Thoughts on paizo moderation and communication

[Thomas Seitz]

In a perfect world, Mister Jacobs, I'd be 12th level paladin of Sarenrae, have a holy avenger, and fighting demons in the Worldwound.

Or at least a world I enjoy more.

[Steve Geddes]

thejeff wrote:

James Jacobs wrote:

The person being offended is the one AND THE ONLY ONE who gets to decide if something is offensive.

If I say something that someone else finds offensive, and they tell me that I offended them, I don't get defensive. I apologize and adjust future speaking with the knowledge that the topic that someone just found offensive could be offensive to other people.

It works for me. I wish it worked for everyone.

To a certain point. As long as everyone involved is really playing fair.

Taking that approach too far makes it easy to weaponize offence. Some people find the presence of LGBTQ people in your products offensive. I do not think you should apologize and adjust future products to avoid offending them.

In terms of what this means in terms of posting here, I think it's worth bearing in mind that someone might be offended without anyone actually doing anything wrong. It's entirely predictable that misunderstandings or disagreements on what's "acceptable" will occur from time to time since we all come here with our own perspectives, views and prejudices. Similarly we have varying beliefs on what's acceptable language/tone, what topics are interesting and suitable for discussion and which should be off limits for a forum such as this.

I've had posts removed here for offending somebody else (or for being "jokes" which were outside of what Paizo are comfortable hosting). I think it's worth bearing in mind that such an action isn't an attack on me, nor an accusation that I was somehow obnoxious. It's just that there is a line here and there will be times it doesn't exactly correspond with my personal line.

Learning where those boundaries are is just part of participating in an internet forum. If Paizo's view on what's allowable is different from mine, that's not them telling me I'm wrong - it's just us learning if we're "compatible". (And if I want to get them to change, subforums like this are the way to go rather than stubbornly breaking the rues as some kind of "forum activist").

[Buri Reborn]

I will pose a question for anyone really, though I am particularly interested in what "Paizo"'s, as if it's a singular entity - heh, response to it. Let's say you are talking about something in perfectly good faith and someone comes along fundamentally misunderstanding and is subsequently incensed. How do you prescribe to go about a) pointing out the misunderstanding, b) resolving it, and c) somehow getting the discussion back on track?

I ask that with a couple assumptions. First and foremost, Paizo's products and their contents are open for discussion, feedback, critique, and even criticism... insofar as those items are kept within the bounds of the game and/or its fantasy setting. And second, the hypothetical discussion being held above is peaceable and respectful. At least, it is prior that the described disruption. That is, no use of epithets or slurs, no language to insinuate Paizo "can't do" this or that or that it doesn't somehow belong.

What if said person is inconsolable in their misunderstanding and refuses to acknowledge what you're talking about even after careful explanation or even acknowledges it but simply doesn't want it to be discussed?

That's it. No more; no less.

[Kryzbyn]

I find it hard to apologetic about someone else's failure at reading comprehension, but that could just be a personal flaw. Especially if the person has no reason to be offended, they are just offended on someone else's behalf, for no reason.

[knightnday]

This hypothetical situation sounds vaguely familiar ..

In any case, I might suggest not engaging with the person and letting silence reign on the topic. Discuss something else and avoid that topic for the time being. It is hard to argue when no one wants to play along; talk about something else or just don't say anything on the thread for a bit. Perhaps their anger or disagreement will dissipate when there is no one to talk to.

[Buri Reborn]

Familiar but different as my assumptions don't apply to that situation.

[Bennybeck Wabbittracks]

Are there examples in Golarion of what might be considered Native American, Meso American or Hispanic cultures?

[thejeff]

Bennybeck Wabbittracks wrote:

Are there examples in Golarion of what might be considered Native American, Meso American or Hispanic cultures?

Not well developed yet. The continent of Arcadia is the Americas analog. There was a bit about it in Distant Shores and some hints elsewhere.

[Trekkie90909]

Buri Reborn wrote:

I will pose a question for anyone really, though I am particularly interested in what "Paizo"'s, as if it's a singular entity - heh, response to it. Let's say you are talking about something in perfectly good faith and someone comes along fundamentally misunderstanding and is subsequently incensed. How do you prescribe to go about a) pointing out the misunderstanding, b) resolving it, and c) somehow getting the discussion back on track?

