What is Political and Mod Direction

Best Selling RPGs - Available Now @ DriveThruRPG.com
Voros said:
Best practice I've seen is to ask the poster to back off or calm down, if they don't then move to a temp ban.

In other words, treat them as an adult and only tempban once they've failed to control themselves.
Click to expand...
Absolutely, actually. "Ask politely" is just something I consider so basic that I didn't feel I needed to say it :smile:

I moderate a local community discord, and our principle is "solve the issue with as little intervention as possible", and in my experience asking folk to knock it off has almost always been enough. You can always escalate if needed, but you can't pull back.
Bunch said:
So that might be a good number to post. Perhaps not prominently but in the faq along the escalation explanation. It shows it happens but very rarely.
Click to expand...
Thing is, that gives them an average they need to keep to.
 
Toastmaster makes a great point, it isn’t the politics in the games that is the issue, the culture wars are the real issue. You could almost just say “no personal attacks” and cover what most of us want to see.
 
Toadmaster said:
Something that really came through to me reading through this post is the re-occurring theme of (put bluntly) "be an adult and don't be a jerk", too bad that needs to be said, but it does.

I think "no politics" in itself is a bit of an issue. Some read this as this is an entirely political free environment, and such a thing really doesn't exist, pretty much every human interaction is political. As a result I think we have had as many or more threads go down in flames over a poster raging that politics are being allowed (or the other sides politics are being allowed and mine aren't), than true "culture war" violations. Baking thinly veiled real world issues into a fantasy or sci-fi setting is more of a rule than an exception.

I'd say one of the biggest red flags and something to be avoided is absolutist comments. Narrative games suck and the people who like them are not real gamers... vs I don't like narrative games because XYZ doesn't work for me. The second there can actually be a discussion, the first is just combative from the start. XYZ game is inherently -ist was the genesis of this most recent thread, had it been stated as I really dislike XYZ aspects of the game because of (list of specific issues) we probably wouldn't have 10 pages of discussion about this.

A game based on Iron Sky is going to have Nazis, Nazis are a political movement. A spy game is going to involve politics Cold War - East bloc Communism vs West bloc Capitalism if set in that popular era of spy vs spy. A spy game set in the present is likely to touch on some real world politics, as they are baked into the setting.

Admitting up front that this is not truly a political free zone and some politics are acceptable may actually reduce conflict. What is not desirable is political debate, this is not the place to discuss the greatness or wickedness of a political figure or movement. Winston Churchill existed, Winston Churchill "was a big stupid poopy head, prove me wrong" however would most likely be an inappropriate post.


While it has largely fallen on deaf ears, some posters are just blood in the water to each other. Probably worth noting that if you find yourself constantly getting "triggered" by a certain poster then using some restraint is wise, avoid responding to them and there is an ignore feature if you find the inability to "just say no" to commenting on some posters posts. Just because you disagree with their point of view does not mean their comments cross a line.




Are you including those who rage quit as bans? I can only think of 1 definitely banned and a second who may have been banned, or quit after being told to change behavior or face a ban. Honestly in both of those cases getting banned was truly a matter of choice, they made zero effort to comply with the basic rules of polite society enforced here.
Click to expand...
Rage quits are rage quits. I only count bans on people that I pulled the trigger on.
 
Dammit Viktor said:
See... and the point where I have a problem with things is that in the vast majority of "no politics" gaming spaces I've spent any time at, "no politics" means that the middle group of statements is "political" and the first statement is... either political in its own right, or can be made political by anyone who chooses to read (and report) it as belonging to the second group. The statements in the third group are not considered political and the members and staff freely indulge in them while belittling and dismissing anyone who makes the first statement, while loudly proclaiming their political neutrality, in the name of their political neutrality.
Click to expand...

I'll just say that I'm going to clarify since I liked the post and it is actually a bit more nuanced than "I agree with this completely". His last sentence where this thread is a warning sign slippery slope stuff isn't what I was agreeing with.

What I do agree with is this part. A lot of places that have no politics rules turn into what Viktor is talking about.

