Moved from the Star Trek thread (forum rules discussion)

Best Selling RPGs - Available Now @ DriveThruRPG.com
Status
Not open for further replies.
If I say I prefer "British farmer" halflings to "miniature mafia" halflings, there's an asshat out there that can turn that statement political.

Wait, they're mutually exclusive??? Shee-it, I've been doing it wrong for years.

(Wonder what that says about my politics? ;))
 
Last night before I went to bed I was reading this thread and talking with Tristram about what mod colors and the like we would have to use in the future...

Can it be mauve? Because I love mauve. And I can jokingly refer to the mods as the "Mauve Brigade".

:grin:
 
noman, you didn't offend me. Nothing so far on this forum has offended me. The fact that I spoke up about a statement that invited political debate doesn't mean I was offended.

I do appreciate your apology however. All is good. :smile:
 
noman, you didn't offend me. Nothing so far on this forum has offended me. The fact that I spoke up about a statement that invited political debate doesn't mean I was offended.

I do appreciate your apology however. All is good. :smile:

That's good to hear. I appreciate your graciousness in this matter.

Nothing I write should be taken too seriously. ;)
 
I unfortunately expect Discovery to be a political crapfest and that will make it difficult to talk about the scifi and Trek aspects of the show. I don't know how we navigate those waters, but I suggest we use sea bass with freaking lasers on their heads.

So Noman, you feel like sharing what you learned?

He realized he's a wanker.

But a really awesome wanker. :smile:
 
I unfortunately expect Discovery to be a political crapfest and that will make it difficult to talk about the scifi and Trek aspects of the show. I don't know how we navigate those waters, but I suggest we use sea bass with freaking lasers on their heads.
It entirely possible you will be right. The way I see it, we have Pundit's place to go talk about that aspect of the show. For people that want to focus on other aspects of the show, there is the thread here.

I don't expect this forum to be able to handle every conversation. In fact, its virtue is that some conversations will never happen here. I really like talking about politics, and I will continue to do so elsewhere. I just appreciate that I have a place to go when I don't want to talk about them.

Some people seem to be tied up over the right way to talk about delicate topics, like Krueger trying to formulate the right way to talk about Limbaugh. It's not that complicated. Don't talk about Limbaugh here.

Or, I don't know, maybe see bass with freaking laser on there head might be the solution.
 
I unfortunately expect Discovery to be a political crapfest and that will make it difficult to talk about the scifi and Trek aspects of the show. I don't know how we navigate those waters, but I suggest we use sea bass with freaking lasers on their heads.

This is my concern as well.

He realized he's a wanker.

Show's what you know, Spinach; I've always known I'm a wanker. :p
 
Calling someone a cynic isn't political either, BTW. :grin:
Basically, you're concern trolling and espousing exactly the kind of "err on the side of caution" action that I'm raising these issues to prevent.

If I say I prefer "British farmer" halflings to "miniature mafia" halflings, there's an asshat out there that can turn that statement political. So what? That statement wasn't political, so when they do, you tell them to shut their piehole, not start instituting newspeak or walking on eggshells.
You don't have to walk on eggshells to avoid saying "virtue signalling". If anything is newspeak, it is speaking in academic jargon like "virtue signalling". I am guessing most posters here in are in at least 40 and most of us never head the term virtue signalling until a few years ago. Somehow we managed to talk about games just fine without engaging in this kind of newspeak for most of our life. Just speak like a normal person instead of someone writing a post-modern sociology thesis.
 
Last edited:
And I should probably just let this conversation go. I've been out all day, and been thinking about it, but I am probably just winding it up again. My apologies.
 
I think this thread has run its course. There's one more reply I'd like to make tonight once I get home (hate typing on the cellphone), but other than that I think we should all hug or bro-chest bump or whatever and relax with some glenfiddich; first round's on me
 
You don't have to walk on eggshells to avoid saying "virtue signalling". If anything is newspeak, it is speaking in academic jargon like "virtue signalling". I am guessing most posters here in are in at least 40 and most of us never head the term virtue signalling until a few years ago. Somehow we managed to talk about games just fine without engaging in this kind of newspeak for most of our life. Just speak like a normal person instead of someone writing a post-modern sociology thesis.

I was about to (reluctantly) type something very similar — it's not hard at all to avoid these conundrums. Just don't engage.

Someone made a comment in another thread here about not wanting to give ACKS' creators any money, and I just knew it was politically motivated (ACKS' author works for Milo Iannopoulos), and I wanted to talk about it because I'm conflicted myself at times (though I've ultimately decided to keep buying ACKS material)... so I went and posted about it. On Google+.

If you think something you're writing might be construed as a political statement — post it elsewhere or keep it to yourself. (Please?)

If you think something someone else wrote might be construed as a political statement — fuck them. Ignore it. Report if it's beyond-the-pale egregious but mostly just fuck 'em. (Please?)

Presumably we're all here because we're fed up with politics interfering with honest, enthusiastic games discussion. Let's all do our part to keep the place politics- and drama-free.

I think this thread has run its course. There's one more reply I'd like to make tonight once I get home (hate typing on the cellphone), but other than that I think we should all hug or bro-chest bump or whatever and relax with some glenfiddich; first round's on me

Glenfiddich would make me very, very happy. But I think I'll finally try that Woodford Reserve sample I got months ago (bourbon is fiendishly hard to find around here).
 