I ask that with a couple assumptions. First and foremost, Paizo's products and their contents are open for discussion, feedback, critique, and even criticism... insofar as those items are kept within the bounds of the game and/or its fantasy setting. And second, the hypothetical discussion being held above is peaceable and respectful. At least, it is prior that the described disruption. That is, no use of epithets or slurs, no language to insinuate Paizo "can't do" this or that or that it doesn't somehow belong.

What if said person is inconsolable in their misunderstanding and refuses to acknowledge what you're talking about even after careful explanation or even acknowledges it but simply doesn't want it to be discussed?

That's it. No more; no less.

James Jacobs wrote:

The person being offended is the one AND THE ONLY ONE who gets to decide if something is offensive.

If I say something that someone else finds offensive, and they tell me that I offended them, I don't get defensive. I apologize and adjust future speaking with the knowledge that the topic that someone just found offensive could be offensive to other people.

It works for me. I wish it worked for everyone.

I like JJ's take on the matter; it's one I've seen crop up in a lot of really positive threads where people have asked how to generally be more open to new players, and how to keep old ones. To answer your question; that would be my answer to questions A), and B). Whether it's a misunderstanding or not, it's best to just apologize; after all the other party has been offended---if it really was just a misunderstanding and offending them wasn't your intention then apologizing is a good first step to getting the discussion either back on track or going in a more positive, roughly parallel direction.

With C) I would suggest trying to engage the offended party in the conversation; if you can get their perspective on the issue in question, and respect it, then you can try try to avoid offending them in the future. That can be hard to do, and if it's failing then silence is probably the best secondary option. I do think there are a number of really important discussion topics which keep cropping up on the boards, which we need to discuss at some point, but to date we have done a poor job of listening to each other on and so we've had to default to silence on the topics.

[Bennybeck Wabbittracks]

thejeff wrote:

Bennybeck Wabbittracks wrote:

Are there examples in Golarion of what might be considered Native American, Meso American or Hispanic cultures?

Not well developed yet. The continent of Arcadia is the Americas analog. There was a bit about it in Distant Shores and some hints elsewhere.

The lack of development then could be argued as a lack of inclusive ty to the fan base. There are members of these groups which play the game as well.

[Steve Geddes]

Buri Reborn wrote:

I will pose a question for anyone really, though I am particularly interested in what "Paizo"'s, as if it's a singular entity - heh, response to it. Let's say you are talking about something in perfectly good faith and someone comes along fundamentally misunderstanding and is subsequently incensed. How do you prescribe to go about a) pointing out the misunderstanding, b) resolving it, and c) somehow getting the discussion back on track?

I think in terms of how I'd approach it I'd try to spell out what I meant using language other than what the person was objecting to.

For example, I used to post on a philosophy site a lot and used to use Nazis as my example of unequivocal "baddies" that nobody would object to using. The regulars all just accepted it, but from time-to-time a newcomer would lambast me about "Godwinning" and claim that I was accusing the opposing side of being nazis or something (I've only ever posted on that site and this one, so I'm often clueless about such internet concepts).

My general approach was to ask them to identify some group they considered to be unequivocally awful and then rephrase my argument in terms of that group. I didn't see any gain from 'defending myself' from what the long-timers could see was a misunderstanding - I'd even apologise sometimes if the person was really, really upset about it.

It's pretty rare that you can't rephrase an argument in a way more palatable to your audience and on a public messageboard you'll sometimes get an audience you didn't expect.

Quote:

What if said person is inconsolable in their misunderstanding and refuses to acknowledge what you're talking about even after careful explanation or even acknowledges it but simply doesn't want it to be discussed?

That's it. No more; no less.

If someone refused to accept my apology, didn't reply to my reframing of the argument and just kept quoting the earlier statement and insisting it was insulting/out-of-line or something then I wouldn't engage with them any more.

I don't see any great need to persuade anyone of anything. My general approach around here is to reply to anyone who replies to me at least once. However, once I've said everything I intend to say (and perhaps had a couple of goes at explaining it) I am happy to leave them with the last word - even if it's a fundamental misunderstanding of the point I am trying to make. Ultimately, I post here to develop my own ideas - I don't see that I have any right nor obligation to change anyone else's mind, nor to correct them if I think they've misunderstood something.

