Trouble with Racists


Website Feedback

151 to 200 of 230 << first < prev | 1 | 2 | 3 | 4 | 5 | next > last >>

1 person marked this as a favorite.

Ok, can't hold this in any longer...

The political climate and recent tensions should not be allowed to ruin gaming, Paizo, or our ability to interact as, if indeed we are, a community.

These boards are meant to be a place to discuss Paizo stuff, gaming stuff, play some forum games, and GET THE HELL away from the horror of the real world.

It would be a true shame if this community shrank or became less than what it is because of some orange haired clown and a pair of outdated political parties. I have seen this community do some amazing things, that actually DID help members of it, and I for one will continue to do so.

But what I am trying to say is...don't let the disease of highly charged partisan politics do to Paizo and us what it is doing to the rest of the world.

Fight back by NOT giving into pressure, or anger, or the desire to be "right" above all. I know we are BETTER than that!

Community & Digital Content Director

4 people marked this as a favorite.

Removed a series of posts. We are not turning this thread into a debate on the results of the latest US presidential election, and the voters in it. Thank you.

RPG Superstar 2009 Top 16

10 people marked this as a favorite.
MichaelCullen wrote:
Freehold DM wrote:
If they are screaming disgusting "statistics" and stating how much they miss segregation, that's not something I am going to tolerate with hugs and such. It's hard to not assume bigotry when it is in front of your face.

I tired to keep my comment generally broad, because I don't know specifically what was said. I was simply trying to affirm what Aux was saying. That and my desire for less divisiveness here on the forums. Even in this thread, people are calling others "enemies". For expressing a distasteful/hurtful view? That makes a person an enemy?

Too often we look at others we disagree with with hate, viewing them as enemies to be destroyed. This seems to have gotten worse over the past few years, though maybe that is just my limited perspective. Heck, I'm sure it was worse leading up to the civil war. You even had congressman beating a senator on the floor of the Senate. Perhaps it is human nature.

I like you guys, and I enjoy gaming with you.
Much love,
Michael

Absolutely. I'm multiracial. My wife is white. If someone expresses the view that multiracial marriage is wrong, they aren't just disagreeing with me.

They're fundamentally saying that I, and more importantly my son, SHOULDN'T EXIST.

Damn right that person is my enemy. In the oldest, purest sense of the word.


1 person marked this as a favorite.
Pathfinder Rulebook Subscriber
Mark Thomas 66 wrote:
MichaelCullen wrote:
Freehold DM wrote:
If they are screaming disgusting "statistics" and stating how much they miss segregation, that's not something I am going to tolerate with hugs and such. It's hard to not assume bigotry when it is in front of your face.

I tired to keep my comment generally broad, because I don't know specifically what was said. I was simply trying to affirm what Aux was saying. That and my desire for less divisiveness here on the forums. Even in this thread, people are calling others "enemies". For expressing a distasteful/hurtful view? That makes a person an enemy?

Too often we look at others we disagree with with hate, viewing them as enemies to be destroyed. This seems to have gotten worse over the past few years, though maybe that is just my limited perspective. Heck, I'm sure it was worse leading up to the civil war. You even had congressman beating a senator on the floor of the Senate. Perhaps it is human nature.

I like you guys, and I enjoy gaming with you.
Much love,
Michael

Absolutely. I'm multiracial. My wife is white. If someone expresses the view that multiracial marriage is wrong, they aren't just disagreeing with me.

They're fundamentally saying that I, and more importantly my son, SHOULDN'T EXIST.

Damn right that person is my enemy. In the oldest, purest sense of the word.

THIS.

Also I just want to state that just because youre my enemy dosent mean that I want to destroy you. I'm perfectly fine with you existing and living your life. As long as you do it *points* OVER THERE.

I dont know where the whole "Viewing them as enemies to be destroyed" thing came in. You guys are taking this to extremes. Must be all that Dungeons and Pathfinder crap you kids play...

