that. Kind of wild because I think we normally agree on most things.

But I'm not sure. I'd have to think about it. It's not my petition, obviously. I think 1-3 is probably the easiest points to get through. 4-6 would also be worth fighting for because I think it'd actually be interesting and advantageous to Wizards given their recent history to do to show they are taking their commitment to diversity and inclusive content seriously. 7-9 is pie-in-the-sky if only because putting out new material (whatever you want to think of it) would cost them real resources, even if I think everyone would actually want new, non-FR material out in the universe. That's what I can say off the top of my head.

I'll be honest, though, I don't really think I was all about "standing my ground" as much as I felt like most people simply weren't reading what was there. With you I guess I just really have a very different definition of "rewrite", but for so many it's just been actually censoring the text or something. I dunno, I feel like getting past the misconceptions of what this is and isn't has been difficult.

 

[JiffyPopTart]

I do not think your response had anything to do with the petition. I was indicating that other posters’ comments about the petition were examples of the idea that materials must be kept available. I mentioned that in response to you saying that no one was arguing that they must.

The context of this conversation is becoming muddled. I’ll drop out. Thanks though for engaging!

Since I've said something along the lines of what you are saying has been said I'd like to clarify.

Products SHOULD remain available, not must remain available. There is a subtle but distinct difference between the two.

WotC SHOULD keep offering their electronic catalog but it's not a hard line like they MUST remain profitable.

 

[Hussar]

I'll be honest, though, I don't really think I was all about "standing my ground" as much as I felt like most people simply weren't reading what was there. With you I guess I just really have a very different definition of "rewrite", but for so many it's just been actually censoring the text or something. I dunno, I feel like getting past the misconceptions of what this is and isn't has been difficult.

But, therein lies the point. It's not really your job to "get past misconceptions". At least, not a big part of your job. If you believe people are misunderstanding the points in the petition, then the petition is written poorly. It is being interpreted in a way that you don't believe is correct, but, even after trying to clarify, people are still not buying your interpretation.

So, at that point, you have two choices. Dig in and keep trying to "correct the mistakes" of others, which is what you've been doing for many pages now with many different poeple. Or, you rewrite the petition and either drop the issue entirely, or find a rephrasing that is acceptable to others.

My point is, it doesn't matter one whit if you are 100% right or not. It doesn't matter. Because people do not believe that they are wrong. I certainly don't believe that my interpretation is mistaken. Being right isn't the point. Getting people to support your view is the point.

So, you have to decide, which is more important; being right or working with people to gain support?

 

[Cergorach]

That they attached it to a single D&D board with a single topic?

You mean a single D&D board with 239,943 members?

The original thread had 235 replies and 12k views, this one has 327 replies and 9k views...

No matter how you view it, 14 petitioners is then a very small number of people that were bothered enough to sign it. I do think that there are more people that agree with the petition, but couldn't be bothered to jump through all the hoops to get it signed. Even more agree with the sentiment, but do not see much use in applying this to a 35 year old product. And still others agree that it's hurtful/offensive, but do not agree with how the original petitioner proposes to resolve it.

I don't think the issue is the topic, as GAZ10 has a very high degree of 'Oof!' in it. Part of the problem is how it's presented, how the argument is written, and the attitude of the original petitioner. It's not for nothing that the original petitioner got his own thread closed by the site owner himself. I think the saying “you get more flies with honey than with vinegar” is very appropriate here...

 

[S'mon]

I always thought this product was a load of rubbish, and it's the only GAZ I have not purchased, either at the time, later second hand, or recently on drivethru. The humour was cringeworthy even for the 1980s.

I guess I'm not in favour of removing it from sale, but it's one of very few TSR products - maybe even the only one - that does deserve its content warning. There are a lot of problems with the text of the petition, which seems to treat the Orcs' own derogatory views of their neighbours as representing TSR's views of IRL ethnic groups. More justifiable is a view that the Orc cultures' parodies of those IRL cultures says something about stereotyping. The humanoids are scapegoats there to exemplify the stereotypically worst traits of the cultures they parody. I wouldn't ban it, but I don't want to buy it.

Edit: I was just looking through Citadel Journal #1, Spring '85. There are pictures of Pygmy miniatures in there that look incredibly racist by modern standards. Definitely made me wince. AFAICT in the 1980s British people generally didn't seem to realise that pygmies are real living people.