[Wei Ji the Learner]

Trekkie90909 wrote:

I like JJ's take on the matter; it's one I've seen crop up in a lot of really positive threads where people have asked how to generally be more open to new players, and how to keep old ones. To answer your question; that would be my answer to questions A), and B). Whether it's a misunderstanding or not, it's best to just apologize; after all the other party has been offended---if it really was just a misunderstanding and offending them wasn't your intention then apologizing is a good first step to getting the discussion either back on track or going in a more positive, roughly parallel direction.

With C) I would suggest trying to engage the offended party in the conversation; if you can get their perspective on the issue in question, and respect it, then you can try try to avoid offending them in the future. That can be hard to do, and if it's failing then silence is probably the best secondary option. I do think there are a number of really important discussion topics which keep cropping up on the boards, which we need to discuss at some point, but to date we have done a poor job of listening to each other on and so we've had to default to silence on the topics.

The problem with apologies is that they actually have to 'pull their weight'.

Saying something like "Sorry, but one is wrong and this is why one is wrong" is NOT an apology.

Tacticslion had a thread going for a while about 'talking past each other'.

And the biggest problem that came up in that thread was... 'talking past each other'.

There was a comment up-thread about 'weaponizing offense'.

That's the same sort of foolishness that turned 'Don't be a jerk' into a three paragraph in-depth depiction of what 'Don't be a jerk' means for at least PFS play.

It feels often enough that rather than 'turn the other cheek' or 'back out of a discussion' there's an automatic leap to 'aggressive discussion'.

Have I had posts deleted whether because they were offensive or they were of a dubious status?

Yes.

Did I learn from that experience?

Yes. At least, I'm hoping I have.

Do I fault the hard-working members of Paizo that make this ability to communicate feasible for that?

No.

Let us all come together as a community and do one of the *other* things that was mentioned above... which is police ourselves a little bit better, and *think* when we're posting how *we* would react if someone said something in a particular fashion to us.

Not to pick a fight, but to learn.

Together.

[Browman]

Bennybeck Wabbittracks wrote:

thejeff wrote:

Bennybeck Wabbittracks wrote:

Are there examples in Golarion of what might be considered Native American, Meso American or Hispanic cultures?

Not well developed yet. The continent of Arcadia is the Americas analog. There was a bit about it in Distant Shores and some hints elsewhere.

The lack of development then could be argued as a lack of inclusive ty to the fan base. There are members of these groups which play the game as well.

Surely it is a much better idea to have it stated that such an area exists and people are free to have characters from there than rush something that ends up being bad stereotypes. Much of the Africa and Asia analogs aren't terribly well developed either. And it is a fantasy setting, why does there even need to be an analog of every culture from earth?

[Kalindlara]

Browman wrote:

Surely it is a much better idea to have it stated that such an area exists and people are free to have characters from there than rush something that ends up being bad stereotypes. Much of the Africa and Asia analogs aren't terribly well developed either.

There is something to this.

Browman wrote:

And it is a fantasy setting, why does there even need to be an analog of every culture from earth?

This, though, is where representation is important. If everyone but you is represented, you'll naturally feel like you're being excluded, and legitimately so. ^_^

[Bennybeck Wabbittracks]

Browman wrote:

Bennybeck Wabbittracks wrote:

thejeff wrote:

Bennybeck Wabbittracks wrote:

Are there examples in Golarion of what might be considered Native American, Meso American or Hispanic cultures?

Not well developed yet. The continent of Arcadia is the Americas analog. There was a bit about it in Distant Shores and some hints elsewhere.

The lack of development then could be argued as a lack of inclusive ty to the fan base. There are members of these groups which play the game as well.

Surely it is a much better idea to have it stated that such an area exists and people are free to have characters from there than rush something that ends up being bad stereotypes. Much of the Africa and Asia analogs aren't terribly well developed either. And it is a fantasy setting, why does there even need to be an analog of every culture from earth?

Inclusive ty. Why are some groups included then and not others?

[Steve Geddes]

Wei Ji the Learner wrote:

Let us all come together as a community and do one of the *other* things that was mentioned above... which is police ourselves a little bit better, and *think* when we're posting how *we* would react if someone said something in a particular fashion to us.

Not to pick a fight, but to learn.

I think it's also worth thinking not just how we would react, but how the person we're replying to is likely to react.

I definitely have different styles for different posters and it doesn't take many interactions to learn their discussion style, in my experience. Some people like debating, others just like sharing different views. Some enjoy long, heavily quoted back-and-forth with lots of citations and evidence - others take that as an attempt to "prove them wrong". There's no harm in adjusting your approach to suit the person you're speaking with.