Silver Crusade

1 person marked this as a favorite.
Pathfinder Adventure Path, Starfinder Adventure Path, Starfinder Roleplaying Game Subscriber
ShinHakkaider wrote:
Mark Thomas 66 wrote:
MichaelCullen wrote:
Freehold DM wrote:
If they are screaming disgusting "statistics" and stating how much they miss segregation, that's not something I am going to tolerate with hugs and such. It's hard to not assume bigotry when it is in front of your face.

I tired to keep my comment generally broad, because I don't know specifically what was said. I was simply trying to affirm what Aux was saying. That and my desire for less divisiveness here on the forums. Even in this thread, people are calling others "enemies". For expressing a distasteful/hurtful view? That makes a person an enemy?

Too often we look at others we disagree with with hate, viewing them as enemies to be destroyed. This seems to have gotten worse over the past few years, though maybe that is just my limited perspective. Heck, I'm sure it was worse leading up to the civil war. You even had congressman beating a senator on the floor of the Senate. Perhaps it is human nature.

I like you guys, and I enjoy gaming with you.
Much love,
Michael

Absolutely. I'm multiracial. My wife is white. If someone expresses the view that multiracial marriage is wrong, they aren't just disagreeing with me.

They're fundamentally saying that I, and more importantly my son, SHOULDN'T EXIST.

Damn right that person is my enemy. In the oldest, purest sense of the word.

THIS.

Also I just want to state that just because youre my enemy dosent mean that I want to destroy you. I'm perfectly fine with you existing and living your life. As long as you do it *points* OVER THERE.

I dont know where the whole "Viewing them as enemies to be destroyed" thing came in. You guys are taking this to extremes. Must be all that Dungeons and Pathfinder crap you kids play...

I'm sorry, but if you're not wanting to destroy them, they are not your enemy. Maybe they make you very angry. Maybe you think they are bad people. Unless you want to destroy them or see them hurt, they are not your enemy.


5 people marked this as a favorite.
Pathfinder Rulebook Subscriber
Redelia wrote:
ShinHakkaider wrote:
Mark Thomas 66 wrote:
MichaelCullen wrote:
Freehold DM wrote:
If they are screaming disgusting "statistics" and stating how much they miss segregation, that's not something I am going to tolerate with hugs and such. It's hard to not assume bigotry when it is in front of your face.

I tired to keep my comment generally broad, because I don't know specifically what was said. I was simply trying to affirm what Aux was saying. That and my desire for less divisiveness here on the forums. Even in this thread, people are calling others "enemies". For expressing a distasteful/hurtful view? That makes a person an enemy?

Too often we look at others we disagree with with hate, viewing them as enemies to be destroyed. This seems to have gotten worse over the past few years, though maybe that is just my limited perspective. Heck, I'm sure it was worse leading up to the civil war. You even had congressman beating a senator on the floor of the Senate. Perhaps it is human nature.

I like you guys, and I enjoy gaming with you.
Much love,
Michael

Absolutely. I'm multiracial. My wife is white. If someone expresses the view that multiracial marriage is wrong, they aren't just disagreeing with me.

They're fundamentally saying that I, and more importantly my son, SHOULDN'T EXIST.

Damn right that person is my enemy. In the oldest, purest sense of the word.

THIS.

Also I just want to state that just because youre my enemy dosent mean that I want to destroy you. I'm perfectly fine with you existing and living your life. As long as you do it *points* OVER THERE.

I dont know where the whole "Viewing them as enemies to be destroyed" thing came in. You guys are taking this to extremes. Must be all that Dungeons and Pathfinder crap you kids play...

I'm sorry, but if you're not wanting to destroy them, they are not your enemy. Maybe they make you very angry. Maybe you think they are bad people. Unless you want to destroy them or see them...

Thank you for telling me who my enemies are and how I should feel about them, Strange Random Person on the internet!


3 people marked this as a favorite.
Redelia wrote:
I'm sorry, but if you're not wanting to destroy them, they are not your enemy. Maybe they make you very angry. Maybe you think they are bad people. Unless you want to destroy them or see them hurt, they are not your enemy.

What if I want them stopped? If I need to protected from them? If I don't necessarily want them hurt or destroyed, but kept from hurting me?


