Mod+ Mythic Polynesia

Best Selling RPGs - Available Now @ DriveThruRPG.com
Absolute nonsense. That road leads logically to one place - the only thing any human can write is an autobiography. It's madness.
Hardly. It merely means that anyone writing about another culture needs to properly know their shit, which I think is a reasonable bar. But in the interests of compromise I'm willing to settle for expecting them to be more no likely to get things wrong then someone who's lived in that culture all that life. How does that sound? We hold them to the same standard rather than higher.
...and what specific harm was done in that case? The Sinn Fein bagmen were able to get more money out of Boston from sympathizers who read the WoD product? The UVF picked up their guns again? Be specific.
Agemegos has touched on what I mean.

"A level of reputational harm that would be legally actionable under UK defamation laws if it was applied to an individual rather than a group". I know less about it, but I also think it reaches that level in Canadian law but not US law.

That said, I'm happy to use "insult" instead of "harm" here? It strikes me as mostly semantics anyway.

I think the same applies to criticism though. Unless someone goes "let's go round Pete Nash's house and break his windows" we're not really meeting the standard you're applying. Even hyberbolic threats of violence may not qualify. I may threaten to bop Voros on the nose (and he would deserve it as we all know) but it's empty unless I can actually do it or get someone else to.

A rabbithole of facts? Proving libel (slander is even harder to prove) is very difficult in any Western country besides the UK. That's a fact.

Yeah, I don't like our laws but libel reform is beyond the scope of this forum. But libel isn't *that* hard to legally prove in Candian law, just comparatively to the UK. (As you say, slander is a different matter)
 
Yes I assume any cultural analogy portrayals are intended to raise awareness in a positive way, but these days that doesn’t always get the expected reception

From the brief piece I saw on this I think he has been a generous donor to the cause. Putting your money where your mouth is can count for a lot when being an 'ally.' Too often Indigenous peoples get high flown rhetoric but when it comes time to pay the piper...not so much.
 
I did not. Again, it is not my job to reach out to others. I was critiquing art in the public.
This seems a bit convenient. You are aware the book is coming. You have concerns, based on the art. You can address it in private before the book comes out, but choose not to because it is not your job, but your mana and utu demand address it publicly? Wouldn’t your mana demand you address it privately first?

I don’t really know about mana, only some vague sense, so I don’t know what happens there. I’ve read briefly about utu, but can’t speak to that. So perhaps you can educate us how mana and utu would apply here. Why mana would not apply before (my very limited understanding of utu brings it close to a sense of revenge, so before the publication makes little sense there) publication when the art was out and there were your own publicly voiced concerns?

My own culture would view letting someone step into the a bad situation like that when they knew it would be bad as a sign of a pretty callous person, and would view an attempt to prevent them as a sign of good will, even if it was not accepted. They would also view doing it in private as attempt to make sure the person doesn’t lose face with others. They would view someone who waits for them to make the mistake and then make a big noise about it after the fact as rude in the best case, and self serving in other less generous cases. As you can see, this view is very different, almost counter to my limited understanding of mana and utu.


This place moves fast huh, every time I hit reply theres more posts!
This topic is exceedingly fast. There were six posts between when I started above and when I went to answer this. Two more appeared while I was quoting.
 
Anyway, I've had my say and will bow out of this thread but want to thank Liam TTT Liam TTT for coming here to discuss the issue. It couldn't be easy to walk into an unfamiliar forum, he may have been risking walking into a lion's den.
Hahaha I very nearly didn't come in. But it seemed like there was enough good intent here that I could at least offer my reasoning to help clarify some things. I know I wont win over everyone here, nor do I want to. But, incase it isnt already obvious, I think accountability is important so here I am.
 
As an aside, if these concerns have emerged regarding ‘Mythic Polynesia’ as a rpg supplement, then I wonder what the reception will be for James Cameron’s ‘Avatar: The Way of Water’?

Big Hollywood blockbusters tend to make a much bigger splash in a pond than gaming supplements do

Because that blue alien race was portrayed as an analogy for native Amazonian people in the original film. There now looks like there are now other blue aliens that are likely influenced by Polynesian culture in some ways. I may be wrong, but the trailer I saw last week felt like those blue folk had some Hawaiian/Polynesian trappings.

Certainly doesn’t automatically make them an analogy for Polynesians however, but James Cameron did say his original film was an analogy regarding how bombastic Western industry was operating and impacting on indigenous people of the Amazon.
There could easily be similar notions and intended themes in the new film regarding socieo-cultural analogies with Pacifica people.

Not that I am a fan of Avatar anyway, I keep away from it all, but James Cameron may be about to trigger off public sensitivities even more than he did the first time around, for good or bad.

Just sayin’
I can say that at this early stage a lot of Māori find the new avatar film pretty on the nose. Its quite clearly inspired by us and our Tangata Moana cousins and yeah, theres a lot of talk around it. Opinions vary, but its not particularly positive. I haven't seen the film though so will hold off my own judgement
 
I can say that at this early stage a lot of Māori find the new avatar film pretty on the nose.
When you say "on the nose", do you mean "it is accurate" or "it stinks"?
 
When you say "on the nose", do you mean "it is accurate" or "it stinks"?
On the nose idiomatically means “obvious”. If someone tells a story metaphorically and it is very clear that they are pulling from a true story and it applies exactly, it is considered “on the nose”. Similar to accurate, but I could say that a ruler is accurate, but on the nose there would mean “ precise”. Subtly different. Sorry. English is brutal
 
On the nose idiomatically means “obvious”.
Not in Australia. Hereabouts "on the nose" means "stinking", literally or metaphorically.

Aware of both usages, I asked Liam TTT what he meant.
 
I went to school in Canada in the 80s and I hear people claim all the time that they were never taught about Canada's horrific treatment of Indigenous peoples.

We definitely learned about it in my school, but only the very basics and it seemed to only cover the far past, with the implication that it was a century ag and Canada was "better now" or something. None of the horrors of the indigenous schools up into the late 20th century (but not sure the wider public even knew much about that at the time).
 
We definitely learned about it in my school, but only the very basics and it seemed to only cover the far past, with the implication that it was a century ag and Canada was "better now" or something. None of the horrors of the indigenous schools up into the late 20th century (but not sure the wider public even knew much about that at the time).
We learned about native Americans in my school, but I grew up next to a reservation, and have never lived in a place that didn’t have a fairly large native population within an hour’s drive. I kind of assumed I was out of the norm.
 
This seems a bit convenient. You are aware the book is coming. You have concerns, based on the art. You can address it in private before the book comes out, but choose not to because it is not your job, but your mana and utu demand address it publicly? Wouldn’t your mana demand you address it privately first?

I don’t really know about mana, only some vague sense, so I don’t know what happens there. I’ve read briefly about utu, but can’t speak to that. So perhaps you can educate us how mana and utu would apply here. Why mana would not apply before (my very limited understanding of utu brings it close to a sense of revenge, so before the publication makes little sense there) publication when the art was out and there were your own publicly voiced concerns?

