I haven't gotten the chance to read the rest of this thread, but put my vote in for allowing political threads back again. It is extremely likely that such things will become more restricted everywhere, so helping that process along by restricting such things beforehand is not a good thing.
Edit: Okay, now I read it, and still think the same thing. Especially when anything could conceivably become viewed as political. Especially when "anything" includes issues that exist in both the game world and our world.
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
Except it's not a thread about LGBT Gaming issues. It's an Community thread "where members of the LGBT community who are also gamers could come and share their life stories, experiences as gamers, and struggles (whether in dealing with their sexuality in relation to our society or not)." (To quote the first post.)
There have certainly been posts about gaming, but there's been a lot more supportive community & life story kind of posts and a fair amount of "political bs", depending on what you mean by that. But you really can't have "healthy discussion" about LGBTQ issues without at least political overtones. How do you avoid politics when they're passing laws against you?
The reason some folks have a hard time seeing LGBTQ issues as political is that they are right. They shouldn't be political. To oversimplify things, progressives see LGBTQ people as deserving equal rights and privileges as everyone else.
Social conservatives see essentially any progress on the LGBTQ front as inherently political, an agenda being pushed by someone. If that weren't the case, we wouldn't still have politicians argue about where people can go to the bathroom. Heck, some politicians still don't want LGBTQ to see their loved ones when they are in the hospital.
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
** spoiler omitted **** spoiler omitted **
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
Hugs and Twinkies for everyone!!
Just as soon as society as falls.
Just don't get the peppermint flavored Twinkies, those were recalled.
Just don't get the peppermint flavored Twinkies, those were recalled.
So future adventurers delving into the forgotten ruins of modern society will have to battle peppermint twinkie derived aberrations?
It's the dreaded Twinkie Orgy, much like a corpse orgy, except worse. Much, much worse.
Now! With Peppermint!!!
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
** spoiler omitted **** spoiler omitted **** spoiler omitted **** spoiler omitted **
Also sorry for dragging your hugs into the discussion, Rysky. You're the best.
|
| 2 people marked this as a favorite. |
** spoiler omitted **** spoiler omitted **** spoiler omitted **
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
I'd just like to say I strongly believe political discussion should be allowed, and I don't particularly *like* them. But I think those early posts summed it up : Politics are real and not talking about it won't make it go away, and they affect every one of us, our games, and paizo as a company.
That said, I fully understand if Paizo is shortstaffed and the ordeal of dealing with the political threads is too much. I wouldn't want to wish that on anyone, lol.
| 2 people marked this as a favorite. |
** spoiler omitted **** spoiler omitted **** spoiler omitted **** spoiler omitted **
** spoiler omitted **** spoiler omitted **** spoiler omitted **** spoiler omitted **** spoiler omitted **
Ha! Joke's on you, I can't read!
Anyone, anyone, can participate in an LGBT gamer thread, according to their inclination and ability.
A democratic gamer thread is explicitly partisan.
| 2 people marked this as a favorite. |
I'm Natalie Imbruglia about this thread.
I thought you were David Lister, Kryzbyn...
Red Dwarf?
| 3 people marked this as a favorite. |
As long as human rights issues are considered politically divisive, not allowing political discourse seems wrong to me.
Red Dwarf?
Well yeah but only because I keep confusing you with that robot...and some times Lister.
| 2 people marked this as a favorite. |
I'm in favor of political threads. I enjoy them. I've learned things in them.
I like having them here precisely because this isn't a political site - we come here for other reasons, so there's a broad range of opinion rather than the echo chamber that's often found at more focused political sites. Which of course contributes to the problems such threads cause.Chris had commented earlier that the staff was discussing the option. I'd be interested in knowing what they're considering - assuming it's something beyond "Oh god, do we really want to deal with it." :)
This. In fact, the demise of political discussion has pretty much eliminated my use of the boards -- and this site -- completely (and I'm sure some people consider that a good thing).
Sorry, but I don't appreciate being muzzled.
| 2 people marked this as a favorite. |
I appreciate being muzzled. :)
At least to a point. I don't want the Paizo political threads to read like the average YouTube political video comments. I know it's a lot of work to allow discussion without it breaking down completely.
When I say "muzzled," I mean I simply can't speak -- in other words, the current ban. Clearly a completely unregulated environment isn't practical.
Which brings the question of whether the amount of effort required is practical or worthwhile for Paizo.
I'm not happy with the ban. I'd rather be able to talk politics, but I understand why they put it in place.
I think the only viable path forward OTHER than a ban would be to outsource moderation to volunteers. Since I doubt that will happen, I kinda doubt political threads will ever come back (hence my lack of participation on the boards of late).
Hmm then on second thought perhaps a grand social experiment in the paizo universe. Maybe if we tried a social thread, that perhaps was more than one side bashing political parties/ candidates it would be grand. I am afraid that it would turn out more like "I think candidate X is horrible and shouldn't be given a chance because of Y" or "President X did better than President Y will".
So many political threads are so quick to point out the negative, how about this, if we want to say something negative, at the same time post something positive in the same post? Just so people have to do digging on both sides of their opinion?
Well, that experiment has been taking place for a while now. There have been many many political threads. For the most part* they don't devolve into one-side bashing the other. That is why so many posters get so much value out of these discussions on this site.