3 people marked this as a favorite.
thejeff wrote:
"Racist" is also a very broad category and it matters very much where someone stands on the spectrum. The guy wearing the white sheet and burning crosses is in a far different place than the one who's absorbed some stereotypes. It's pretty hard to grow up in America without picking up at least some racism. It's a question of how much and how you deal with it.

Musical interlude time.

Scarab Sages

2 people marked this as a favorite.
Redelia wrote:
I'm sorry, but if you're not wanting to destroy them, they are not your enemy. Maybe they make you very angry. Maybe you think they are bad people. Unless you want to destroy them or see them hurt, they are not your enemy.

This is certainly one way to react. But I believe many greater men than I have said that Love is the greatest weapon in varying ways. I prefer not to have enemies, and while I have at times in my life wished great harm and destruction on those I considered an enemy, as I get older, its too much work to produce that much hate.

I'd rather not. And yes, those who wish my destruction are my enemy, but by their choice, not mine. I'll just go on loving and being as happy as I can be. If I can't avoid the hate, I'll try to return love. If that doesn't work, then I don't know what I'd do, as I haven't encountered that yet. But I'd like to believe that I'd be a better man and find a way to remove myself from the situation without violence or hate.

Silver Crusade

Pathfinder Adventure Path, Starfinder Adventure Path, Starfinder Roleplaying Game Subscriber

I wrote several other posts, but I have deleted them, because they were escalating things, not helping. If I have injured you with my words, ShinHakkaider, I apologize. I was trying to engage intellectually, forgetting how much this can also be an emotional issue for some.


Pathfinder Rulebook Subscriber
Redelia wrote:
I wrote several other posts, but I have deleted them, because they were escalating things, not helping. If I have injured you with my words, ShinHakkaider, I apologize. I was trying to engage intellectually, forgetting how much this can also be an emotional issue for some.

Injured? Not at all. It's that this sort of thing is highly subjective and personal. I mean there's almost nothing more personal than the declaration of an enemy. Which is why i found it kind of hilarious that some random person on a messageboard is telling me how I should feel about it.

Trust me I wasn't "injured" at all. I was laughing pretty hard in fact.
Thanks for that!

Silver Crusade

Pathfinder Adventure Path, Starfinder Adventure Path, Starfinder Roleplaying Game Subscriber
ShinHakkaider wrote:
Redelia wrote:
I wrote several other posts, but I have deleted them, because they were escalating things, not helping. If I have injured you with my words, ShinHakkaider, I apologize. I was trying to engage intellectually, forgetting how much this can also be an emotional issue for some.

Injured? Not at all. It's that this sort of thing is highly subjective and personal. I mean there's almost nothing more personal than the declaration of an enemy. Which is why i found it kind of hilarious that some random person on a messageboard is telling me how I should feel about it.

Trust me I wasn't "injured" at all. I was laughing pretty hard in fact.
Thanks for that!

My point wasn't to argue with the subjective portion, it was to disagree with you as to what the definition of an enemy is.

Grand Lodge

1 person marked this as a favorite.
Adventure Path Charter Subscriber; Pathfinder Starfinder Adventure Path Subscriber

Disclaimer: Longtime poster. I hid OT a few years ago because I didn't like the direction it was headed. Banning poli-threads won't change my day-to-day posting habits.

Honestly though, I'm glad poli-threads have been banned. It's long over-due, IMO. I really, really hope it lowers the overall sense of tension around here. The more we're talking about gaming and sharing ideas, the better off these forums will be.

-Skeld


1 person marked this as a favorite.
Skeld wrote:

Disclaimer: Longtime poster. I hid OT a few years ago because I didn't like the direction it was headed. Banning poli-threads won't change my day-to-day posting habits.

Honestly though, I'm glad poli-threads have been banned. It's long over-due, IMO. I really, really hope it lowers the overall sense of tension around here. The more we're talking about gaming and sharing ideas, the better off these forums will be.

-Skeld

Agree to disagree -- of course, I also don't think it's at all fair to suggest that all political threads are trolling -- but I appreciate your point-of-view.