My own culture would view letting someone step into the a bad situation like that when they knew it would be bad as a sign of a pretty callous person, and would view an attempt to prevent them as a sign of good will, even if it was not accepted. They would also view doing it in private as attempt to make sure the person doesn’t lose face with others. They would view someone who waits for them to make the mistake and then make a big noise about it after the fact as rude in the best case, and self serving in other less generous cases. As you can see, this view is very different, almost counter to my limited understanding of mana and utu.



This topic is exceedingly fast. There were six posts between when I started above and when I went to answer this. Two more appeared while I was quoting.
Sure I can do my best to explain things a bit.

Utu is easy to explain in this context: its ultimately about balance and redress. Often it was translated as revenge, but that is in more extreme cases. But the idea of Utu is it is a reaction to a wrong. Until something exists you cannot take Utu on it. In this case Utu is about balancing out the wrong doing/statements in the book and encouraging TDM to engage in a process to remove the problematic content. If they do this then Utu is satisfied and they gain Mana. Even if they only partially do this, such as issue a satisfactory statement, then the case for Utu diminishes, discussion gets more courteous etc. If Utu is not achieved and you allow it to go unaddressed then it negatively impacts your mana.

Mana is much more complex. It means a lot of things, prestige, authority, honour, ethics and so on. Everyone and everything has some degree of mana. You inherit it, you pass it on and you can build upon it. For example my mana is not just mine, it is the mana of my ancestors and my future offspring, so I have a duty to protect it.

TDM and its staff also have mana. And they have a duty to protect it. This is where it becomes their duty to do the right thing, so to speak, and ensure that they are acting in a way that does not diminish their mana. Ultimately this onus is on them to ensure that they release a good product that isn't built on the backs of others, and if they do misstep then they should engage in the utu process to right it.

As for my own Mana in the context of this book, back when I commented on the art it seemed like it was just going to be another marginally problematic book written from ignorance. Made a comment and left it. Some people I know were much hotter on it as it developed but I'm pretty busy so stayed largely out of it (for full context I had started a new job in feb, I was not in a place to go out of my way to solicit work, especially when the authors seemed uninterested. And as I have said previously, I don't solicit as a rule anyway). Once it came out and I started hearing about what was in the book, it went from just being problematic to something that needed addressing as it sounded much worse than I expected. Thats where Utu and my mana came into it. I wanted to form my own opinion so while I had heard some stuff was in there and bad, I strated at the start. Upon finding the Moriori stuff and reading it myself things escalated a bit. The book effectively states that my ancestors killed and ate a people and stole their land, a land that we consider ourselves intrinsically related to. Which is not true (edit: the eating and stealing part). We are no angels, but that particular untruth got me quite fired up. This is why you see my engagement change at that point.

Hopefully that gives some clarity?
 
As to why I start with a public callout. Our different views on this are possibly down to differing cultural priorities here. The book is already out and publicly available. The words inside it have been said in a public manner, so mana and utu both demand public accountability. The time for private discussion was before the book was available to public.
That's quite possible I think, with the complicated intermix of how culture informs tactics. But yeah, a lot of Brit working class culture is about "face", for better or worse. So I can't help but react to public callouts as a declaration of hostility because I'm used to either a) being aimed primarily at the onlooker or b) being a warning that stuff's about to physically kick off if someone doesn't back down.
The elephant in the room. A comment made in a moment of anger and I accept that. I considered removing it before writing the big thread but kept it up for the same reasons I stated above. There would be no mana in pretending it wasnt said. For what its worth I wouldn't assault Mr Shirley, over this issue especially, but you bet I would call him out on it should our paths cross and demand reply, especially while TDM is not offering one. But such a situation is incredibly unlikely at this stage.
That's fair. I'm sure we've all posted illadvised stuff in a moment of anger.
For my preferred solution: There is a concept or structure we use in governance and policy a lot called the 3 P's. Its the 3 principles of the treaty of waitangi, our foundational document. Its basically the bare minimum to adhere to when doing anything that impacts Māori, at least where the crown is concerned. The Ps are Participation, Protection and Partnership. The idea is that when something impacts Māori they should be involved in decision making, should be a partner in the process from the start and efforts should be made to avoid adding to ongoing harm.

Now this doesn't apply to everyone, especially people abroad writing game books. But it is a very good place to start if you genuinely intend to create a work that is safe, and I think the 3P concept is easily transplantable to other cultures too.
I think those are all excellent principles even if I'm not sure it's realistic to expect them in all cases. I'm fully away I'm on the edge of politics at least as much as you now, but it's interesting similar to the "nothing about us without us" slogan I'm familiar with from disability services. The reason I'm not sure we can expect that universally is that the latter at least is primarly about governence. I don't think most people would try and apply it to a book about someone with a disability. (Apart from anything else, you run headlong into the "who has the right to speak" issue there). I'm not sure I'd use "safe" rather than "respectful" or "accurate", but that one may be semantics again).
As for non Māori who don't have ready access to us for collaboration, I think a big part of it is Mana. Do they have the mana to speak about us? There are plenty of Tauiwi (non māori) who have proven over the years that they can speak with some degree of authority about us. But that took time, knowledge and understanding to get there. Mr Shirley stated his research methods previously, which is in essence him stating his mana to talk on this. But he ultimately fell short. On a related note there is a book called Decolonizing Methodologies by Linda Tuhiwai Smith that lays out the pitfalls of this kind of research model.
I agree that he fell short (I think a significant number of us do). Unfortunately, while I don't know it, the Smith book sounds interesting but not something we can discuss on the forum without going headfirst into politics of the academic variety.
In a perfect world I would like to see more of us writing about and sharing our culture ourselves, instead of it being primarily something done by outsiders. When I see calls for variety, I see that as more of a call for variety in the people telling the stories, instead of the same group of people telling everyone else's stories for them.
That's also something I'd welcome. It's similar to the Derry Girls example I mentioned earlier. I cannot think of a way I personally would be able to write a brilliant comedy about being a teenage girl growing up in Derry during The Troubles. People telling their own stories more is great from an artistic perspective and I need no further justification.
So yeah, Tauiwi can write about us obviously, we can't stop them, but they are not free from critique for this. We aren't just an aesthetic or a cool story to be commoditized at will. We have a history of our culture being plundered and if you do further plundering we will call you out. And anyone who thinks they can write a completely safe text is in fantasy land; anything has the potential for harm and it is not up to the author to state if someone else is harmed. Even a Māori author is very likely to create something with potential to harm. Which is why taking efforts to counter this and minimize these risks are valuable. This book didn't make much, if any, efforts in this way.
I think our disagreement here is pretty nuanced. I definitely agree people aren't and shouldn't be free of critique. I just, generally, prefer things to be out there to critique. Expose bad history to the light of factual criticism, rather than try and stop it existing. (As you say, a fruitless goal ever). I'm also starting to wonder if the usage of "safe" and "harm" may be a cultural difference here.
I will say this though, and this slightly is an answer to Zebraman too, part of the "who has the right to speak" conversation is always contextual eh. We have to consider the broader context and acknowledge that it is typically complex and messy. A European writing about a culture currently colonized by Europeans with no particular ties or knowledge to the culture in question save for some 100 year old books is inherently more risky and harmful than that same person writing about a culture that is no longer around or their own culture. They become a part of that history of colonization when they do that, and colonization is often filled with bad actions by well meaning people that when combined equal great harm. This is especially true when someone is commoditizing the thing; when you take someone's culture, particularly one at risk, and sell it for your own gain that is much more clearly appropriation than, say, fusion cuisine. Appropriation is a messy complicated thing, but when someone is taking something that isn't theres and selling it... thats not just human contact and the merging of cultures.
Yeah, this one is complex and I recognise your view is a lot more nuanced then a lot of internet discussion on the topic. Unfortunately, I don't feel I can really discuss either the concepts of colonisation or cultural appropriation without jumping too much into overtly political waters. If you want me to expand on this feel free to drop me a PM, but I won't be at all offended if you don't. I recognise that the speed of the thread may already be a bit much!
And in this particular case I don't really buy the "fantastical world" defense either. We are talking about real still living cultures, real historical figures and so on. Sure, it includes things like monsters, but so much of this is clearly grounded in reality that when it steps outside reality it becomes notable. The area that is mostly grounded in reality is the history of the cultures, so when the variation to that history is not just a fictional fantasy but a white supremacist myth from the real world it stands out. This myth has been used to excuse or apologize for policies with a stated aim of cultural genocide. To make an extreme comparison giving this a pass "'cause fantasy" would be like a ww2 alternative history game that is very similar to our own history except it made all the Nazi claims about Jews true and then we accept it because its fiction. It is extreme I know, even verges on Godwins law which I am reluctant to do, but its a similar thing. Lies were told to justify one culture subjugating another, the harms of which is still felt today, so at the very least including these lies in your fantasy book is extremely bad taste. That bad taste doesn't go away just because you sell it in the fiction section of the bookshop.
Agreed. I don't think "fantastical world" is a 100% defense anyway. (MYFAROG is a fantasy world). But I don't think that applies here anyway. The Old World (Warhammer) takes inspiration from Renaissance Europe but is clearly a fantastical world. I don't think that applies here; it's much closer to something like Maelstrom Gothic, which I think is clearly a game with supernatural elements set explictly in Victorian London
I am aware that this is all tip toeing along the cliff edge of the no politics rule; it is a hard topic to discuss without that proximity as it is inherently political to an extent. I'm doing my best to keep it objective and matter of fact
I wouldn't worry, I think everyone's in the same boat on this topic. Putting my mod hat on for a moment, if anything does dance too close to the line we'll step in without that being a "slap on the wrist" or anything, merely good housekeeping.
 
