In defense of the political threads, they aren't that bad.
Mostly it's five to ten people locked in an endless cycle of debate and back and forth.
They're generally quite civil with each other.
Like I said, I hear a lot of politics in my day to day life and it's nice not having them in off topic. :-)
| 6 people marked this as a favorite. |
So here would be my major arguments for retaining politics on Paizo:
First, arguments for:
1. For one, I found the political threads (and related threads) to often be incredibly informative. I knew pretty much nothing about the plight of Trans folk before visiting Paizo, nor was I remotely familiar with concepts such as privilege. I imagine other posters have stumbled upon similar ideas or news items they would not be otherwise aware of
2. For some of us, this may be the only real place where we actually discuss these issues. Perhaps the greatest problem facing our society today, something both sides agree on, is that many of us live in isolated "bubbles", where we only interact with folks with shared life experiences and views. Interacting here with folks of different backgrounds does expose people to new viewpoints and reduce "Othering" which both sides are all to capable of doing. and the fact that the Paizo forums are NOT a specific politics oriented site means we can often do so in a more concise pattern, and not simply wading through 50 million angry rants/replies on a news piece
3. Perhaps the most compelling is simply...with the elimination of politics...what does that actually mean? There are many active threads still in Off topic and elsewhere that frequently deal with topics that, for one side or another, that often overlap strongly with politics. LGBTQ threads, anything dealing climate and science, religion, etc. Right now with the blanket politics ban I don't know really know sometimes how or what to post. If someone asks me about evolution, will my ask a paleontologist thread get shut down because political fights over creationism in the classroom? Can I reply to a comment about representation or white washing in a movie thread? What do I post in the event of a national disaster, like the recent Orlando shooting? Since what is and isn't political can vary by the person.
4. Pathfinder is an adult game. What do I mean here? well Pathfinder has not shied away from dealing with real world issues, something we all commend the game on as far as things like representation of minorities/LGBTQ folks. But it goes deeper than that. You have a LG god of lawful executions, A gold dragon of nebulous alignment running a Eugenics experiment, and a black and white alignment system which dictates what is and isn't evil, and all sorts of parallels with real world events and themes that provoke discussion. These sort of discussions are great, but incredibly difficult at times if there isn't an area out of the CS/Pathfinder RPG line, at least without risking a thread shutdown. A off topic area that allows politics.
5. What solution does a Politics ban provide. I know things could get intense there, but I have to ask how much of it was the topic and how much of it was the posters. It felt that often "difficult" politics related thread posters didn't behave that better in other threads. In this sense, if the concern about the politics threads is that they make the site less enjoyable for customers, could the problem be one of moderation and certain posters, and not one necessarily of topic. I still would hold that most politics threads I have been part of have usually had a warmer atmosphere than some rules or Pathfinder RPG threads. Stuff posted in the various Errata reaction threads was far far more hostile in tone than what I read daily in the election threads for instance. At least in Politics I feel, because of the very nature of the threads, there was some more diplomatic posting.
5. What solution does a Politics ban provide. I know things could get intense there, but I have to ask how much of it was the topic and how much of it was the posters. It felt that often "difficult" politics related thread posters didn't behave that better in other threads. In this sense, if the concern about the politics threads is that they make the site less enjoyable for customers, could the problem be one of moderation and certain posters, and not one necessarily of topic. I still would hold that most politics threads I have been part of have usually had a warmer atmosphere than some rules or Pathfinder RPG threads. Stuff posted in the various Errata reaction threads was far far more hostile in tone than what I read daily in the election threads for instance. At least in Politics I feel, because of the very nature of the threads, there was some more diplomatic posting.
This may be the heart of not only the problem with charged threads like politics but other threads as well. We have posters that, for lack of a better term, like to stir things up in one way or the other. You can set your watch by their replies, many of which skirt the razor's edge of what you could flag and what you just sort of sigh and move on from. I'm not sure what the solution for that problem is, however. Removing posts and warnings don't seem to work. Banning people doesn't always work and creates other problems.
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
Now my suggestions:
1. Feel free to keep Politics banned until you folks have a Gninja replacement.
2. Feel free to do whatever needs to be done so Off topic threads don't show up in the RS feed or whatever.
3. Also feel free to play "whack a mole" with repetitive threads. There doesn't need to be a ton of "Trump got elected OMG" threads, one would suffice.