Last edited:
Some people seem to be tied up over the right way to talk about delicate topics, like Krueger trying to formulate the right way to talk about Limbaugh. It's not that complicated. Don't talk about Limbaugh here.
I'll keep from using examples in the future, you're obviously incapable of grasping them, either that, or your ass is chapped because I said something you didn't like again. I wonder which?
 
You don't have to walk on eggshells to avoid saying "virtue signalling". If anything is newspeak, it is speaking in academic jargon like "virtue signalling". I am guessing most posters here in are in at least 40 and most of us never head the term virtue signalling until a few years ago. Somehow we managed to talk about games just fine without engaging in this kind of newspeak for most of our life. Just speak like a normal person instead of someone writing a post-modern sociology thesis.
So the person in favor of redefining an academic term because of their own ignorance of it, wants to call following the original definition Newspeak. Well, that's the first time the Pub broke the old Irony meter.
 
I'll keep from using examples in the future, you're obviously incapable of grasping them, either that, or your ass is chapped because I said something you didn't like again. I wonder which?
If I liked what you were saying, I wouldn't be disagreeing with you. But Tristram is right. This topic is done. See you around the gaming forum.
 
Not to reopen the topic but a recent preview made me realise how difficult it can be to discuss something without touching on the politics of it.

I also realised I’d rather not discuss that topic if it means argument and bad atmosphere. This is the internet...we have enough of that lol
 
This is what I was waiting for.

Leave it to Shipyard to provide a crucial byte of data. :smile:

I'd like to ask for the mod's indulgence with this post; I'm about to get nuttier than usual.
[ snip epic nuttiness ;) ]

It's not as weird as all that. I understood it just fine. It's something I wouldn't mind discussing further, outside of this thread. It's funny, Pundit and I come from a very similar background, literature -wise. From Robert Anton Wilson to Abremelin to Crowley, but he ended up a believer while I remain a skeptic.

Tristram, Endless, I apologize for any stress or frustration I may have caused you. *Japanese bow*

Not at all. The reason a thread like this exists is "Quis custodiet ipsos custodes? Agis." I think what you and several others have hit on is that the underlying issue here is the burden that many intelligent folks here have of seeing implications. For my part, I've seen the implications involved with being a "mod" for the first time. I mentioned to OHT, jokingly, my issues with authority. That actually extends to myself as well. I'm not comfortable with the dynamic it creates in interactions between me and the posters here. I'm much more comfortable just reasoning with people as people than speaking from a position of authority (unless I'm being a know-it-all in regards to art ). Ultimately the point of this thread itself is to stress that EF and I don't see ourselves as outside of or above the community here, that every person's input and opinions is valued and accounted for. As for the implications in how this incident was handled; what I can assure everyone is that it is a learning experience, rather than a setting of precedence. The reason we don't want a long list of rules nor banned terms is that we recognize context matters, and this is meant to be a dynamic and adaptive system rather than an entropic, calcifying one.

Speaking of, my earlier comments in the thread regarding a mod text colour may not be something we continue with.

Technically speaking, I "won" a while ago,

f84ea0847f165bceb9b93221a827dfc8.gif



although that's not exactly true, since I don't think Tristram's mind was changed at all. He has basically agreed with me about the usage of the term, and isn't declaring it a political buzz-word that needs to be banned. But you're right in that having the English language defined by the dictionary and not by Tweets and +1's isn't a "victory". It's simply this place not going off the deep end.

Actually your arguments did change my opinion of the term overall. They showed me clearly and legitimized the other PoV of the two I was trying to account for. However...

"Rush Limbaugh expresses Right-Wing, conservative views" is not a political statement.

Whether that statement in and of itself is political, in the broader sense its bringing up the current state of political affairs, which is not something that needs to be discussed here. Look at it this way: I think this place is a much more pleasant place to be, overall, when we as a group simply don't acknowledge the outside world or reference current events at all. "A shrine to escapism" is my motto.

Hmm, are you saying "toxic nodes" don't exist, period, not even in the context of the information they input into the system, even if deliberately destructive?

I think that "toxic nodes" exist, but that we haven't seen them in the system yet, (but all of us have seen them before, and know what they look like - I cant be the only one here whose been following the, ahem, "Biscuit Chronicles" on another site with a mix of horror and amusement). The strength of having only the one rule open to interpretation, and taking context into account on a case by case basis, rather than a list of banned terms, is that such toxic nodes will not be able to "game the system" as it were.

So, me thinks "virtue signalling" is basically the same as "trying too hard" or even "protesting too much".

I wonder if we could build a functional list of loaded terms to avoid and acceptable alternatives.

I don't know, it's a little silly, but a tight list of terms or topics that are verboten might be useful.

We don't want to go this route, because it needlessly causes anxiety over expression, and I think its an endless trap of having to add to the list in a way that ignores context. Theres a tendency in certain forums to amass a calcification of detritus (I wont go too far into detail in this, I think we all know what I'm referencing). I'd much prefer the common sense approach, even if that leads to mod calls being questioned more often. Or even especially because of that.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Banner: The best cosmic horror & Cthulhu Mythos @ DriveThruRPG.com
Back
Top