Not in Australia. Hereabouts "on the nose" means "stinking", literally or metaphorically.
Yep in Australia and New Zealand, being "on the nose' is definately not a good thing
 
Yep in Australia and New Zealand, being "on the nose' is definately not a good thing
My favourite thing like that is when Americans find out that Brits use "quite" to mean "a bit" and realise that we've not been being really enthusiastic all this time.
 
I missed the on the nose question, Yeah, On the nose here is not a good thing. As said above, its often a reaction to something that is openly bad. You might say "Thats a bit on the nose isnt it?" the same way you might say "That was a bit harsh!". I think it comes from the very precise meaning and would've started as referring to a brutal truth, but over time has come to mean "thats offensive"
 
I'm jumping out now before I trip over myself as I often do in MOD+ threads.
I also have to go get things ready on this hectic Christmas Eve.
Thanking Liam TTT Liam TTT for showing up here and responding in a dignified articulate way.
Good vibes and intentions are appreciated here more than anything else! :thumbsup:
 
Last edited:
Sure I can do my best to explain things a bit.

Utu is easy to explain in this context: its ultimately about balance and redress. Often it was translated as revenge, but that is in more extreme cases. But the idea of Utu is it is a reaction to a wrong. Until something exists you cannot take Utu on it. In this case Utu is about balancing out the wrong doing/statements in the book and encouraging TDM to engage in a process to remove the problematic content. If they do this then Utu is satisfied and they gain Mana. Even if they only partially do this, such as issue a satisfactory statement, then the case for Utu diminishes, discussion gets more courteous etc. If Utu is not achieved and you allow it to go unaddressed then it negatively impacts your mana.

Mana is much more complex. It means a lot of things, prestige, authority, honour, ethics and so on. Everyone and everything has some degree of mana. You inherit it, you pass it on and you can build upon it. For example my mana is not just mine, it is the mana of my ancestors and my future offspring, so I have a duty to protect it.

TDM and its staff also have mana. And they have a duty to protect it. This is where it becomes their duty to do the right thing, so to speak, and ensure that they are acting in a way that does not diminish their mana. Ultimately this onus is on them to ensure that they release a good product that isn't built on the backs of others, and if they do misstep then they should engage in the utu process to right it.

As for my own Mana in the context of this book, back when I commented on the art it seemed like it was just going to be another marginally problematic book written from ignorance. Made a comment and left it. Some people I know were much hotter on it as it developed but I'm pretty busy so stayed largely out of it (for full context I had started a new job in feb, I was not in a place to go out of my way to solicit work, especially when the authors seemed uninterested. And as I have said previously, I don't solicit as a rule anyway). Once it came out and I started hearing about what was in the book, it went from just being problematic to something that needed addressing as it sounded much worse than I expected. Thats where Utu and my mana came into it. I wanted to form my own opinion so while I had heard some stuff was in there and bad, I strated at the start. Upon finding the Moriori stuff and reading it myself things escalated a bit. The book effectively states that my ancestors killed and ate a people and stole their land, a land that we consider ourselves intrinsically related to. Which is not true (edit: the eating and stealing part). We are no angels, but that particular untruth got me quite fired up. This is why you see my engagement change at that point.

Hopefully that gives some clarity?
It does. Thank you.

I am largely of the position that I wish this would have been addressed privately months ago. I think the position of “it’s not my job to reach out to them” in all cases is not good for the mana, as I understand it, of anyone. It means no one takes action and thus we get situations where everyone stares each other down and points fingers. A very similar statement was made by TDM back in March (“they are free to reach out to us”) and it doesn’t sit well with me either.

I think everyone would be happier with a more accurate book, mythic or not. It’s not going to overly impact me - I don’t based my view of people on gaming books, I don’t generally run historical games, I ask my folks about sensitive topics and just stay out of them (religion is the big one for my table, and I’m debating keeping out a very clear swindler who is religiously bent). But folks like that, for whatever reason.

I think at this point I’m just mad that folks won’t calm down and take a look, relax, read the whole thing, figure out how any mistakes might have been made, and deal with that. Rather, they decide ALL of TDMs future products are now off limits, how all of their previous ones are as well, and how associated communities are now racist by association just because they liked many other publications without a whiff of erroneous content of that nature. So much damage was done, so many bytes were spilled, and I don’t think it has promised any change at all.

this thread, and the other with the critique of your posts, and probably about the best that will come of it.
 
I'm going to try this quote feature. If I dont mess this up I will be proud.