4. IF...politics is seen to be just too much work, could we get a more narrowly defined ban list. For instance, in video games there is specifically a ban on gamer-gate discussion that has been mentioned in the past. If there are some hot button issues you don't want remotely posted about here (say..gun rights..or abortion. Whatever you have observed is prone to blowing up here), could those be specifically called out as such? Rather than a blanket ban. Otherwise I feel, like others, a lot of good gets thrown out with the bad, and I don't really know what I should or shouldn't post (see point above about how broad politics is). Not everything is a hot button issue, and there is a huge realm of difference between some of the past gamer-gate threads and say, poor Comrade Anklebiter's communist thread or the election threads (at least in my opinion).
| 3 people marked this as a favorite. |
]No, I just don't want to have to sift through twenty "Trump did this" "Trump did that" etc. To find something fun or intelligent, like asking Vertebrate specialists what's so fascinating about having a spine in the water. That's all.
Oh I agree repetition is bad, and I would be fine with the Paizo highlords getting rid of redundant threads. Although it's not exactly a political only problem. See the monthly "Pathinder is bloated" and "We need a new edition" threads.
So if I started a "Democrat Gamer Community" thread, that should be fine, because it's gamers?
I do think it's not an entirely fair comparison, but I find it surprisingly hard to justify why I think that.
Aaaaand I'm out. You've gone from an intellectually dishonest comparison to full-blown non sequitur.
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
I prefer we just do something more inclusive because right now it's not. Politics I mean, not Paizo.
| 3 people marked this as a favorite. |
I would settle for a separate subforum for 'Politics' (Maybe call it 'real world issues?') rather than an outright ban, but that idea has been shot down before. I don't know if it is worth bringing up as an option again.
I will compliment the admins and IT staff for their efforts to give posters the tools to avoid contentious threads. Even if the ban is lifted there are tools in place to avoid the threads. You do end up missing a lot of new threads using Focus though. It would be far nicer to be able to blanket close a sub-forum.
I don't envy Paizo the decision. Either way it's a b****, and there is no solution that pleases everyone.
| 2 people marked this as a favorite. |
I think there IS value in having political discussions among people brought together for other reasons, because you'll get a bigger cross-section of views than in spaces created specifically for politics.
Of course, that advantage is moot if only one side feels comfortable participating because insults and name-calling against them are allowed to stand, while their civil disagreement is secretly moderated away.
|
Overall direction of our Community Guidelines/moderation is not the goal of this thread. Our community involves thousands of posters, with thousands of posts per day, and if a post seems to just "disappear" it's fairly difficult to resolve that problem if the specific instance isn't being made known to our team. If you find yourself in this situation, the best course of action is to email community@paizo.com to give us an opportunity to investigate why this happened, and provide an explanation. While we might give the impression of being "omnipresent", we really aren't, and are human and susceptible to not getting it right all the time.
Let's move along to discussion political threads as they exist on our site, thanks!
| 2 people marked this as a favorite. |
Aaaaand I'm out. You've gone from an intellectually dishonest comparison to full-blown non sequitur.So if I started a "Democrat Gamer Community" thread, that should be fine, because it's gamers?
I do think it's not an entirely fair comparison, but I find it surprisingly hard to justify why I think that.
It's actually a pretty fair comparison. The LBTQ Gamer Community thread doesn't actually discuss gaming all that much, but rather day-to-day LGBTQ life (and copious amounts of hugging). There's nothing wrong with that, but thejeff's point is that for the most part, the thread is game-themed in name only. So to say that the thread isn't comparable to the examples given is (hypocritically) intellectually dishonest.
I guess? I'm not sure where the anger comes from though, other than Internet Entitlement. I tend to believe in the "My House" rule: This is Paizo's house. They've asked us to not do X thing, and I respect that. If I have a problem with it, I can do X thing at Bob or Sally or Fred's house rather than being upset that Paizo doesn't like X thing (politics, bringing my gun to the gaming table, calling people names, drinking all their milk, etc.)
Getting upset about it is an alien idea to me.
Oh it's totally entitlement. I didn't mean to imply I took a side one way or another on this part. Only that my experience shows people get upset when you take away things. I think it's perfectly reasonable to say "no politics please," but it's hard to enforce and at first people will be upset.
This subject (any politics) is such an individual perspective point of view its difficult to police the thread. To put it in a much more simple analogy it would be akin to asking what is your favorite color. In the end it all comes down to opinion. Opinions are not fact but are often based on feeling as much as fact. So many opinions can be backed up by fact, figures and even a crowd can leave the single voice (minority) who has a differing opinion to feel left out, berated or even bullied in many differing forms.