1 person marked this as a favorite.
bugleyman wrote:
Skeld wrote:

Disclaimer: Longtime poster. I hid OT a few years ago because I didn't like the direction it was headed. Banning poli-threads won't change my day-to-day posting habits.

Honestly though, I'm glad poli-threads have been banned. It's long over-due, IMO. I really, really hope it lowers the overall sense of tension around here. The more we're talking about gaming and sharing ideas, the better off these forums will be.

-Skeld

Agree to disagree -- of course, I also don't think it's at all fair to suggest that all political threads are trolling -- but I appreciate your point-of-view.

I don't think they did suggest that (It's usually the Goblin talking about politrolling anyway).

I don't think it's going to make that big a difference in the climate around here though. Not like there aren't plenty of hostile fights about game mechanics or edition wars and I don't think most of those are driven by the relatively few people in the political threads carrying things over.
I know I've had supportive discussions in game threads with people I've strongly disagreed with in political threads.

We're still going to have LGBTQ issues come up in game related threads, because Paizo's still going to use such characters in their work. Maybe most of those convinced LGBTQ issues should stay out of gaming have left or gone into hiding, but new people will always wander in and take offence and be slapped down. Then get upset about the moderation.

I might be wrong, but I doubt a lot will really change.

RPG Superstar 2009 Top 16

1 person marked this as a favorite.
Redelia wrote:
ShinHakkaider wrote:
Redelia wrote:
I wrote several other posts, but I have deleted them, because they were escalating things, not helping. If I have injured you with my words, ShinHakkaider, I apologize. I was trying to engage intellectually, forgetting how much this can also be an emotional issue for some.

Injured? Not at all. It's that this sort of thing is highly subjective and personal. I mean there's almost nothing more personal than the declaration of an enemy. Which is why i found it kind of hilarious that some random person on a messageboard is telling me how I should feel about it.

Trust me I wasn't "injured" at all. I was laughing pretty hard in fact.
Thanks for that!

My point wasn't to argue with the subjective portion, it was to disagree with you as to what the definition of an enemy is.

en·e·my

ˈenəmē/Submit
noun
a person who is actively opposed or hostile to someone or something.
synonyms: opponent, adversary, foe, archenemy, rival, antagonist, combatant, challenger, competitor, opposer; More
a hostile nation or its armed forces or citizens, especially in time of war.
noun: the enemy
"the enemy shot down four helicopters"
a thing that harms or weakens something else.
"routine is the enemy of art"

No mention of needing to destroy said enemy.


9 people marked this as a favorite.

I find it a very sad thing that politics will now not be discussed on these boards. I can understand the problems with having those discussions, but let's be honest, compared to the rules questions sections, they were a balmy breeze. Still, it is difficult to go through the discussions in my head without seeing precisely the echo chamber described above. Go American-style leftist, or go home, to put it frankly. As a Swede, it is a daunting prospect to learn all the words that nobody is supposed to say. As an old school liberal, I consider it better to know that someone despises you because they tell you, than not to know because those particular words are forbidden. With all due respect to those theories of language-shaping-thoughts and all that, those people aren't going to stop thinking what they think because they get called racists. It doesn't work like that. What works is giving them an alternative, something better to believe in, listening to their concerns, respectfully showing them your position, and, critically, letting them save face when they do try to change.


thejeff wrote:
I don't think they did suggest that (It's usually the Goblin talking about politrolling anyway).

My mistake; I read "poli-thread" as "poli-troll threads." I guess I'm projecting. ;-)

Grand Lodge

Adventure Path Charter Subscriber; Pathfinder Starfinder Adventure Path Subscriber
thejeff wrote:
bugleyman wrote:
Skeld wrote:

Disclaimer: Longtime poster. I hid OT a few years ago because I didn't like the direction it was headed. Banning poli-threads won't change my day-to-day posting habits.

Honestly though, I'm glad poli-threads have been banned. It's long over-due, IMO. I really, really hope it lowers the overall sense of tension around here. The more we're talking about gaming and sharing ideas, the better off these forums will be.

-Skeld

Agree to disagree -- of course, I also don't think it's at all fair to suggest that all political threads are trolling -- but I appreciate your point-of-view.