[Buri Reborn]

I'm curious, then, how do we help identify offense? Just as we can be unclear in our speech, so can someone in the heat of expressing anger no matter the reason behind it. Not all expressions of it are even offense per se. Some people might be having a bad day. Someone might be trying to pick of fight. Someone might be actively trying to derail a subject.

Asking if they're offended or providing a "in case I offended you" line can easily simply inflame the situation further. Unless they offer up that piece of information, you can't always navigate that situation.

What I'm hearing is that, ultimately, other people get carte blanche to use it as a weapon, if they want, and we have to simply accept it on an honor system that that's just how it is.

[Steve Geddes]

Bennybeck Wabbittracks wrote:

Browman wrote:

Bennybeck Wabbittracks wrote:

thejeff wrote:

Bennybeck Wabbittracks wrote:

Are there examples in Golarion of what might be considered Native American, Meso American or Hispanic cultures?

Not well developed yet. The continent of Arcadia is the Americas analog. There was a bit about it in Distant Shores and some hints elsewhere.

The lack of development then could be argued as a lack of inclusive ty to the fan base. There are members of these groups which play the game as well.

Surely it is a much better idea to have it stated that such an area exists and people are free to have characters from there than rush something that ends up being bad stereotypes. Much of the Africa and Asia analogs aren't terribly well developed either. And it is a fantasy setting, why does there even need to be an analog of every culture from earth?

Inclusive ty. Why are some groups included then and not others?

I think because they haven't got to them yet. They learned from doing Tian Xia that introducing a whole new continent is a massive imposition on company resources. It is inevitable that something has to come first and something has to come last. What they've done in the meantime is to build inclusivity in as much as they can from the start - with plans to do more when they can.

Also, of course, they have to balance both doing what they want and doing what sells. I know many at Paizo were dead-keen to develop Tian Xia and would like to do more, but it didn't sell as well as they would have liked. As such, they have to take another look at different ways to expand the world in a way that satisfies both their own standards and meets the demands of the market.

They have to do more than just make material they like - it has to be commercially successful as well.

[Steve Geddes]

Buri Reborn wrote:

I'm curious, then, how do we help identify offense? Just as we can be unclear in our speech, so can someone in the heat of expressing anger no matter the reason behind it. Not all expressions of it are even offense per se. Some people might be having a bad day. Someone might be trying to pick of fight. Someone might be actively trying to derail a subject.

Asking if they're offended or providing a "in case I offended you" line can easily simply inflame the situation further. Unless they offer up that piece of information, you can't always navigate that situation.

What I'm hearing is that, ultimately, other people get carte blanche to use it as a weapon, if they want, and we have to simply accept it on an honor system that that's just how it is.

For my part I was just answering your question.

That's how I approach it. I wasn't suggesting that you have to do it that way. FWIW, what is lost? I don't feel that I'm silenced here on the forums - even if from time to time people grossly misunderstand what I've said and leap to some conclusion (sometimes the exact opposite of what I beleve). I just explain what I actually mean a couple of times and if they still don't get what I mean (or insist that I'm being rude or something) then I just leave it.

Maybe my post will get deleted, maybe the moderators will decide that I was fine and the other poster misunderstood. In the end, it doesn't really matter. From time to time I've had a post deleted and queried it. I've also flagged posts to see that they weren't removed. My boundaries aren't exactly the same as Paizo's but I don't see that as an issue. If they're close enough, this is the site for me. If they're too far apart, it isn't. If I feel really strongly about it, I can post a thread in Website feedback asking for a change in policy.

Can I ask what's wrong with "accepting it on an honor system"? What do you lose if you post something entirely innocently - someone takes offence, you can't explain to them what you actually meant and so you just stop talking to them? I don't really see why that's an issue (?) It's just two people not communicating very well - which is going to happen no matter what the board rules are, imo.

[Trekkie90909]

Buri Reborn wrote:

I'm curious, then, how do we help identify offense? Just as we can be unclear in our speech, so can someone in the heat of expressing anger no matter the reason behind it. Not all expressions of it are even offense per se. Some people might be having a bad day. Someone might be trying to pick of fight. Someone might be actively trying to derail a subject.

Asking if they're offended or providing a "in case I offended you" line can easily simply inflame the situation further. Unless they offer up that piece of information, you can't always navigate that situation.