I don't think this place leans that way though for the most part.

I think the largest problem we have on this forum is a group of people who try to shout down things they disagree with that can vaguely be construed as political with "oh no politics!" and derailing threads that wouldn't have even caused a problem because saying "Yeah, I make the setting a bit less sexist for my home games cause my players weren't comfortable with it" isn't actually political.

People just need to report and move on if they think something is political.
 
Toadmaster said:
While it has largely fallen on deaf ears, some posters are just blood in the water to each other.
Click to expand...
True dat.
Toadmaster said:
Probably worth noting that if you find yourself constantly getting "triggered" by a certain poster then using some restraint is wise,
Click to expand...
Wise words.
Toadmaster said:
avoid responding to them and there is an ignore feature if you find the inability to "just say no" to commenting on some posters posts.
Click to expand...
Good to know, and then always an option. Honestly, I wasn't aware of the "Ignore" feature.
Toadmaster said:
Just because you disagree with their point of view does not mean their comments cross a line.
Click to expand...
This.

My personal - and not overly pragmatic - point of view is that, deep down, we have a little bit of a monster in us, and sometimes other people spot it, and recoil in horror.

...

Haha, got you :devil: ! I don't really think that. Or my above statement is at least incomplete.

Well, I guess my real point is that sometimes we see reflected in other people the face of the malevolent beast which lurks in our inside. And then we lash in absolute disgust at our own ugliness, to obliterate it.

Of course, it doesn't work, because it's really a part of us that we are ascribing to another person.

So it's best to stop attacking this other person, because there is little chance that he/she is an horrible being in real life.

And besides, like Gandal implied, even if that was the case, even Gollum has a right to live.
 
JAMUMU said:
Hey Pubbers

Sorry, it did seem like I was rage-quitting the pub, but I actually meant the thread. I hit the log-out button for the first time (in a fit of Eurovision-drunken pique), then couldn't remember my password or which throwaway email I'd used for the account. Sorted it now, though.

And I'm sorry if using the word misogyny was a little too hot-button topic. "Sexism" would have been a better word, but Prosecco emboldens my vocabulary. I wasn't attempting to stir up a pot of trouble, rather I was just answering the OP's question. Also, I was careful to say "Westeros" rather than ASOIAF as a whole, or GRR Martin as a person, but I don't want to re-ignite any arguments.

I do very much enjoy the board's culture, and I think that the general "no politics" rule is very much a part of that. Of course it's hard to discuss cultural products without sometimes - and often without intent - stepping a toe over that line. The mods here do a fantastic job of knowing bad faith when they see it, and I think the board does lean much more toward "no politics as manners" rather than "no politics to suppress dissent".

On the other hand, certain posters have a habit of taking (a great many) things as bad faith provocations, reacting as if they've been personally slighted, then swinging into threads all guns blazing like they alone are the final arbiters of truth and justice. I don't think that's healthy for the board's culture or reputation, and not a great way to retain or attract new posters.

Anyway, I look forward to second-guessing all your personal politics based on your opinions of geese and broccoli.
Click to expand...
Good to hear you didn't intend to ragequit JAMUMU JAMUMU

If you had used "sexism", I probably wouldn't have said anything.

But, we had Palladium Fantasy's "inherent racism" back to back with "Westeros misogyny". Intended or not, we're heading into a contextualization that's probably going to be seen as political.

Talking in general now,
From what we've heard from some of the Mods, in part I was correct.

My error was in Posting AND Reporting instead of just Reporting. That and not reading all the current posts when responding to earlier ones and violating a Mod Directive.