In my humble OPINION real world politics should be left out of the public arena of a game. The GAME is our common thread in all of this even if it is an off topic thread. In today's day and age politics reaches young and younger folks and it strongly divides people. This is a place I used to like to come to get AWAY from the politics. When I come in here I dont care what your politics are or any other hot button issue, im not here for your opinions on the real world, im here for discussions on the game or even distantly related subjects that have nothing to do with the real world. Because of the kind of person I am I think folks should not be censored but on the other hand common courtesy, general politeness and decency should guide us through. BUt again this can vary widely as each and every one of us has differing points of view on each of those things. Personally I cant stand the "PC" thing, I personally hate hyphenating anything American (you either are American or you are not). But this is often an community that reaches other countries. As far as I am concerned the only real world politics that should be discussed are the ancient forms we use in our story telling. The ancient Roman senate, 15th century Hungarian Courtesans and court, 11th century European feudal system only to name a few.
In conclusion I say keep real world politics out of gaming all together and it should be voluntary to do so not mandatory. So if you open a proverbial can of worms dont cry when you get blasted, offended or dont like the opinion of others. The real world and this digital arena only have a small connection but it can hurt just as bad. If you know you are about to open a subject that could divide folks diametrically and with out thinking about the consequences of your actions you may want to learn some manners in real life. Its an old cliche but "Dont talk about Politics, Religion or money" is a real thing for a reason, it starts fights and ends friendships or even results in physical confrontation. The smallest spark not matter how good intentioned can result in a forest fire.
|
| 3 people marked this as a favorite. |
The LBTQ Gamer Community thread doesn't actually discuss gaming all that much, but rather day-to-day LGBTQ life (and copious amounts of hugging). There's nothing wrong with that, but thejeff's point is that for the most part, the thread is game-themed in name only. So to say that the thread isn't comparable to the examples given is (hypocritically) intellectually dishonest.
The thing is that this thread, no matter what's discussed in it, by it's very nature is highly political and will stay political as long as he is needed. I absolutely support them for taking a stand on that topic, but to allow for such threads to exist while simultaneously to disallow discussion of other political topics may be hard to explain for a lot of people.
So I'd rather have them to find a solution to allow for political topics than to alienate part of their fanbase for not being consequent with a ban. Especially as I've never found those topics here to be as vitriolic as I'm used from other boards.
The LBTQ Gamer Community thread doesn't actually discuss gaming all that much, but rather day-to-day LGBTQ life (and copious amounts of hugging). There's nothing wrong with that, but thejeff's point is that for the most part, the thread is game-themed in name only. So to say that the thread isn't comparable to the examples given is (hypocritically) intellectually dishonest.The thing is that this thread, no matter what's discussed in it, by it's very nature is highly political and will stay political as long as he is needed. I absolutely support them for taking a stand on that topic, but to allow for such threads to exist while simultaneously to disallow discussion of other political topics may be hard to explain for a lot of people.
So I'd rather have them to find a solution to allow for political topics than to alienate part of their fanbase for not being consequent with a ban. Especially as I've never found those topics here to be as vitriolic as I'm used from other boards.
It would be hard to explain because it would be pretty inconsistent. Saying "we don't want political threads" but then not only allowing, but also being personally engaged in, a thread which is itself often politically charged is borderline hypocritical. I have no issue with Paizo staff getting involved personally in the discussions within such threads (in fact, I kind of like it), but I do have an issue with them doing that, and then turning around and disallowing threads that are equally political.
|
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
Yeap, the line was crossed sometime ago between just a game site and more of a third place for Paizo guests. Also, just because opinions are often subjective doesnt mean they are not worth discussing because they cant be won.
No entitlement here, just want to tell paizo I value discussions here on all varieties of topics. If its too resource intensive to facilitate thats too bad, but I understand.
I don't know. Seems to me the reaction has been more "We understand the problems in the current environment, but we would like the ban lifted" than "Wah! Paizo's mean!"
Wanting to talk politics here is not entitlement. Raging at Paizo over it would be, but I haven't seen much of that.
I mean for a permanent ban. Sorry for the confusion. Temporary ban is provoking discussion. Also, when I say "upset," I don't mean "Wah! Paizo's mean!" though that's an entertaining visual
|
|
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
OTOH, it's the same kind of line between having a community space for LGBTQ folk and not allowing others to trash it with homophobic attacks posing as discussion.