What I'm hearing is that, ultimately, other people get carte blanche to use it as a weapon, if they want, and we have to simply accept it on an honor system that that's just how it is.

Generally it comes down to what they identify as offense; if, after they've identified this you still aren't sure, I'd suggest PMing them to ask if they wouldn't mind clarifying (unless you think it's something better asked in the open). Either way, opening discussion and listening (learning, as wei ji puts it) is the only way to see things from their perspective.

I'm not sure anyone here is arguing that being offended by something should be used as a weapon. I have seen it argued elsewhere occasionally, but ultimately it comes down to whether you want to see the people on the boards as peers or not. Personally, I don't see what I gain from assuming that when someone says 'that's hurtful' what they actually mean is to hurt me; it's certainly not what I mean when I say that. I also don't think they should be made to defend themselves if they do, generally I don't see what that defense really accomplishes except to make them feel more persecuted. Apologize, sincerely (thank you wei ji, for the reminder), and either let the matter drop or take a different approach as you think is best suited to the situation.

Edit: ninja'd (steve said it better anyways)

[Steve Geddes]

Trekkie90909 wrote:

I'm not sure anyone here is arguing that being offended by something should be used as a weapon.

Yeah I don't really know what that even entails. Do you mean people pretending to be offended in order to silence discussion or something?

It seems to me that, if they're not involved in the discussion (because you're tried and failed to explain what you mean so you are now just not replying to them) it's going to be pretty transparent isn't it?

[Trekkie90909]

@Steve; that's my impression of what it means to use 'offense' as a weapon.

EDIT: perhaps I could have phrased that better as "I don't think anyone else here is arguing that offense is usually used as a weapon on the boards, and I don't think in a broader sense that anyone is arguing it should be. Generally I think when someone posts that they're offended they actually are, and they just want the offense to stop."

[Browman]

Bennybeck Wabbittracks wrote:

Browman wrote:

Bennybeck Wabbittracks wrote:

thejeff wrote:

Bennybeck Wabbittracks wrote:

Are there examples in Golarion of what might be considered Native American, Meso American or Hispanic cultures?

Not well developed yet. The continent of Arcadia is the Americas analog. There was a bit about it in Distant Shores and some hints elsewhere.

The lack of development then could be argued as a lack of inclusive ty to the fan base. There are members of these groups which play the game as well.

Surely it is a much better idea to have it stated that such an area exists and people are free to have characters from there than rush something that ends up being bad stereotypes. Much of the Africa and Asia analogs aren't terribly well developed either. And it is a fantasy setting, why does there even need to be an analog of every culture from earth?

Inclusive ty. Why are some groups included then and not others?

But where does one draw the line, you realistically can't include every single self identifying group. Also isn't including something simply to be inclusive a problem in and of itself?

I am not trying to say that golarion or any other setting shouldn't be inclusive, but it has to be done in a way that makes for that setting. And these things shouldn't be rushed, as I said previously it is better to briefly mention that something is out there in an unexplored part of the setting than doing poor quality work.

[Kalindlara]

At this point, it might be best if the Arcadia/inclusivity discussion were moved to its own thread, where it can be discussed in greater detail without becoming a distraction from the topic here. ^_^

[Drahliana Moonrunner]

Kalindlara wrote:

Browman wrote:

Surely it is a much better idea to have it stated that such an area exists and people are free to have characters from there than rush something that ends up being bad stereotypes. Much of the Africa and Asia analogs aren't terribly well developed either.

There is something to this.

Browman wrote:

And it is a fantasy setting, why does there even need to be an analog of every culture from earth?

This, though, is where representation is important. If everyone but you is represented, you'll naturally feel like you're being excluded, and legitimately so. ^_^

The territory covered by the former Soviet Union alone has over two hundred distinct cultural groups that speak dozens of differnt languages. New York City alone has on the average about 40 different languages being spoken each day.

You simply can't represent every Earth culture on a stripped down for gaming purposes fantasy world.

[Ventnor]

Drahliana Moonrunner wrote:

Kalindlara wrote:

Browman wrote:

Surely it is a much better idea to have it stated that such an area exists and people are free to have characters from there than rush something that ends up being bad stereotypes. Much of the Africa and Asia analogs aren't terribly well developed either.

There is something to this.

Browman wrote:

And it is a fantasy setting, why does there even need to be an analog of every culture from earth?