Why must I Report OR Post? Well, look at all the posts where people say they want a Pub where, for a few minutes, they can talk about Gaming without getting into an argument sponsored by Current Events, Social Media, or the US Culture War. One price of that is TristramEvans TristramEvans throws out a "Careful Now" meme once in a great while. :grin: Another price is, maybe every year or year in a half, we're gonna get one of these threads as people's definitions of things differ. If history repeats itself, I'll probably be involved in the reason. I could probably use a little eggshell walking now and then. :thumbsup:
 
I have been quite the length of this thread because I’m pretty happy with the way the Pub is and I think the mods will continue to steer us in a good direction. Having said that I did want to please consider one thing regarding religion. I have seen on a site that will go nameless people being criticized for saying they were going to pray for someone. The person in question wasn’t trying to convert anyone, instead they were trying to lovingly support a person that was dealing with a sick child. I recommend we be wary of religious discussions (along the lines of what Black Leaf suggest) but suggest that we do not restrict someone from offering to pray wether that might be the prayers from a Christian, Muslim or Hindi or even the good thoughts from an Atheist. I don’t think the mods were going to go that far but I thought I better put it out there
 
Ronnie Sanford said:
I have been quite the length of this thread because I’m pretty happy with the way the Pub is and I think the mods will continue to steer us in a good direction. Having said that I did want to please consider one thing regarding religion. I have seen on a site that will go nameless people being criticized for saying they were going to pray for someone. The person in question wasn’t trying to convert anyone, instead they were trying to lovingly support a person that was dealing with a sick child. I recommend we be wary of religious discussions (along the lines of what Black Leaf suggest) but suggest that we do not restrict someone from offering to pray wether that might be the prayers from a Christian, Muslim or Hindi or even the good thoughts from an Atheist. I don’t think the mods were going to go that far but I thought I better put it out there
Click to expand...
I certainly can't see us going that far.

All I'd say is that it can get a bit complicated.

Making an offer is fine in my view and should be taken in the spirit it's intended. But avoid just telling people you're going to pray for them because that's where conflicts can arise, no matter how well meaning.

A good analogy is our posters of a more occultist bent shouldn't be telling people they've cast spells on their behalf, even if it's something as benevolent as a good health spell.

I don't think this will come up (touch wood). I think everyone's normally pretty good at applying common sense to situations like this.
 
Black Leaf said:
I certainly can't see us going that far.

All I'd say is that it can get a bit complicated.

Making an offer is fine in my view and should be taken in the spirit it's intended. But avoid just telling people you're going to pray for them because that's where conflicts can arise, no matter how well meaning.

A good analogy is our posters of a more occultist bent shouldn't be telling people they've cast spells on their behalf, even if it's something as benevolent as a good health spell.

I don't think this will come up (touch wood). I think everyone's normally pretty good at applying common sense to situations like this.
Click to expand...
It does come up though I think on multiple occasions. People say I'll keep you in my prayers and so far as I know it's never caused an issue.
 
Black Leaf said:
I certainly can't see us going that far.

All I'd say is that it can get a bit complicated.

Making an offer is fine in my view and should be taken in the spirit it's intended. But avoid just telling people you're going to pray for them because that's where conflicts can arise, no matter how well meaning.

A good analogy is our posters of a more occultist bent shouldn't be telling people they've cast spells on their behalf, even if it's something as benevolent as a good health spell.

I don't think this will come up (touch wood). I think everyone's normally pretty good at applying common sense to situations like this.
Click to expand...

Yes, a heartfelt I'll choke a chicken for you tonight may not be taken with the goodwill intended... :tongue:
 
Ronnie Sanford said:
I have been quite the length of this thread because I’m pretty happy with the way the Pub is and I think the mods will continue to steer us in a good direction. Having said that I did want to please consider one thing regarding religion. I have seen on a site that will go nameless people being criticized for saying they were going to pray for someone. The person in question wasn’t trying to convert anyone, instead they were trying to lovingly support a person that was dealing with a sick child. I recommend we be wary of religious discussions (along the lines of what Black Leaf suggest) but suggest that we do not restrict someone from offering to pray wether that might be the prayers from a Christian, Muslim or Hindi or even the good thoughts from an Atheist. I don’t think the mods were going to go that far but I thought I better put it out there
Click to expand...
Fair enough. I get slightly irritated by it when someone announces that they are going to pray for me, but not enough to make a fuss about it. A general truce requirea the we all stop it with the barbs and needles, and also that we be a bit thick-skinned, and also that we cut a generous margin for the people who cop a lot of crap in everyday life and just need a place where everyone will leave their crap at the door. Have a thought for people who have to put it with shit like yours everywhere they turn, and show some fucking mercy.
 