*They notably do get intense and/or heated but only rarely do they come unraveled. The rancor did escalate quite a bit in the week or so before the (US) election which prompted to the ban on this type of thread.
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
Indeed, nothing of value was lost. ;)
That is probably the majority opinion. :-)
Unfortunately, having to wonder whether anything I post on any topic could be construed as political -- and arguably just about anything could -- renders the board essentially useless.
| 3 people marked this as a favorite. |
Shower thoughts, Paizo is a very progressive company. They take opportunities (for better or worse) to try and educate people on their viewpoints via their moderation practices. It's clear that they all care a lot about the views they hold, and consider them their definition of common decency.
In this rapidly changing political climate...shutting down discussion does not help in spreading that decency. There are a lot of things going on RIGHT NOW that are hard to keep track of and run counter to Paizo's ideology, and that of many in the community. Bills and protests and marches that can potentially change history or mitigate the damage caused by the current administration.
It seems to make sense for Paizo to want people to discuss these things, organize, and get out to make a change. Whether it be by joining activist groups or just "signal boosting" those problems to this audience.
Shutting down all political discussion is how the other side wins, in other words.
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
I'm in favor of political threads. I enjoy them. I've learned things in them.
I like having them here precisely because this isn't a political site - we come here for other reasons, so there's a broad range of opinion rather than the echo chamber that's often found at more focused political sites. Which of course contributes to the problems such threads cause.Chris had commented earlier that the staff was discussing the option. I'd be interested in knowing what they're considering - assuming it's something beyond "Oh god, do we really want to deal with it." :)
This. In fact, the demise of political discussion has pretty much eliminated my use of the boards -- and this site -- completely (and I'm sure some people consider that a good thing).
Sorry, but I don't appreciate being muzzled.
I appreciate being muzzled. :)
At least to a point. I don't want the Paizo political threads to read like the average YouTube political video comments. I know it's a lot of work to allow discussion without it breaking down completely.
Muzzled is when they throw you off the boards completely. At the moment, politics is simply being asked to stay in the corner for an indefinite period. And like I said, it's not that we're short of places for political partisans to shout at each other. Paizo simply doesn't want to be one of them, any more than a gaming shop would.
| 2 people marked this as a favorite. |
Muzzled is when they throw you off the boards completely. At the moment, politics is simply being asked to stay in the corner for an indefinite period. And like I said, it's not that we're short of places for political partisans to shout at each other. Paizo simply doesn't want to be one of them, any more than a gaming shop would.
1. I've never been in a gaming shop that regulated patron's discussions. Have you?
2. It is reductive to characterize all political discussion as "partisans shouting at each other."
3. Muzzled literally means "unable to speak." That's pretty much the definition of a ban, temporary or otherwise.
| 5 people marked this as a favorite. |
If people can't accept that nearly half of the country aren't (insert your favorite -ist or -phobe moniker here), then there's no point in discussion.
| 2 people marked this as a favorite. |
I'd keep it banned within Off Topic and allowed elsewhere, as is the case now. You can talk about it when it's directly relevent to the subject at hand, but in general? I think Paizo has shown that they just can't keep it friendly and inviting. Even when politics were allowed, I preferred to discuss them elsewhere, because the discussion was largely dominated by people being jerks (and some truly impressive persecution complexes) and the moderators being unable to handle it. Always felt rather toxic compared to other forums I visited. And, end of the day, Paizo is a private corporation. The more toxic the environment is, the more people get scared off (and yes, I do think that means we need a Rules Forum crackdown, too). If that means people are muzzled or lose what they consider valuable input or information, so be it. Not Paizo's job or responsibility to provide an environment for the free exchange of information.
| 4 people marked this as a favorite. |
Shower thoughts, Paizo is a very progressive company. They take opportunities (for better or worse) to try and educate people on their viewpoints via their moderation practices. It's clear that they all care a lot about the views they hold, and consider them their definition of common decency.
In this rapidly changing political climate...shutting down discussion does not help in spreading that decency. There are a lot of things going on RIGHT NOW that are hard to keep track of and run counter to Paizo's ideology, and that of many in the community. Bills and protests and marches that can potentially change history or mitigate the damage caused by the current administration.
It seems to make sense for Paizo to want people to discuss these things, organize, and get out to make a change. Whether it be by joining activist groups or just "signal boosting" those problems to this audience.
Shutting down all political discussion is how the other side wins, in other words.
So you think political discussions should be open, so they can serve as a marketing tool for the particular ideology that Paizo endorses?
Do you realize that there are lots of people with differing, even contradictory, ideologies that would like to participate as full members of the community, and not be treated as second-class citizens?
I would rather have no political discussion at all, or full and open discussion, than set up a political echo chamber where I, and people like me, can be set up as an ideological punching bag. I don't want to participate in a community where I'm treated as a roadblock, or an enemy to be overcome, or "damaging" because of how I might have voted, without a chance to defend myself or present my own perspective.
| 2 people marked this as a favorite. |
If people can't accept that nearly half of the country aren't (insert your favorite -ist or -phobe moniker here), then there's no point in discussion.
Being able to talk to people that largely DO accept that is one of the reasons I used Paizo as a forum for political discussion.
Granted, that isn't always the case, but it's a heck of a lot more common here than most other places. Most news sites, for example, have a comment section that consists solely of people screaming at the top of their lungs against ridiculous caricatures of their "enemies."