This, though, is where representation is important. If everyone but you is represented, you'll naturally feel like you're being excluded, and legitimately so. ^_^

The territory covered by the former Soviet Union alone has over two hundred distinct cultural groups that speak dozens of differnt languages. New York City alone has on the average about 40 different languages being spoken each day.

You simply can't represent every Earth culture on a stripped down for gaming purposes fantasy world.

That doesn't mean you shouldn't try to be inclusive, though. I mean, unless you demand that every effort always be perfect, in which case you're gonna have a bad time.

[Drahliana Moonrunner]

Ventnor wrote:

Drahliana Moonrunner wrote:

Kalindlara wrote:

Browman wrote:

Surely it is a much better idea to have it stated that such an area exists and people are free to have characters from there than rush something that ends up being bad stereotypes. Much of the Africa and Asia analogs aren't terribly well developed either.

There is something to this.

Browman wrote:

And it is a fantasy setting, why does there even need to be an analog of every culture from earth?

This, though, is where representation is important. If everyone but you is represented, you'll naturally feel like you're being excluded, and legitimately so. ^_^

The territory covered by the former Soviet Union alone has over two hundred distinct cultural groups that speak dozens of differnt languages. New York City alone has on the average about 40 different languages being spoken each day.

You simply can't represent every Earth culture on a stripped down for gaming purposes fantasy world.

That doesn't mean you shouldn't try to be inclusive, though. I mean, unless you demand that every effort always be perfect, in which case you're gonna have a bad time.

But it does mean that you have to set up standards to evaluate such efforts. Is it okay to leave out Paraguay when you include Chile?

When Paizo sets it's standards for inclusiveness it may be that it's prioritizing broad racial and gender inclusion rather than trying to get a pair of everything on the Ark.

[Kobold Catgirl]

Maybe we should just make some room! We'll get rid of Cheliax, Andoran, Taldor, Galt, the River Kingdoms (we don't need a whole country for Alaska anyways), Druma, Isger, Nidal, Nirmathas, Ustalav, Brevoy, Sarkoris, Molthune, Irrisen, the white Varisian city-states, Kyonin, the Five Kings Mountains...

...Gosh, we're all worried about not having room for all those diverse cultures, but we sure had room for a lot of the, uh, white ones.

Which I think is the point. Sure, getting to a whole other continent is hard, but Paizo's the one that chose to put these cultures on a whole other continent. Cheliax is the apple of everyone's eye. That region is where we centered the game. Hell, even if you go to the Mwangi Expanse, you still have to deal with the Chelaxian a$&~!!+s trying to colonize the place.

It's a fairly eurocentric setting, not in theory, but in practice. That's not an inherently bad thing, but it is a fact, and maybe a slightly regrettable one in the context of fantasy settings as a genre.

[Kobold Catgirl]

Kalindlara wrote:

At this point, it might be best if the Arcadia/inclusivity discussion were moved to its own thread, where it can be discussed in greater detail without becoming a distraction from the topic here. ^_^

Whoops. Yeah, probably shouldn't force the mods to, uh, moderate the moderation thread.

[Talonhawke]

Steve Geddes wrote:

Trekkie90909 wrote:

I'm not sure anyone here is arguing that being offended by something should be used as a weapon.

Yeah I don't really know what that even entails. Do you mean people pretending to be offended in order to silence discussion or something?

It seems to me that, if they're not involved in the discussion (because you're tried and failed to explain what you mean so you are now just not replying to them) it's going to be pretty transparent isn't it?

You have the right of it. It's the fact that you can claim offense even on someone else behalf, and if the subject matter is right then a bandwagon can follow causing a cascade of offense until it is silenced even if no-one was actually offended to start with.

[knightnday]

Which leads to the question of how do you know if someone is offended, for themselves or others? People tend to want to defend their friends or an idea over something that they see as wrong.

I know I've wandered into a thread, read something and was mildly offended and just backed out of the thread rather than getting into it with the posters. Some people have a lower threshold for offense than I do, or are more likely to defend their friends or an idea than I am.

As far as the above question from Buri on identifying offense and so forth, that's what I suggest we leave to the mods. There are things that I've flagged that were apparently not offensive enough to get removed, and things that seemed OK at the time that apparently bothered people. They do a fairly good job IMO of getting it right and striking a healthy balance here.