That's quite possible I think, with the complicated intermix of how culture informs tactics.
I quoted this because I am fully aware of how my expecting TDM to live up to my cultures concepts of mana, utu etc is pushing the boat out. But it is my world view, and navigating how these different worldviews work is the joy of the human condition. But also I feel like if they can publish a book about how my culture works then I think its only fair that they respect it enough to understand my reaction from within that culture.
I think those are all excellent principles even if I'm not sure it's realistic to expect them in all cases.
Yeah for sure. Its an idealistic enterprise that gets more and more difficult the further we get from Aotearoa. It's a good ideal to strive for and use as a guiding light when deciding what to do when it isn't possible, I think. We look at the intent behind what the 3Ps set out to do, and do our best to adhere to them. We have a concept called Kaupapa, it means guiding principle or purpose. If we look for the Kaupapa in the 3ps and seek to empower them, even when we cannot adhere to them strictly, then we are off to a strong start.
I just, generally, prefer things to be out there to critique. Expose bad history to the light of factual criticism, rather than try and stop it existing.

I actually largely agree with you. I have never been a fan of idealistic fantasy that presents a world free from colonization, discrimination etc that you see popular in many circles. I am very much of the school of expose it and critique it. Represent the true issues of our history warts and all. Especially in TTRPGs as its an immersive and cathartic medium that allows us to engage with the complexities of history in a way that is safe for us as players. Instead of "This thing is bad so I don't include it at all" I lean towards "this thing is bad, let me show you how bad, and together lets consider how not to do the bad thing going forward"

But this book isn't doing that. It's sharing something that is untrue in a medium that couches it as history, from a product line famed for its accuracy. Its not a critique at all and doesn't positively add to the conversation.
 
That's it from me, then.
There's only two Englishes. The english that asks for "wine" and the real English that asks for "the wine" (Buckfast Tonic Wine). All else is vanity.
 
It does. Thank you.

I am largely of the position that I wish this would have been addressed privately months ago. I think the position of “it’s not my job to reach out to them” in all cases is not good for the mana, as I understand it, of anyone. It means no one takes action and thus we get situations where everyone stares each other down and points fingers. A very similar statement was made by TDM back in March (“they are free to reach out to us”) and it doesn’t sit well with me either.

I think everyone would be happier with a more accurate book, mythic or not. It’s not going to overly impact me - I don’t based my view of people on gaming books, I don’t generally run historical games, I ask my folks about sensitive topics and just stay out of them (religion is the big one for my table, and I’m debating keeping out a very clear swindler who is religiously bent). But folks like that, for whatever reason.

I think at this point I’m just mad that folks won’t calm down and take a look, relax, read the whole thing, figure out how any mistakes might have been made, and deal with that. Rather, they decide ALL of TDMs future products are now off limits, how all of their previous ones are as well, and how associated communities are now racist by association just because they liked many other publications without a whiff of erroneous content of that nature. So much damage was done, so many bytes were spilled, and I don’t think it has promised any change at all.

this thread, and the other with the critique of your posts, and probably about the best that will come of it.
Yeah I can appreciate your stance on this, even where I disagree. I will say that in the various places you and I have communicated around this you have always been more than fair and I appreciate your even approach on every forum etc

I will say that for me, unless The Design Mechanism rights this I wont be buying into any more of their stuff nor will I recommend them. And I am very likely to get rid of the stuff I do have. Just because I don't want to support a company that is ok with this being out in the world.

BUT I am absolutely hoping they do in fact do the right thing and if they do I will absolutely praise them for it. I want to be really clear here: I am not calling for a wholesale "cancelation" of TDM and I know how hard it is to say you made a mistake and fix it. I don't want to define someone by their mistakes when I can define them by how they respond to those mistakes. We need examples of people reacting right in these moments just as much as we need examples of people getting it right the first time. I keep saying this publicly so I am accountable on this front too.

My industry friends have all said that Loz in particular is a top bloke, so I have hope here. Some near and dear friends of mine have said that Carol Johnson is absolutely good people too. I'm inclined to trust these friends, so that's why I continue to engage in these various discussions as I want it known to TDM that while I absolutely want them held to account, I want it to be fair also. It's not a switch thats flipped permanently to bad for me.

That said, what we have right now is pretty bad. I can't really give too much benefit of the doubt until I see a reason to.

Not that my endorsement might mean much to TDM. But its my mana, which means everything to me, so its the best I can offer.

As for their communities being racist, of course not. I have absolutely received racist comments, but I suspect they aren't even TDM fans but people who don't like seeing me speak out. As for TDMs fan base as a whole, each will have their own take, they don't have to agree with me. I get it. I'm sure I can find plenty of books on my RPG shelf written by some folk unliked by others too.
 
Yeah I can appreciate your stance on this, even where I disagree. I will say that in the various places you and I have communicated around this you have always been more than fair and I appreciate your even approach on every forum etc
I really appreciate that. Thank you. I’m in a peculiar position in this whole thing, and it has been quite the time for reflection. Some of it has been more vociferous than I would like, and I’m still reflecting on a good many things that are involved. A lot of thinking about what I’m saying and going back and removing some of it and rewording it before I post. And sometimes walking away.

BUT I am absolutely hoping they do in fact do the right thing and if they do I will absolutely praise them for it. I want to be really clear here: I am not calling for a wholesale "cancelation" of TDM and I know how hard it is to say you made a mistake and fix it. I don't want to define someone by their mistakes when I can define them by how they respond to those mistakes. We need examples of people reacting right in these moments just as much as we need examples of people getting it right the first time. I keep saying this publicly so I am accountable on this front too.
I think the people who follow you on Twitter missed the part where you are not calling for wholesale cancellation. I can’t hold you responsible to that, but that’s pretty much the reason to not start with a public forum.


My industry friends have all said that Loz in particular is a top bloke, so I have hope here. Some near and dear friends of mine have said that Carol Johnson is absolutely good people too. I'm inclined to trust these friends, so that's why I continue to engage in these various discussions as I want it known to TDM that while I absolutely want them held to account, I want it to be fair also. It's not a switch thats flipped permanently to bad for me.

That said, what we have right now is pretty bad. I can't really give too much benefit of the doubt until I see a reason to.
Does this strike you as mistrusting your friends? Being willing to call TDM out, being willing to call their work racist in a public forum, being willing to publicly say “nah! I know you all say Loz is a good guy, but I’m going to go on a public forum and use my voice to say that you are wrong.”

that is specifically why I started examining my own view of what was racism - I had friends and people I respect saying things were racist and I disagreed with them about it, but I respected them enough to say “hey, you know, let’s assume they are right. What is getting them to this point?” And thus here we are a couple years into this. It’s what made me start reading the book mentioned above. It’s made me learn a whole raft of new things and different perspectives. I’ll freely admit I didn’t understand the concept of systematic racism 5 years ago.

that’s why it seems to me sort of an odd way to respect your friend’s view.