I don't think they did suggest that (It's usually the Goblin talking about politrolling anyway).

I don't think it's going to make that big a difference in the climate around here though. Not like there aren't plenty of hostile fights about game mechanics or edition wars and I don't think most of those are driven by the relatively few people in the political threads carrying things over.
I know I've had supportive discussions in game threads with people I've strongly disagreed with in political threads.

We're still going to have LGBTQ issues come up in game related threads, because Paizo's still going to use such characters in their work. Maybe most of those convinced LGBTQ issues should stay out of gaming have left or gone into hiding, but new people will always wander in and take offence and be slapped down. Then get upset about the moderation.

I might be wrong, but I doubt a lot will really change.

Right. I made no attempt to imply that all political threads are trolling.

We'll have to wait and see what the long-term removal of an entire line of very contentious discussion does to the overall grar level, but I think it's going lessen it.

-Skeld

Edit:

bugleyman wrote:
thejeff wrote:
I don't think they did suggest that (It's usually the Goblin talking about politrolling anyway).
My mistake; I read "poli-thread" as "poli-troll threads." I guess I'm projecting. ;-)

No worries. :)


2 people marked this as a favorite.

Another thing: I sincerely do not believe banning politics will have the effect people hope. What draws people to participate deeply in a community is that they feel welcome as they are in that community. That they can gather around all sorts of topics that are important to them in that group. See Deep 6 FaWTL for an example. For better or worse, the current world situation makes all our lives political, and finding people you like to discuss them with is a huge plus. My guess is, overall posting will merely go down. I may be wrong.


7 people marked this as a favorite.
Sissyl wrote:

I find it a very sad thing that politics will now not be discussed on these boards. I can understand the problems with having those discussions, but let's be honest, compared to the rules questions sections, they were a balmy breeze. Still, it is difficult to go through the discussions in my head without seeing precisely the echo chamber described above. Go American-style leftist, or go home, to put it frankly. As a Swede, it is a daunting prospect to learn all the words that nobody is supposed to say. As an old school liberal, I consider it better to know that someone despises you because they tell you, than not to know because those particular words are forbidden. With all due respect to those theories of language-shaping-thoughts and all that, those people aren't going to stop thinking what they think because they get called racists. It doesn't work like that. What works is giving them an alternative, something better to believe in, listening to their concerns, respectfully showing them your position, and, critically, letting them save face when they do try to change.

Perhaps, but racism and sexism and homophobia being open and publicly acceptable makes it far easier to spread. There may be better ways of teaching people they're wrong, but not doing so isn't an option.

How do you "listen to someone's concern and respectfully show them your position" when their concerns are that you're destroying the country by existing?

It's really not a matter of "the words that nobody is supposed to say". That's a right wing political correctness shibboleth. There are a few that are really beyond the pale, but it should be really simple to know which those are. In fact, it's because it's assumed that everyone knows them that it's assumed anyone using them is doing so with intent.
There are others that are not so well known and if you use one of them, it's usually pretty simple to say "Oh I didn't know, sorry" - and then stop.
There are a small handful that are actually contentious, where some subgroups want them used and other are adamantly opposed - queer might be an example.

But mostly, it isn't the words, it's the attitude. With the right approach you can slip up on the words occasionally and not be bothered. Or you display your bigotry openly without ever using a word on the "forbidden list".
It's quite possible for a US White Supremacist to argue his case for White Power without ever using the N-word. Doesn't make him any less racist.

Individual words are a distraction. They're a symptom, not a cause. (Which doesn't mean go ahead and use them. They can be weapons. They can hurt.)


3 people marked this as a favorite.

Yeah. Thank you for demonstrating my point, thejeff. I am sure you will get many favourites. I just can't answer it, as I stated.

Grand Lodge

2 people marked this as a favorite.
Pathfinder Adventure, Rulebook Subscriber; Pathfinder Battles Case Subscriber
ShinHakkaider wrote:

THIS.

Also I just want to state that just because youre my enemy dosent mean that I want to destroy you. I'm perfectly fine with you existing and living your life. As long as you do it *points* OVER THERE.