[Bennybeck Wabbittracks]

Drahliana Moonrunner wrote:

Kalindlara wrote:

Browman wrote:

Surely it is a much better idea to have it stated that such an area exists and people are free to have characters from there than rush something that ends up being bad stereotypes. Much of the Africa and Asia analogs aren't terribly well developed either.

There is something to this.

Browman wrote:

And it is a fantasy setting, why does there even need to be an analog of every culture from earth?

This, though, is where representation is important. If everyone but you is represented, you'll naturally feel like you're being excluded, and legitimately so. ^_^

The territory covered by the former Soviet Union alone has over two hundred distinct cultural groups that speak dozens of differnt languages. New York City alone has on the average about 40 different languages being spoken each day.

You simply can't represent every Earth culture on a stripped down for gaming purposes fantasy world.

Leaving out Native American, Meso American and Hispanic cultures and societies, not even with an archetype like the Jaguar Warriors, or even giving a sense that those cultures are validated in the game, while having things as geishas (not a bad thing) are deliberate choices especially when operating a business in the United States.

[Kryzbyn]

I think to minimize the "offense as a weapon", don't respond to a post. Flag it, and move on.
This would prevent threadcrapping in case of a misunderstanding, and then it would be left up to the moderators to decide, without the prejudice of a back and forth, to decide for themselves. While I agree the mods tend to play favorites (they are human beings after all), I would still give them benefit of the doubt in this case, were that rule to be actively followed by the community.
This would mean that folks who threadcrap and then flag should get warnings and such. Rules without enforcement are useless.

[Chris Lambertz]

As we have repeatedly noted, we are not going to disclose information on individual accounts. I've removed a post and the responses to it for this reason.

I am currently working out my response to some of the comments here, thank you for your patience!

[Chemlak]

Thank you for your time, consideration, and attention, Chris (and everyone else involved at Paizo).

[Kryzbyn]

Bennybeck Wabbittracks wrote:

Leaving out Native American, Meso American and Hispanic cultures and societies, not even with an archetype like the Jaguar Warriors, or even giving a sense that those cultures are validated in the game, while having things as geishas (not a bad thing) are deliberate choices especially when operating a business in the United States.

It's not an all or nothing thing, man. Don't let the perfect be the enemy of the good.

[Nicos]

Bennybeck Wabbittracks wrote:

thejeff wrote:

Bennybeck Wabbittracks wrote:

Are there examples in Golarion of what might be considered Native American, Meso American or Hispanic cultures?

Not well developed yet. The continent of Arcadia is the Americas analog. There was a bit about it in Distant Shores and some hints elsewhere.

The lack of development then could be argued as a lack of inclusive ty to the fan base. There are members of these groups which play the game as well.

And those members could very well understand that no fantasy world can possibly cover all world cultures not it should be demanded to do it. As an Hispanic I know I do.

Moreover, what Paizo choose to put or not in their setting is irrelevant for my games. It could be nice to see their take on arcadia, but I don't be offended if they never publish about it.

[Bennybeck Wabbittracks]

Nicos wrote:

Bennybeck Wabbittracks wrote:

thejeff wrote:

Bennybeck Wabbittracks wrote:

Are there examples in Golarion of what might be considered Native American, Meso American or Hispanic cultures?

Not well developed yet. The continent of Arcadia is the Americas analog. There was a bit about it in Distant Shores and some hints elsewhere.

The lack of development then could be argued as a lack of inclusive ty to the fan base. There are members of these groups which play the game as well.

And those members could very well understand that no fantasy world can possibly cover all world cultures not it should be demanded to do it. As an Hispanic I know I do.

Moreover, what Paizo choose to put or not in their setting is irrelevant for my games. It could be nice to see their take on arcadia, but I don't be offended if they never publish about it.

And as a Hispanic it might be nice to see people from the Southwest included in something other than a mention.

[Bennybeck Wabbittracks]

Kryzbyn wrote:

Bennybeck Wabbittracks wrote:

Leaving out Native American, Meso American and Hispanic cultures and societies, not even with an archetype like the Jaguar Warriors, or even giving a sense that those cultures are validated in the game, while having things as geishas (not a bad thing) are deliberate choices especially when operating a business in the United States.

It's not an all or nothing thing, man. Don't let the perfect be the enemy of the good.

However, a simple mention is not the same as being inclusive. Something more substantial could be done, otherwise it is a Heroes and Holiday's way of looking at things. "Oh look, we mentioned Rudolpho Anaya today in school because it is National Hispanic Awareness month, we are so much into diversity."