In my opinion, it's not the exact same line. Because it's not a black-white scenario. Belonging to the LGBTQ crowd doesn't make you automatically right with everything you say, and disagreeing with some of the views presented by that community doesn't make you automatically into a homophobic idiot. Though those provably exist, there's no denying that.
And if you can protect the LGBTQ part of our community from hate speech, then it shouldn't be impossible to protect the part of the fanbase that is willing and motivated to discuss political topics in a mature way.
| 2 people marked this as a favorite. |
It would be hard to explain because it would be pretty inconsistent. Saying "we don't want political threads" but then not only allowing, but also being personally engaged in, a thread which is itself often politically charged is borderline hypocritical. I have no issue with Paizo staff getting involved personally in the discussions within such threads (in fact, I kind of like it), but I do have an issue with them doing that, and then turning around and disallowing threads that are equally political.The LBTQ Gamer Community thread doesn't actually discuss gaming all that much, but rather day-to-day LGBTQ life (and copious amounts of hugging). There's nothing wrong with that, but thejeff's point is that for the most part, the thread is game-themed in name only. So to say that the thread isn't comparable to the examples given is (hypocritically) intellectually dishonest.The thing is that this thread, no matter what's discussed in it, by it's very nature is highly political and will stay political as long as he is needed. I absolutely support them for taking a stand on that topic, but to allow for such threads to exist while simultaneously to disallow discussion of other political topics may be hard to explain for a lot of people.
So I'd rather have them to find a solution to allow for political topics than to alienate part of their fanbase for not being consequent with a ban. Especially as I've never found those topics here to be as vitriolic as I'm used from other boards.
OTOH, it's the same kind of line between having a community space for LGBTQ folk and not allowing others to trash it with homophobic attacks posing as discussion.
Which might not make sense in some ideologically pure free speech sense, but makes perfect sense in a building community kind of way.
That would be perfectly fine if Paizo made that their stance saying, "We don't want political discussion, with the exception of X-issue because we want this site to accommodate the people to which it pertains". Then it would be intellectually consistent and I'd have no issue with it (mostly, though I'd still miss the general political talk). What I take issue with is the "no political threads" stance when that's not actually true.
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
My position is that Paizo provides the Messageboards and moderate them for "free". So they can do what they want.
Nobody in this thread is saying otherwise. Arguing in favor of something != arguing that the group in question doesn't have the final say in the matter.
My position is that Paizo provides the Messageboards and moderate them for "free". So they can do what they want.Nobody in this thread is saying otherwise. Arguing in favor of something != arguing that the group in question doesn't have the final say in the matter.As BigDTBone said in the OP
Please don't bring up any specific topics and definitely don't turn this into a political thread of its own! ThankMy post was just complying with the OP. :)
What does a user's request to not point to specific topics have to do with whether or not Paizo can do what they want with the messageboards?
Try that again, but this time answer my question instead of putting words in my mouth, unless that was a formatting error.
I would like to hear the opinions of the mods, and others at Paizo, although I realize that could be a tricky topic to discuss publicly.
I think putting the politics stuff on hold for the last few months was a smart call, and required, given the current political climate level of political discourse. I think our national politics has become akin to professional wrestling - a spectacle detached from reality. It is very difficult to talk about important issues through that lens.
While I enjoy the political stuff, I don't really see the advantage Paizo gets out of it from a business perspective. I don't expect them to provide a forum for beliefs and opinions they find objectionable, and I'm not sure they want to allow some politics but not others.
While I have a lot of opinions on the topic, I will keep them to myself for now, and simply state that I support the mods and agree with whatever decision they come to.
EDIT: One other thing that is directly related to this topic:
I think it would be a good idea if the people at Paizo used two different aliases depending on how they are interacting on the boards. When representing Paizo officially, they use their official handles with titles and everything, and when participating on a personal level, they use aliases without the titles etc. This would allow involvement without confusing the policy of the company with the opinion of the individual.
| 2 people marked this as a favorite. |
OTOH, it's the same kind of line between having a community space for LGBTQ folk and not allowing others to trash it with homophobic attacks posing as discussion.In my opinion, it's not the exact same line. Because it's not a black-white scenario. Belonging to the LGBTQ crowd doesn't make you automatically right with everything you say, and disagreeing with some of the views presented by that community doesn't make you automatically into a homophobic idiot. Though those probably exist, there's no denying that.