The problem being that OVER THERE is not far enough to prevent them from having a negative effect on you, given our interconnections. Those hostile views will reach out through social proxies to attack you no matter where your enemy is put.


1 person marked this as a favorite.
Sissyl wrote:
Yeah. Thank you for demonstrating my point, thejeff. I am sure you will get many favourites. I just can't answer it, as I stated.

I've got no idea what you mean.

I'm pretty sure it's hostile, but I don't understand it. Or why you can't answer.


1 person marked this as a favorite.

Whether you understand it or not, I have said what I am going to say on the matter. Going further would mean more conflict, and I am both too weary and too respectful of the rules of conduct to go that direction. And no, I am not being particularly hostile.


Okay.


1 person marked this as a favorite.
Sissyl wrote:
Another thing: I sincerely do not believe banning politics will have the effect people hope. What draws people to participate deeply in a community is that they feel welcome as they are in that community. That they can gather around all sorts of topics that are important to them in that group. See Deep 6 FaWTL for an example.

...

...

The long-running FaWtL threads, the threads that you use as an example of being welcoming and community...

...ban political discussion.

Edit: I'm not trying to be an !sshole, just pointing out why FaWtL is so long-lived.


Read the rest of it. While those threads are nice and welcoming, it is still an important topic for people, and not allowing it will hurt people's will to engage here.


3 people marked this as a favorite.
Sissyl wrote:
Read the rest of it. While those threads are nice and welcoming, it is still an important topic for people, and not allowing it will hurt people's will to engage here.

Maybe. But not being able to talk about real-world politics here will probably help many people's will to engage here. I'll miss being able to snare new political stuff and be snarky about it, but I accept that trade off for the improvement by lowering the Def Con Grar levels.

Edit: I had included some specific examples on why I disliked discussing politics here, but that seemed like unneeded kindling.

If I want to discuss politics (or just snark/joke about it), I have other web places I can visit. I'm quite ok with needing separate communities to hop between.


1 person marked this as a favorite.

When the site has a system where you cannot delete something you posted over an hour ago, it sort of makes it hard to take back something you wish you had never said in the first place.

Then, days latter, someone reads that thing you wish you had never posted, and it could start a whole new series of posts made that people wish they had never made.

I think that is a good enough reason to limit the types of discussions that are allowed here.


1 person marked this as a favorite.

Most sites I'm aware of don't have a mechanism for deleting posts even up to an hour old. The drawback to allowing that (or editing posts) is that you can screw with people by baiting them and then deleting or editing posts so their responses seem like out-of-nowhere attacks.


4 people marked this as a favorite.
Pathfinder Rulebook Subscriber
TriOmegaZero wrote:
ShinHakkaider wrote:

THIS.

Also I just want to state that just because youre my enemy dosent mean that I want to destroy you. I'm perfectly fine with you existing and living your life. As long as you do it *points* OVER THERE.

The problem being that OVER THERE is not far enough to prevent them from having a negative effect on you, given our interconnections. Those hostile views will reach out through social proxies to attack you no matter where your enemy is put.

D00d those hostile views reach out to me in REAL SPACE. There are things that I have to take into consideration just walking down the street that most of the people here aren't thinking twice about. So keeping overt racists away from me and mine it seem like a sisyphusian task(not even sure that's a word but you know what I mean...) but I'll take my wins whenever I can get them.


1 person marked this as a favorite.
Pathfinder Adventure Path, Rulebook, Starfinder Adventure Path, Starfinder Roleplaying Game, Starfinder Society Subscriber
Terquem wrote:

When the site has a system where you cannot delete something you posted over an hour ago, it sort of makes it hard to take back something you wish you had never said in the first place.

Then, days latter, someone reads that thing you wish you had never posted, and it could start a whole new series of posts made that people wish they had never made.

I think that is a good enough reason to limit the types of discussions that are allowed here.

I apologize for stupid s!%! I say all the time.