As for their communities being racist, of course not. I have absolutely received racist comments, but I suspect they aren't even TDM fans but people who don't like seeing me speak out. As for TDMs fan base as a whole, each will have their own take, they don't have to agree with me. I get it. I'm sure I can find plenty of books on my RPG shelf written by some folk unliked by others too.
Like I said above. I can’t hold you to others actions. That’s not remotely fair. But I do feel a screed saying that, in some way, they are worse than the author of MYFAROG, or that it is so offensive that a vague threat needs to be made (and I saw your clarification, so I do not misconstrue the intent), is on you.

Doing it in public with your voice means you are responsible for the outcome of that to some extent. It is literally the burden of leadership in the community - knowing your voice is what people follow, and how that can have consequences you don’t intend. You are in that position, asked for or not. That’s why I warned the other mods I am a nonstop stream of explicatives when ranting. That’s why my public voice is pretty measured and my wife is damn tired of hearing about mythic Polynesia ;)

If we throw a rock into the lake, it makes a big splash, gets everyone all wet, and has ripples that last a long time. You can’t build a bridge that way. You place them in. You do it carefully. I just wish building the bridge had been started by either you or TDM. I’m mad it still isn’t to my knowledge.
 
I don't think there's any incidence of Mythic Polynesia referring to anything as 'exotic' is there? That seems too obviously a mistake these days.

You took the reference out of context: for example, Mythic Polynesia or an REH Conan book for calling a fictional land "exotic"...

Modiphius postponed publication of a Conan title and had a "Cultural Sensitivity Reader" (which is a debate all its own) to "correct" (another debate all its own) the text to please an audience the world was never aimed at. And with "corrected" text, still seemingly failed at what was intended.

By your context, you would seem to be in the camp of exotic = negative connotations without regard to context of the text involved. Which is a struggle and open debate in postcolonial studies. When, of course, just like people, everything is not just black and white.
 
Does this strike you as mistrusting your friends? Being willing to call TDM out, being willing to call their work racist in a public forum, being willing to publicly say “nah! I know you all say Loz is a good guy, but I’m going to go on a public forum and use my voice to say that you are wrong.”

that is specifically why I started examining my own view of what was racism - I had friends and people I respect saying things were racist and I disagreed with them about it, but I respected them enough to say “hey, you know, let’s assume they are right. What is getting them to this point?” And thus here we are a couple years into this. It’s what made me start reading the book mentioned above. It’s made me learn a whole raft of new things and different perspectives. I’ll freely admit I didn’t understand the concept of systematic racism 5 years ago.

that’s why it seems to me sort of an odd way to respect your friend’s view.
For clarity my friends have all said things along the lines of "Thats very odd for them to do that, Loz is a top bloke" etc.

I think its possible to do a racist thing without you being racist yourself, if that makes sense. You can do a thing because you do not know better, or because you yourself have fallen for systemic racism etc without you having ill intent or overtly racist views. Most racist things done here in Aotearoa every day are generally done by people who don't understand how what they are doing is wrong. Thats part of why I bang on about misleading messaging around Moriori, many people who believe this won't do it knowing its harmful, they just do not know.

Where it becomes problematic is when you know what you have done is a racist thing and choose not to do anything about it. Thats where we run into problems. That is why I think its important that Loz and co react sooner rather than later. This is also my biggest misgiving with some of the conversation around these issues that we see elsewhere on the internet. If we do not give people a chance to admit wrong doing and try and do better then we really just encourage others to keep doing wrong cause they cant win.

Finally on this particular point, its ultimately Mr Shirley who did the research and should know better. Loz's name is on it, but I doubt he really knows one way or the other. Same for Carol. At this point it has been pointed out to them, what they do next matters. So the way I see it, just like how the Mythic line has a reputation for accuracy but here it is, Los and co have a reputation as good people and at the moment we aren't seeing that. Both of these reputations, and the mana attached, are repairable. That ball is in their court.

as an aside this is a bugbear of mine generally. I wont go into detail cause the one rule, but we need more nuance on this broader topic generally. It would be nice to live in a world where we can point things out to each other, realize we did wrong and fix it.
But I do feel a screed saying that, in some way, they are worse than the author of MYFAROG
The point I was making was that at least Varg is willing to come out and say what he is. I doubt anyone there is worse than him. Or even on par. But they aren't in a hurry to prove it, or so it seems. Ill concede I may have been overly dramatic. But Ill point to my comment earlier about the implication of that history section to my mana. By that point in the thread it was taking a lot of effort to not just spit and swear
That’s why my public voice is pretty measured and my wife is damn tired of hearing about mythic Polynesia ;)
Your wife and my partner would probably get along well, both being well versed in sitting through rants and vents!
 
Not sure why I posted that to be honest lol. Just reading the replies and my precise nature got to me.

It's late here and getting into Christmas Eve so maybe a few days before I reply!. Certainly some food for thought and some points I'd respond to though.
 
Kia ora RPG pub.

Liam here from the twitter thread that's been discussed here a fair bit. I've been linked to this chat a few times in the last few weeks and saw a lot of speculation around my intent etc and at least one post saying I'd be welcome so I figured I'd join to clarify a few things for peeps in good faith. Ill do this by answering some of the common comments I've seen come up. Ill do my best to adhere to the one rule, though its kind of a political topic in a way. But I'll do my best to remain objective.

Welcome to The Pub Liam. It's good of you to wade into these waters, as hostile as they might seem, though I can't help but wish that you'd found our way to our corner of the net under different circumstances - the Pub usually does not involve itself in controversies. For reasons I'm sure you can understand, this topic was deemed relevant enough to the hobby, and our community (especially as we are host to an inordinate number of Mythras fans) to justify pushing the line of our One Rule - a rule that exists to foster fellowship, not to cover up or give a free pass to racism.


Who am I and what gives me the right to say this stuff anyway?

I'll be honest, even if you were just a dude from New Jersey I think you'd have the right to express your opinion. I think that you are knowledgeable on the subject in question was self-evident from your tweets, so it's not just "an opinion", it's an informed opinion, backed by evidence.


Why did I make the post: Initially I wasn't going to, as publicly calling out companies isn't good for business as a consultant. But my mana demanded I do it in the end. When works are made about us but without us they invariably cause harm, so it was important I look at it for the sake of people who follow me to know if it was safe or not. I received a lot of comments asking about my thoughts so a public thread made the most sense. Also, I was aware that some other voices were calling it out without really giving good cause, as is typical for twitter. If I was going to say a book has issues I wanted to present those issues clearly and as objectively as one can in the circumstance. Wasn't interested in just calling for a mob as is the twitter way.

I have to say, whatever the surrounding issues regarding your Twitter thread, I personally am glad you made it. As I've stated previously in this thread, the subject matter is an area of the world that I have next to no knowledge of. Though I spend a lot of time in historical research, my focus is pretty myopically centred around one very specific field of study and cultures outside of that I only know what I've picked up by occasional osmosis. As such, without you bringing the matter t public attention, I would have assumed the information presented in Mythic Polynesia was of a standard of research matching the previous books in the line, and taken the information presented at face value, thus inadvertently perpetuating the stereotypes and historical fallacies. While I understand the argument from some that a gamebok should not be held to the same standard as an academic work, the value of the Mythic Earth line, for me, is it's academic integrity. If someone put out an RPG that was described as "loosely based upon the Polynesian cultures" that I knew was largely fantasy or just picking and choosing aspects of the culture to create a surface-level approximation, that would have held no interest to me.