Off an on reading through this thread has been fascinating. I think my only real issue is that there are some sharks in the water swimming around here looking to cause an issue when none really was intended or meant. Makes for a lot of work for the life guards err moderators when that happens. I'm always deeply appreciative of the efforts of the moderators here. They do a really good job with what can be a difficult at times job. They miss something occasional and when we have newer posters who are unaware that there are the occasional shark in the water... Farewell and ado to you fair Spanish ladies...

 
Acmegamer said:
Off an on reading through this thread has been fascinating. I think my only real issue is that there are some sharks in the water swimming around here looking to cause an issue when none really was intended or meant. Makes for a lot of work for the life guards err moderators when that happens. I'm always deeply appreciative of the efforts of the moderators here. They do a really good job with what can be a difficult at times job. They miss something occasional and when we have newer posters who are unaware that there are the occasional shark in the water... Farewell and ado to you fair Spanish ladies...

Click to expand...


Quint was such an amazing character.

When I was a kid we had a Wedgewood stove and the oven knob had Robertshaw written across it. Apparently Robertshaw made thermostats and Wedgewood was a customer, but I thought it was related to the actor Robert Shaw. Here's to a true renaissance man, a great actor and oven maker. :grin:

Turns out the thermostat company was named for its founder Frederick Robertshaw...


As to the rest agree we have had some pot stirrers, but I'd like to think most of our regular "trouble makers" are just easily drawn into a maelstrom rather than intentionally seeking them out. If people hang out in the dark corners of the RPG-verse they start to see malevolent intent everywhere even where none exists.
 
Acmegamer said:
Off an on reading through this thread has been fascinating. I think my only real issue is that there are some sharks in the water swimming around here looking to cause an issue when none really was intended or meant.
Click to expand...

A handful of regular posters here take “no fighting here!” as a constraint to work within for their crusade to pwn their oppo, not as an escape from it. They are at best very tiresome.
 
Last edited:
Toadmaster said:
Quint was such an amazing character.

When I was a kid we had a Wedgewood stove and the oven knob had Robertshaw written across it. Apparently Robertshaw made thermostats and Wedgewood was a customer, but I thought it was related to the actor Robert Shaw. Here's to a true renaissance man, a great actor and oven maker. :grin:

Turns out the thermostat company was named for its founder Frederick Robertshaw...


As to the rest agree we have had some pot stirrers, but I'd like to think most of our regular "trouble makers" are just easily drawn into a maelstrom rather than intentionally seeking them out. If people hang out in the dark corners of the RPG-verse they start to see malevolent intent everywhere even where none exists.
Click to expand...
Loved Robert Shaw, died too young. I could watch him in anything.
 
I don't see any overall political leanings on this forum. Maybe, I'm just not active enough to notice.

The walking on eggshells thing I don't get. Because, I feel the complete opposite. This is probably the only public place on the internet, where I would feel comfortable about posting any controversial RPG topic.
This is because, I have a sense that most posters here, don't automically presume any intent beyond what is actually written. If they are in doubt, most here are also good at asking instead of just assuming. This is something, I really love this forum for. Besides the very relaxed and humorous atmosphere here.

I think some posters are just too tuned into the current political debate, that they see it everywhere. These same posters also feel like commenting on these things all the time. So whenever they see POLITICS, they take the bait hook, line and sinker. Which leads to threads like this.
 
The Mad Hatter said:
I don't see any overall political leanings on this forum. Maybe, I'm just not active enough to notice.

The walking on eggshells thing I don't get. Because, I feel the complete opposite. This is probably the only public place on the internet, where I would feel comfortable about posting any controversial RPG topic.
This is because, I have a sense that most posters here, don't automically presume any intent beyond what is actually written. If they are in doubt, most here are also good at asking instead of just assuming. This is something, I really love this forum for. Besides the very relaxed and humorous atmosphere here.