Saying "I'm sorry" isn't as hard as it's made out to be. :-)


7 people marked this as a favorite.
Chris Lambertz wrote:
Removed a derail. Folks, derailing this with a debate about what words are/are not offensive is not productive (for the record, "cis" is not a word our staff considers a slur, you can't use a particular "f" word to refer to gay people here either). If you're questioning whether a word is acceptable, our team is happy to answer, but elevating the conversation in this way doesn't help.

I should know better than to even get involved in a discussion of this nature....but what the hell...

I wasn't part of the discussion where the alleged "racism" occurred....so I have no opinion on that.

That said it has become very popular...in a very biased fashion, to throw accusations around, especially accusations of racism and homophobia. People are very quick to jump others and make such accusations....and as often as not it's either a simple (or obscure) misunderstanding.

For example...Chris stated above the staff don't consider "cis" a slur...guess what...I most certainly do. I don't care what labels someone else chooses to apply to themselves.....but NOBODY get's to apply labels to me, and tell me I have to accept them.

Likewise someone got jumped last week for using a term (I forget the exact term)....and was immediately jumped because it's origin is related to Gypsies or some such...so it's considered a "slur"....when in reality it hasn't meant that for many generations, and their usage of the term was completely in line with common usage (depending on your generation I suppose).

Are there racists and homophobes in the world....you bet.....
There are also (in far greater numbers these days) radical SJW that are just looking for anyone to attack.

If you see something you think is offensive....ask them what they mean before assuming offense it intended, or some form of prejudice is in play.

Stop looking for someone to go to war with....that's not what any of us are here for.

Just some random thoughts from a 53 year old Gay Heathen.....

Sovereign Court

4 people marked this as a favorite.
Pathfinder Adventure Path, Companion Subscriber

...well.

Thank you for revealing all that about yourself. It really is good to know.


2 people marked this as a favorite.
Kalindlara wrote:

...well.

Thank you for revealing all that about yourself. It really is good to know.

Ya it's silly....but it gives all the folks who want to jump on the grist of my thoughts with accusations of prejudice pause.....besides none of it is worthy of secrecy ;)

Sovereign Court

1 person marked this as a favorite.

I can recall sitting in a staff meeting once where a person stated at length that he had a major issue with the flag the guy down the hall had at the door to his office. It just didn't seem right that he could display that ... symbol of oppression... etc...

Most of us in the meeting were a little confused about what he was talking about, but 5 minutes or so into the speach about racism and how the guy was a bigot, it dawned on us that the speaker had his flags a bit confused. The "bigot" was NOT actually displaying the Confederate Battle Flag... it was a Union Jack - and it was in front of the office for the U.K. Rep....


Ummm... I would say Union Jack has some "symbol of oppression" thing going on as well, but, still.


7 people marked this as a favorite.

I don't have time or energy to go through all of this right now, as I'm about to head to bed, but I will say: I agree with the essential sentiments of the OP, and those who have voiced opinions parallel to the OPs', and I'm sending my useless good vibes towards those who have stuck up for those opinions on this thread. These threads are rough.

It saddens me that there are some issues we are literally not allowed to talk about because certain fringes will ruin the conversations for everyone. It feels like that holds us back from being a truly welcoming community. I don't want to ban politics, I want to ban the people who make civil political discussions, particularly about certain people, conspiracy theories, and hate groups, untenable. But there's basically two mods on the forums (arguably 1.5, since Sara Marie's got a lot else besides to do). Am I supposed to demand they suck it up and deal with it? That's what's kept me from really making any sort of "Big Stink" (as it were) about it. I have faith that they are doing what they can.

Paizo has come a long ways. I hold out hope we can continue to advance positively. I'm gonna go to bed now before I say something that sparks a big argument.

Also, "cis" isn't a slur. That's the silliest thing I've ever heard. I'll believe it's a slur the day the #downwithcis bus parks in my gravel driveway and beats me to death with canes. And, well, then I'll be dead, so I still don't give a f*!$.


1 person marked this as a favorite.

Addendum: My Focus has been on for a while, so I only just now learned that political discussions have officially been banned. I'm really upset now. I stand by everything I said, including the sentiments of goodwill and faith in the mods. Good night.


3 people marked this as a favorite.
Pathfinder Adventure Path, Lost Omens, Rulebook Subscriber

Poster since 2011 here...