So I think your critique was valuable and important, especially for folks completely uninvolved and unknowledgeable of the cultures discussed like myself.

As for your choice of venue - Twitter - well, I'll come back to that later.

Did I do it for clout?: Considering the way twitter is going at the moment, going for clout over there is a rather pointless endeavor huh :tongue: But like I said, it was a mana thing, and that doesn't really care what the broader public thinks for better or worse. Considering the amount of abuse I've worn over it I would say it isn't worth any clout it could've given.

I do think there is an appearance of conflict of interests that could have been assuaged by a disclaimer upfront and maybe should have informed certain statements that were made that extended beyond illuminating or debunking information. I also don't think that's entirely on your head, because it involves certain (admittedly well-founded) prejudices against bad actors and parasites in the current social media climate that have adopted the role of "consultants" and wielded that as a badfaith weapon in recent years.

Why is the post so long:

I think this is an issue with the format of Twitter more than your post actually being "long" in any objective sense.

What's all this about Moriori anyway?: So I have seen one user here especially get a bit mixed up with the Moriori stuff I raised. For clarity I need to talk about the mythical Moriori genocide and the very real one.

Moriori are a separate people's from Māori, though its likely some of them descend from Māori who migrated to their islands around 500 years ago. They developed separate from Māori and adopted a culture of non violence and pacifism. In the 1830s, two Māori tribes that were displaced due to a conflict known as the musket wars, had heard about the Chatham islands and made their way there to establish a new home. This ended up being a violent encounter and the pacifist Moriori were brutally dealt with. Very few of them survived, first the initial genocide and then the lack of care from the colonial govt who allowed this injustice to carry on. This whole thing took place between 1835 and 1870. This is dark moment in history that Moriori are still recovering from today.

A couple of decades later some European ethnographers proposed that Moriori were inferior to Māori, and that they lived on the mainland prior to Māori arrival. They preposed that the Māori supplanted them due to their racial superiority and conquered the lands. This was popular for two reasons. One, there was a strong belief that Caucasians were superior to Māori, so the idea of another further inferior people aligned with this worldview. And two, it undermined Māori claim to the land, and excused or justified European annexation of the lands and intended cultural replacement of the inferior Māori. If they conquered for the land then so could the empire. This was picked up and taught in schools for awhile from around 1900. It was disproven as early as 1920, but prevailed until the 1960s in schools. To this day this myth is expressed by people who typically want to undermine Māori and justify or ignore colonial injustice. Moriori suffer for this myth too, as it often states that they are extinct or were physically and intellectual inferior to Māori and by extension Europeans. It also takes attention away from the real atrocity they experienced in their history. These days the only people who openly share this narrative are white supremacists or very old people who learned it in schools and aren't up to date. Its a highly offensive part of our ongoing colonization.

If you want a more in-depth look at the history I recommend this video as an easily accessible way to get a good overall look


Thank you, I'll watch the video. I'm going to have to look to see what MP actually says, as it seems like this is a complex subject. I do have a question about this specific sentence though: "Very few of them survived, first the initial genocide and then the lack of care from the colonial govt who allowed this injustice to carry on."

I'm going to try to word this carefully because again, I am admittedly completely ignorant of this history, and I'm not trying to make any assumptions, but to be clear, the Moriori were the victims of an attempted genocide by the Maori, yes? Because in this context that statement reads like "the colonial government are to blame for not preventing the Maori's attempts to genocide the Moriori". I'm hoping I'm mistaken in my reading and you can clarify, because if my initial reading is correct, that seems an attempt to shift responsibility, and inadvertently infantilizing the Maori by placing the colnial government in the role pf moral guardians.

But if it was taught at schools then it must be in a text book, so easy mistake to make right?: As I said, this was disproven a century ago. The amount of text that contradicts this narrative vastly outweighs the texts that say it is truth. So you pretty much have to go out of your way to read that history and believe it if you are researching in this day and age. Given its harm and implications that's not really good enough, IMO.

I really wish that the author was more willing to engage on this topic. I understand the fear surrounding getting embroiled in a controversy these days, but the silence is just opening himself to assumptions. I don't want to chastise him, but I'd like to know how this mistake was made, and to understand his approach to research and how it led to this.


You got upset about the language change in the book, is it really important?

I have a different perspective on this in particular, but I do at least understand your viewpoint and why it's important to you.


Do you want a mob to shut down The Design Mechanism?: No not really.

that's a good starting point at least.


When I started the twitter thread I just wanted my followers to know about it really. Now I think TDM should do the right thing, pull the book. Keeping it up means that they are at the very least ok with a book of theirs perpetuating racist myths. Which is pretty stink, IMO. TDM can absolutely do the right thing here and pull a win, IMO. Even a statement would be of value.

I want to give TDM the benefit of the doubt, but the silence at the moment is deafening. I'm inclined to be more patient, as TDM is actually just two guys who do this as a part-time gig, not a corporation with anyone trained in public relations. It would be helpful, I think, to know what they are doing though - are they currently going through the book, verifying the information based on the critiques? That to me would be a millin times different than if they are just ignoring the situation entirely, hoping it will blow over.

Sorry my forum skills can't figure out how to work the multi quote,

When you quote someone, you can choose any point in that quote, click on it, ad press return, breaking up the quote for a response.


The elephant in the room.

Have you publicly disavowed those statements on Twitter? Because explaining them here doesn't have much effect.


(I have more responses, but that will be getting into the weeds and it's Christmas eve eve here, so I have holiday preparations I need to attend to, I'll hopefully get back to this soon. )
 
The notion that one needs to be a member of culture X in order to write or speak about it, full stop, is arrant nonsense.
Full agreement to this full stop.

There's a wonderful discussion of this subject by scholar Gayatri Spivak, in which she argues that avoiding criticism of any culture because you (collective-you not you-as-individual) are not part of it is "salving your conscience" ... that you are obliged as a thinking human being to do the homework required to speak and then to offer criticism and opinion.

And, of course, homework is more than watching a Netflix series (proper noun used generically)... Neither of the following statements is better than the other: "I'm not from Central/South America nor a cocaine user, so I cannot speak about the horrors of drug cartels in Mexico and Colombia" nor "I just watched Narcos, so can speak with authority on the violence of drug trafficking!" The former is arrant nonsense, and the latter, an example of the adage a little knowledge is a dangerous thing.

I've taught classes where this happens in almost every uncomfortable ethnic/cultural discussion, sometimes with dire fallout afterward. It's a cop-out, to be sure. I've met people not of my ethnicity, culture, social class, nor nationality who could speak with more authority on those topics than I could being a part of them. If it were wrong or incorrect to critique outside of one's own small place of birth, then no political discussion could ever be had...