[knightnday]

I believe that James mentioned on another thread that more than mentions are forthcoming; currently we're dealing with the Inner Sea and expanding outwards from there.

[PathlessBeth]

James Jacobs wrote:

The person being offended is the one AND THE ONLY ONE who gets to decide if something is offensive.

If I say something that someone else finds offensive, and they tell me that I offended them, I don't get defensive. I apologize and adjust future speaking with the knowledge that the topic that someone just found offensive could be offensive to other people.

It works for me. I wish it worked for everyone.

It might work for you because you have moderator powers. If someone says something that offends you, their post is deleted and they get banned.

If someone says something that offends me, then they might get their post deleted, or they might get 29 favorites, including a favorite from a Paizo employee, and learn that that sort of behavior is not only acceptable, but encouraged.

Frankly, I avoid browsing the forums on my phone largely because I can't use the ignore script on my phone. When I'm away from my computer, I tend to stick to my pbps, and browsing my favorite posts (or occasionally the post history of someone whose posts I enjoy reading).

[thejeff]

137ben wrote:

James Jacobs wrote:

The person being offended is the one AND THE ONLY ONE who gets to decide if something is offensive.

If I say something that someone else finds offensive, and they tell me that I offended them, I don't get defensive. I apologize and adjust future speaking with the knowledge that the topic that someone just found offensive could be offensive to other people.

It works for me. I wish it worked for everyone.

It might work for you because you have moderator powers. If someone says something that offends you, their post is deleted and they get banned.

If someone says something that offends me, then they might get their post deleted, or they might get 29 favorites, including a favorite from a Paizo employee, and learn that that sort of behavior is not only acceptable, but encouraged.

Frankly, I avoid browsing the forums on my phone largely because I can't use the ignore script on my phone. When I'm away from my computer, I tend to stick to my pbps, and browsing my favorite posts (or occasionally the post history of someone whose posts I enjoy reading).

You might notice that James was talking about what he does when he says something that someone else tells him offends them, not about how he deals with things that offend him.

There's a big difference.

[James Jacobs]

137ben wrote:

James Jacobs wrote:

The person being offended is the one AND THE ONLY ONE who gets to decide if something is offensive.

If I say something that someone else finds offensive, and they tell me that I offended them, I don't get defensive. I apologize and adjust future speaking with the knowledge that the topic that someone just found offensive could be offensive to other people.

It works for me. I wish it worked for everyone.

It might work for you because you have moderator powers. If someone says something that offends you, their post is deleted and they get banned.

If someone says something that offends me, then they might get their post deleted, or they might get 29 favorites, including a favorite from a Paizo employee, and learn that that sort of behavior is not only acceptable, but encouraged.

Frankly, I avoid browsing the forums on my phone largely because I can't use the ignore script on my phone. When I'm away from my computer, I tend to stick to my pbps, and browsing my favorite posts (or occasionally the post history of someone whose posts I enjoy reading).

As a matter of fact, I do not have moderator powers. If someone says something I find offensive, I flag it as offensive and move on, just as the vast majority of the rest of the folks should on these boards.

[James Jacobs]

thejeff wrote:

137ben wrote:

James Jacobs wrote:

The person being offended is the one AND THE ONLY ONE who gets to decide if something is offensive.

If I say something that someone else finds offensive, and they tell me that I offended them, I don't get defensive. I apologize and adjust future speaking with the knowledge that the topic that someone just found offensive could be offensive to other people.

It works for me. I wish it worked for everyone.

It might work for you because you have moderator powers. If someone says something that offends you, their post is deleted and they get banned.

If someone says something that offends me, then they might get their post deleted, or they might get 29 favorites, including a favorite from a Paizo employee, and learn that that sort of behavior is not only acceptable, but encouraged.

Frankly, I avoid browsing the forums on my phone largely because I can't use the ignore script on my phone. When I'm away from my computer, I tend to stick to my pbps, and browsing my favorite posts (or occasionally the post history of someone whose posts I enjoy reading).

You might notice that James was talking about what he does when he says something that someone else tells him offends them, not about how he deals with things that offend him.

There's a big difference.

Also this. I'm less worried about being offended than I am about giving offense, I guess.

[TriOmegaZero]

I was offended by that gug at PaizoCon. My poor cavalier's HP was brutally offended! :P