Here's the thing about the vague disagreements you mention - there are things which don't make a person homophobic (liking the Star Wars prequels, preferring mustard to ketchup, and thinking the color purple is the best) and things that do (thinking gay marriage should be illegal, electroshock therapy is okay, and that non-discrimination clauses violate freedom of religion). In the case of the former you are correct and, like politics, it isn't a black-and-white issue. Yet, I'm fairly certain there aren't any posters in that thread who think someone's a "homophobic idiot" for not agreeing with them when they say that Johto was the best region in Pokemon. More often than not it's the people who say things like "I don't hate trans people but women shouldn't be allowed to use the men's restroom".
tl;dr, some disagreements are not strictly black-and-white - disagreements over basic human rights for members of the LGBTQ+ community are.
On-topic, I think banning the political threads is a good short-term solution for decreasing workload and preventing issues, but in the long-term I'd like for them to return if possible. There are a bunch of really intelligent and well-informed people on this site that I learned a lot from over the last year or so, and losing the non-confrontational discussions means losing their insight too. I'd understand if Paizo wants to keep them down for good, but perhaps defining what topics are and aren't okay would be on the to-do list if they stay banned.
|
|
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
And it's not like politics hasn't seeped into other "Off-Topic" threads anyway.
Yeah, but I think that that's a bad development, because if something goes wrong, a thread will be closed that was originally intended to provide fun/discussion regarding a topic that had nothing to do with the issue moderated at all. And I hate that, when threads get closed because people can't behave, especially when the escalation had nothing to do with the thread topic at hand.
While I enjoy the political stuff, I don't really see the advantage Paizo gets out of it from a business perspective.
It's certainly an indirect advantage if one at all as far as business is concerned. To me it's that I don't stop being a political being just because I come here and I'd rather talk politics with fellow gamers whose opinion I already value than with someone unknown who might or might not have an agenda. And while I don't want to imply that I come here because of those threads, it's still one of the advantages the Paizo boards have over other boards I visit. So it's something I'd like to stay.
That it's Paizo's prerogative to decide what to do about those threads goes without saying.
|
|
So let me get this straight - politics isn't a black-and-white issue, and since being LGBTQ+ doesn't magically make you right about everything they're basically the same?
That's not what I said, it's not what I intended to say and it's nothing you can get from what I said without willful misinterpretation.
To go back to thejeffs argument:
You have a community space for LGBTQ folk and don't allow others to trash it with homophobic attacks posing as discussion. Can we agree that that's a good thing? Fine.
Compare that to:
You have a community space for politically-minded folk and decide to close it permanently so as not to allow others to trash it with whatever insincere attacks posing as discussion.
Different treatments do not make for the exact same line, that's all I'm suggesting.
So let me get this straight - politics isn't a black-and-white issue, and since being LGBTQ+ doesn't magically make you right about everything they're basically the same?That's not what I said, it's not what I intended to say and it's nothing you can get from what I said without willful misinterpretation.
To go back to thejeffs argument:
You have a community space for LGBTQ folk and don't allow others to trash it with homophobic attacks posing as discussion. Can we agree that that's a good thing? Fine.
Compare that to:
You have a community space for politically-minded folk and decide to close it permanently so as not to allow others to trash it with whatever insincere attacks posing as discussion.
Different treatments do not make for the exact same line, that's all I'm suggesting.
Person 1: The LGBT Gamer's Thread is about building a community, so they'd rather deal with removing homophobic people to safeguard the community than shut it down.
Person 2: But determining who's actually homophobic and who's not isn't so simple - some people get told they're homophobic just for disagreeing with something a person in the community said. Don't get me wrong, though, those people do exist. And if they can police the LGBT Gamer's Community thread, can't they just police the political threads too?
My immediate reaction: Huh? Are they saying that political threads and the LGBTQ Gamer's Thread are similar because there's some kind of difficulty determining who's really a problem and who's innocent in both cases? But it's really easy to determine who's homophobic / saying homophobic things!
Probably could've been less confrontational - I've just been through this sort of discussion in a bad way before and bad experiences motivated bad habits. That, and I bet I failed my Unclear Dialogue save.