Such an idea would also prevent most literature from being written. As a [reservation-born Nez Perce] friend of mine often says, the single best representation of his collective indigenous culture in any fictional media is written by dead-white-man, Ken Kesey (Chief Broom in ...Cuckoo's Nest). The worst is exampled by a well-meaning rpgamer online saying something like: "Oh, you're Native American, so you must know all about Native American mysticism!" ... which is pure fetishism. A fetishism still often bred by Hollywood movies that are given a pass on their many evident transgressions.
 
Thank you, I'll watch the video. I'm going to have to look to see what MP actually says, as it seems like this is a complex subject. I do have a question about this specific sentence though: "Very few of them survived, first the initial genocide and then the lack of care from the colonial govt who allowed this injustice to carry on."

I'm going to try to word this carefully because again, I am admittedly completely ignorant of this history, and I'm not trying to make any assumptions, but to be clear, the Moriori were the victims of an attempted genocide by the Maori, yes? Because in this context that statement reads like "the colonial government are to blame for not preventing the Maori's attempts to genocide the Moriori". I'm hoping I'm mistaken in my reading and you can clarify, because if my initial reading is correct, that seems an irresponsible attempt to shift responsibility.
This bit is a bit nuanced, but the video kind of explains it well enough.

Basically Moriori tried to use their position as British subjects, as well as those doing the genociding as British subjects, to challenge what was happening as they were legally protected under British law. They also went to the land courts and applied for their land rights to be acknowledged. Due to the crown not wanting to take a position on conquest and give māori a window to claim wrong doing themselves, the crown awarded 97% of the islands the Moriori lived on to the Māori tribes that had attacked them and basically turned a blind eye to the on going issues on the island for quite some time. So while the primary offenders were absolutely the invading tribes, the crown willfully neglected its duty to protect the Moriori as well. Bit of insult on injury.

Like others here, with it being Xmas eve I really should bow out. This place moves so fast I havent been able to get things done between post. Meri Kirihimete to you all for tomorrow (I say this knowing Ill get drawn back, but in principle I am leaving!)
 
Like others here, with it being Xmas eve I really should bow out. This place moves so fast I havent been able to get things done between post. Meri Kirihimete to you all for tomorrow (I say this knowing Ill get drawn back, but in principle I am leaving!)

we're discussing closing the thread for the Christmas season because many of us Mods won't be around much the next week, and reopening it in the New Year. I know I wont have time to provide proper responses before then.

Anyways, happy holidays to you.
 
Kia ora RPG pub.

You may have already figured this out by now, but this site is a bit different, its definitely not Twitter, Reddit, or many of the other RPG sites.

It is a fun, relaxed place, topics tend to meander, and people gently poke fun at each other. Only pointing this out as when topics occasionally go into sensitive areas it can be necessary to take a deep breath, add a pinch of salt and re-read the comment before deciding a comment was meant as anything but trying to take some of the tension out of the air. There have been a few knock down drag out conflicts, but they are rare.

If you take a comment as a challenge or insult, by all means call the poster on it if that seems appropriate, but know that most of the time that wasn't the intent (with a few possible exceptions).

Reading your posts it would appear you seem to get that, but thought it was worth mentioning. Even posting here for a few years now when coming here from the rest of the internet where open hostility is standard practice, sometimes I still find it necessary to wait in the airlock for a few minutes before engaging.

Welcome, I think you will find that most here appreciate your coming, even if they ultimately disagree with your view. I for one don't do Twitter, so I appreciate hearing it direct, vs hearsay.


Also as nobody has provided the link there was a separate post addressing many of the concerns brought up. Be aware that poster is only infrequently at the site but happened to be here when the topic came up, so replies may not be answered by the poster Seadna.

Mythic Polynesia: An In-Depth Analysis of Liam's Critiques

Cliffs notes version, the final analysis found the bulk of MP to be fairly researched, the flaws were almost entirely in relation to the cultures in and about New Zealand which perhaps should have been left out and addressed with a separate "Southern Polynesia" product.

I wouldn't so much put it as a hierarchy but say that anybody who writes about a culture should be qualified to do so. A member of that culture is statistically far more likely to qualify but that's not a hard and fast rule and anybody (especially from outside that culture) should be doing a metric fuckton of research to make sure they get it right. And I think we should probably be harsher on anybody outside that culture getting things wrong, especially in commercial products.

This can also lead to almost Monty Pythonesqe situations. Is an Apache qualified to comment on a product covering all Native Americans or only on the sections dealing with the Apache? Can a Mescalero Apache comment on Yavapai-Apache traditions?

Agree academic research is capable of making blunders, somebody closer to the subject wouldn't, but ultimately qualified should be quality research, not genetics.

This place moves fast huh, every time I hit reply theres more posts!

Our history of cultural damage, plundering etc is VERY fresh, raw and on going.

The area I am most worried about, when talking about harms, is that TTRPG is still a young and growing hobby within our culture. Māori and other Tāngata Moana often seek out works about our culture to use in games. When the works they are likely to reach for state colonial lies and traumas as if they are history that will put people off, agitate colonial wounds and in the worse case cement untruths in the minds of people trying to make sense of our place in the world and relationship with others. I work proactively to try and grow Māori involvement in the hobby cause the more of us there are, the more likely it is that our culture will be shared in positive ways with the community and people can engage with and learn. This text could disrupt that, and currently we are so few in the hobby that putting off even one or two people is a sad loss for the hobby and its diversity, IMO.


I think this is a far more significant comment that helps to explain your particular view. There is a huge difference between wrongs carried out in an almost intangible past (hundreds / thousands of years ago) vs those that still have living people who were involved / are still involved.
 
Last edited:
There is a huge difference between wrongs carried out in an almost intangible past (hundreds / thousands of years ago) vs those that still have living people who were involved / are still involved.
Which would apply to a lot of places that became part of the new European empires of the modern era.

I can find it a bit odd to take stock and think about how a place such as India is still more than twenty years away from a full century of independence. You can have media in which an American teenager can have a grandparent with memories of partition.
 
Which would apply to a lot of places that became part of the new European empires of the modern era.

I can find it a bit odd to take stock and think about how a place such as India is still more than twenty years away from a full century of independence. You can have media in which an American teenager can have a grandparent with memories of partition.

Partition? Are you referring to Jim Crow Laws / Segregation? I've lived in the US my whole life and am not familiar with that phrase if that is what it refers to. A quick google only turned up some sites that I'm afraid to click on as I suspect they are related to the chaps that wear white sheets with pointy hoods.
 
This place moves fast huh, every time I hit reply theres more posts!

I can't really speak for Iceland as their history is not something I know much about. But I point back to my comment about context is key. Our history of cultural damage, plundering etc is VERY fresh, raw and on going. As I said, on its own this book isn't particularly important, but from the inside of the culture it cannot really be viewed in isolation as it is now part of a cohort of texts spreading untruths about us, and particularly untruths that are used as a hammer to silence our efforts at redress. You are correct when you say that this book is unlikely to impact things like Crown Treaty Settlements on its own. But the opinions it shares amplify opinions that exist in the cultural conscious of this nation and can encourage further colonization and resistance to righting past wrongs. On its own its just a single voice, but a chorus is made up of many individual voices. For further context at time of writing a party in our govt is pushing for a public referendum that re-interprets our founding document in a way that undermines Māori sovereignty completely, so anything that muddies the water on that front is risky right now. Again, I doubt this book will end up on coffee tables across the nation and inform a vote, but it could add weight to people who already have misguided takes on our shared history or sit on the fence, as the chorus gets another voice.