I support the banning of political threads on the Paizo boards.

Those threads tend to increase the general level of hostility and IMO hurt the online Paizo community.

Very, very few people ever change their opinions or worldview because of Internet discussions. In those threads, you just get angry people shouting past each other as the vitriol rises. And seeing how some posters react on such threads often greatly lowers my own opinion of them...further weakening the sense of community.

Furthermore, political issues are emotionally charged. Writing text on a screen increases the distance, making it harder to understand the emotional context of a discussion, which can muddy the topic and cause further misunderstanding.

Consequently, I choose not to engage. I've been hiding the political threads for years.

On slurs: It's the members of a minority group that get to say whether or not a trem is a slur. Members of the majority (i.e. cis white dudes like myself) don't get to say, "Well, actually, 'blergie' is just an historical term and I don't mean anything by it, so people from Blergland should't get so bent out of shape when I use it." That's not how it works. Doing that marks you as a racist.

When you're corrected after using a racial term ignorantly and without malice, you apologize and STOP USING IT.

It's also the responsibility of everyone to point out use of such terms and tell the user to stop.

Personal anecdotes:
Back in the early 80s when I was 12, boom boxes were a thing, but the term "boom box" hadn't really taken hold. The terms used in my very, very white city in New Hampshire were "ghetto blaster" or "n***er box". None of my friends or I had never met a non-white person before, and we had no concept of what these terms actually meant. So we used them. Until a teacher in school pointed it out, and then we stopped.

Likewise, when I was 14, I had no idea that to "joo your way out" of something was a slur against Jews until a Jewish friend pointed it out. I apologized and stopped using the term.


Muse. wrote:

I can recall sitting in a staff meeting once where a person stated at length that he had a major issue with the flag the guy down the hall had at the door to his office. It just didn't seem right that he could display that ... symbol of oppression... etc...

Most of us in the meeting were a little confused about what he was talking about, but 5 minutes or so into the speach about racism and how the guy was a bigot, it dawned on us that the speaker had his flags a bit confused. The "bigot" was NOT actually displaying the Confederate Battle Flag... it was a Union Jack - and it was in front of the office for the U.K. Rep....

union Jack has VERY negative race based connotations for some of my family. I have largely outlived them, but the history remains.

The Exchange

2 people marked this as a favorite.
Kobold Cleaver wrote:
Addendum: My Focus has been on for a while, so I only just now learned that political discussions have officially been banned. I'm really upset now. I stand by everything I said, including the sentiments of goodwill and faith in the mods. Good night.

Me too. I have mixed feelings. I participated way back in some but got burned out with it, and the Focus button meant I haven't seen any for ages. So while I can decry "censorship" I also have avoided them like the plague for several years, arguably self-censoring what I see. I've seen ignorance and unpleasantness on both sides, and since this forum is really about killing time and killing goblins the demise of politics here is probably a good thing, and an appropriate thing, on balance. I can still discuss the news of the day with the guys I play PbP with on a discussion thread if I have to, and frankly have a more productive discussion.

Scarab Sages

1 person marked this as a favorite.
nighttree wrote:
Kalindlara wrote:

...well.

Thank you for revealing all that about yourself. It really is good to know.

Ya it's silly....but it gives all the folks who want to jump on the grist of my thoughts with accusations of prejudice pause.....besides none of it is worthy of secrecy ;)

If anyone watched this last season of Survivor, you'll know that must because you identify with a group that is often discriminated against, doesn't mean you can't be bigoted.

I'm not saying you are. Just that your implied premise is faulty.


3 people marked this as a favorite.
Pathfinder Adventure Path, Rulebook, Starfinder Adventure Path, Starfinder Roleplaying Game, Starfinder Society Subscriber

Does ANYONE still watch Survivor? I never hear anyone talk about it anymore.

Captain Yesterday fun fact: i've never seen an episode of Survivor.

151 to 200 of 230 << first < prev | 1 | 2 | 3 | 4 | 5 | next > last >>
Community / Forums / Paizo / Website Feedback / Trouble with Racists All Messageboards