Thing about policing them both is there's just one LGBTQ Gamer's Thread and a metric ton of political threads. 'Tis the season and all that. Due to recent events the political threads are getting seriously heated. By contrast, the LGBTQ Gamer's Thread is usually pretty tame. Certainly there are times when it waxes political (the last page or so is, although some would argue justifiably so) but rarely aggressive in the same way. I mean, I had to binge like 15 pages of wedding announcements and hugs just to find that - the difference is staggering.
I seriously do hope they come back once tempers have cooled down a bit, but in the meantime, I'm hopping on over to the thread where people give each other hugs on a daily basis.
|
|
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
My immediate reaction: Huh? Are they saying that political threads and the LGBTQ Gamer's Thread are similar because there's some kind of difficulty determining who's really a problem and who's innocent in both cases? But it's really easy to determine who's homophobic / saying homophobic things!
ok, now I understand where the problem lies. And that it actually was my fault for phrasing my argument in an unclear way.
cause I agree that it's easy to identify homophobic posts. But I also think that it's quite easy to identify trolls and other idiots on political threads. in both cases compared to other people who simply might have another (possibly valid) opinon regarding a topic.And my point was simply regarding thejeffs argument that Paizo kinda drew the same line when actually handling those things in a different way.
Thing about policing them both is there's just one LGBTQ Gamer's Thread and a metric ton of political threads.
You're right about that. Which is also why I would be fine if they decide to allow the one but not the other.
| 2 people marked this as a favorite. |
** spoiler omitted **
Thing about policing them both is there's just one LGBTQ Gamer's Thread and a metric ton of political threads.You're right about that. Which is also why I would be fine if they decide to allow the one but not the other.
I don't think it is actually that easy to tell who is trolling vs being serious in the world right now. Poe's law is out in force and it has transcended the internet. As it turns out, vast swaths of people are prepared to accept hyperbole and lies as truth. It is almost impossible to tell the gas-lighters apart from the gas-lighted.
| 2 people marked this as a favorite. |
If theyre going to bring back the political forums they should get an ignore feature as well.
Thing about policing them both is there's just one LGBTQ Gamer's Thread and a metric ton of political threads.You're right about that. Which is also why I would be fine if they decide to allow the one but not the other.
Agreed.
|
|
Even beyond that it sometimes seems like we're using completely different language - the same words to mean different things. Particularly clear when talking about prejudice and bigotry and similar issues.
hehe, believe me, as a german talking mostly to U.S. citizens at these boards, I'm full aware of that. That's actually one of the reasons I like those political threads. Because I learn a lot about the vast ocean of differences between our political cultures.
The point still being that in most cases you can resolve misunderstandings coming out of this culture clash in a peaceful way if both sides are willing. SO that's what I normally try to do if confronted with an opinion that could be interpreted as flame-bait (I surely have my bad days, though).
But what normally happens with political trolls is the following: They offer an argument - you offer a counterargument - they start personal insults. Which is trolling, even if they mean it seriously.
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
It's actually a pretty fair comparison. The LBTQ Gamer Community thread doesn't actually discuss gaming all that much, but rather day-to-day LGBTQ life (and copious amounts of hugging). There's nothing wrong with that, but thejeff's point is that for the most part, the thread is game-themed in name only. So to say that the thread isn't comparable to the examples given is (hypocritically) intellectually dishonest.
Needless to say, I disagree and don't think it is fair at all.
"LGBT Gamer Community thread" does at its core have to do with gaming, in that as a hobby we've grown from a boys-world to a more diverse culture, one that has necessarily adopted a more open-arms approach. There is meat to that conversation and it is certainly on-topic. (side note - if that thread isn't often talking about LGBT-gaming issues as you stated, that is problematic because it is going off topic, likely with political overtones. Someone might stroll into that thread looking for a healthy discussion and find themselves reading a bunch of political bs. That's a problem.)
"Democrat Gamer thread" is a ridiculous comparison because there is nothing about being a democrat, republican, torie, or labour party that has anything to do with gaming.
It is exactly this kind of muddy-water ambiguity that makes any political discussion on a non-politics site unpalatable to me.
|
|
| 4 people marked this as a favorite. |
"Democrat Gamer thread" is a ridiculous comparison because there is nothing about being a democrat, republican, torie, or labour party that has anything to do with gaming.
uh what? My political preferences have a much more direct influence to the way I'm gaming than my sexual orientation ever had. That approach might differ with other people, but to say that the one thing is gaming related but the other thing is not (when in fact, in an open-arms-society both should be unnnecessary), is, well I don't know a better word for it, simply wrong.