The area I am most worried about, when talking about harms, is that TTRPG is still a young and growing hobby within our culture. Māori and other Tāngata Moana often seek out works about our culture to use in games. When the works they are likely to reach for state colonial lies and traumas as if they are history that will put people off, agitate colonial wounds and in the worse case cement untruths in the minds of people trying to make sense of our place in the world and relationship with others. I work proactively to try and grow Māori involvement in the hobby cause the more of us there are, the more likely it is that our culture will be shared in positive ways with the community and people can engage with and learn. This text could disrupt that, and currently we are so few in the hobby that putting off even one or two people is a sad loss for the hobby and its diversity, IMO.
Well, I agree that the obvious historical inaccuracy should be corrected, especially since it concerns actual legal treaties as we speak. I also understand the need to correct such inaccuracies as they have been the source of historical justifications for taking land.

What I disagree with is that this must be rectified immediately, because harm is actively being done. Even if you were talking about reputation, some Maori did cause the Moriori to leave for Chatham, and then other Maori followed them there, enslaved them, and butchered them down to 100-200 people. I know the Musket Wars were a time of great upheaval and all forms of economic and geographical pressure was being applied, but if the Moriori had gotten there first, would the Maori have moved on?

As far as TDM's response I'm sure they're looking into it, and talking to Shirley without throwing him under the bus. TDM products aren't something you usually randomly pick up at your FLGS, I kind of doubt there's a lot of Mythras players that don't engage in some way with online circles about the game. If WotC did this, you certainly could argue there'd be possibly hundreds of thousands of people worldwide who were misinformed and not likely to know anything about the controversy unless WotC addresses it. I don't really think that's the case here.
 
Partition? Are you referring to Jim Crow Laws / Segregation? I've lived in the US my whole life and am not familiar with that phrase if that is what it refers to. A quick google only turned up some sites that I'm afraid to click on as I suspect they are related to the chaps that wear white sheets with pointy hoods.
I believe he's talking about the partition of India. I know Gujurati people younger than me that are still pissed about that.
 
I think its possible to do a racist thing without you being racist yourself, if that makes sense. You can do a thing because you do not know better, or because you yourself have fallen for systemic racism etc without you having ill intent or overtly racist views. Most racist things done here in Aotearoa every day are generally done by people who don't understand how what they are doing is wrong. Thats part of why I bang on about misleading messaging around Moriori, many people who believe this won't do it knowing its harmful, they just do not know.
I think this distinction is lost on the VAST majority of folks. “This is the most racist…” and the brain shuts off. There is no distinction between the product and the person.

I also have some thoughts about genuine mistakes that revolve around race - one could make a mistake about a race, genuinely make an error, and then be called racist. No I’ll intent was ever conceived, but they’ve been put in the same place as the KKK in my country. That is not even remotely fair. I’m not implying that this happened here, but I think it is more likely the case than the other way. This ties into a. Last point you made, but I’ll wait for there.
Where it becomes problematic is when you know what you have done is a racist thing and choose not to do anything about it. Thats where we run into problems. That is why I think its important that Loz and co react sooner rather than later. This is also my biggest misgiving with some of the conversation around these issues that we see elsewhere on the internet. If we do not give people a chance to admit wrong doing and try and do better then we really just encourage others to keep doing wrong cause they cant win.
Frankly, I’m not sure why they would participate in any discussion. There are a small brigade of folks on Twitter and on TBP who are for sure never buying any TDM product ever again because they are definitely the most racist folks in the rpg world. Except we know that’s just not true.

They say their sorry, won’t happen again. Everyone screams why aren’t you removing the book! Cancel them! Until they get the exact solution they want, which will be harmful and likely kill the game entirely, they won’t be satisfied. There is no evidence of this, no matter how much you might want it to be true.

what was the point in speaking up at all? The rest of Polynesia lost a game that was reasonably accurate to them, and now you lost understanding.

This is why the private conversation has to lead. Because now there won’t be cooperation. There will be just ignoring. There will be just animosity. There won’t be any understanding or healing or even working on racism.
Finally on this particular point, its ultimately Mr Shirley who did the research and should know better. Loz's name is on it, but I doubt he really knows one way or the other. Same for Carol. At this point it has been pointed out to them, what they do next matters. So the way I see it, just like how the Mythic line has a reputation for accuracy but here it is, Los and co have a reputation as good people and at the moment we aren't seeing that. Both of these reputations, and the mana attached, are repairable. That ball is in their court.
But, you know, you didn’t call out Dr Shirley alone. The calls aren’t to boycott Dr Shirley. TDM is the one that is supposed to respond.

yes, it would have been easy for Dr. Shirley to get a modern book. Don’t get me wrong on this. A single google search for me indicated there were waters I needed to pay attention to. That it is a controversial topic. My first “google suggested search” it after putting in moriori was “moriori genocide” and the first link lead me to a news article that dispelled the myth and that it was a hot bed issue. That’s a low bar as far as I am concerned.

There is plenty they can do, but I think there is no evidence that it will actually fix the situation. One can hope mark submits a new section that is better researched and a v2 gets published, but I think there is plenty the community can do as well. I’ve encouraged folks to email them directly, as that seems to work the best. Yelling on Twitter is just a tool to drive people away.
as an aside this is a bugbear of mine generally. I wont go into detail cause the one rule, but we need more nuance on this broader topic generally. It would be nice to live in a world where we can point things out to each other, realize we did wrong and fix it.
I would like a word for “racist but honestly doesn’t know” and “unintentionally racist material” that neither one say the word racism. Not because they don’t need to be corrected, but because no one wants to hear anything associated with them called racist. Everyone’s brains shut off. They instantly do exactly what has been happening. Even actual racists hate being called racist - their brains shut off too. They just get defensive and fight. Nothing is going to be changed with that.

The point I was making was that at least Varg is willing to come out and say what he is. I doubt anyone there is worse than him. Or even on par. But they aren't in a hurry to prove it, or so it seems. Ill concede I may have been overly dramatic. But Ill point to my comment earlier about the implication of that history section to my mana. By that point in the thread it was taking a lot of effort to not just spit and swear
MYFAROG is the Godwin’s rule of the rpg community. Simple at that. Unfortunately , it was very early in your tweet stream. However, I’ll take your concession in the spirit it is intended. It happens to all of us.

im trying to make threadreaderapp unroll your whole thread so it’s. A bit easier for folks with disabilities to read. I’ve said repeatedly, in this thread, I think it is important to read and to fully digest what you are saying. I was hoping for something less inflammatory and still productive for change.
 
Banner: The best cosmic horror & Cthulhu Mythos @ DriveThruRPG.com
Back
Top