I think some posters are just too tuned into the current political debate, that they see it everywhere. These same posters also feel like commenting on these things all the time. So whenever they see POLITICS, they take the bait hook, line and sinker. Which leads to threads like this.
Click to expand...

Agree and I think this applies equally to the eggshell walkers as well as those chronically in the penalty box. If you have become trained to expect attacks / see secret subtext in posts where none was intended you will react accordingly. The internet is a rough and tumble place, and gaming sites are no exception. It is not hard to come up with a list of sites befitting Obi-Wan's classic description of Mos Eisley.




Thankfully this place is more like Casablanca.
 
A bit late to the party. Just to make things clear: I'm only offering my view on the subject, not telling anyone how they should run their forum.

"No politics" is a lie. "No politics" means maintaining (at best) the status quo. To make it a bit clearer: if you had a forum in China, Russia or North Korea and claimed to be "non-political" what kind of discourse would you be supporting by just being "neutral"?

It's a lie because rpgs, as any other cultural product are shaped and created by the political atmosphere of their time, they're not created in a vaccum. I know for most of us (me included) they're a way to leave our sick sad world behind but cutting off any politics from rpg discussion is a bit non-sensical and it makes the discussion poorer.

Yeah, I know, it can often degenerate, people throwing feces at each other thinking they're political arguments. Quite frankly I still prefer that to acting as if we lived in Neverland.
 
Kobayashi said:
A bit late to the party. Just to make things clear: I'm only offering my view on the subject, not telling anyone how they should run their forum.

"No politics" is a lie. "No politics" means maintaining (at best) the status quo. To make it a bit clearer: if you had a forum in China, Russia or North Korea and claimed to be "non-political" what kind of discourse would you be supporting by just being "neutral"?

It's a lie because rpgs, as any other cultural product are shaped and created by the political atmosphere of their time, they're not created in a vaccum. I know for most of us (me included) they're a way to leave our sick sad world behind but cutting off any politics from rpg discussion is a bit non-sensical and it makes the discussion poorer.

Yeah, I know, it can often degenerate, people throwing feces at each other thinking they're political arguments. Quite frankly I still prefer that to acting as if we lived in Neverland.
Click to expand...
You want an in-depth discussion of the Magic Deer form of government in Blue Rose, go ahead. Just don't brand the game with a political label and by extension, the game's authors and consumers.
 
CRKrueger said:
You want an in-depth discussion of the Magic Deer form of government in Blue Rose, go ahead. Just don't brand the game with a political label and by extension, the game's authors and consumers.
Click to expand...
As I said having an "in-depth discussion" of a fantasy form of government implies reference to real-world politics, you cant' get around that. It's a bit like saying "you can talk about 1984's description of government without talking about the author's views on the subject and in what political atmosphere the book came to be".
 
Let's take a game like Cy-borg for example, the book clearly states that you can't play a corporate agent or a cop because they are the enemy.
Seeing cops as a tool of oppression was not "invented" by Cy-borg and it's a direct reference to a political vision of the role of police in society.

If you (a general you, not "you" specifically) say: "you can talk about that as long as you don't reference real events of police brutality and its use by governments" you actively support the whole discourse of those who don't want to have a discussion on the subject and want to minimize or erase any discussion of police brutality or abuse.

I'll repeat what I said in my original post: if you don't want any reference to subjects like racism, class inequality, women's right and the like, whose discourse are you supporting in the end? The one of those who want those exact subjects to be ignored or dismissed as well.
 
Kobayashi said:
.I'll repeat what I said in my original post: if you don't want any reference to subjects like racism, class inequality, women's right and the like, whose discourse are you supporting in the end? The one of those who want those exact subjects to be ignored or dismissed as well.
Click to expand...
I don’t believe any of those subjects would breach the no-politics rule unless you started to go into the usual political mudslinging, or “gotcha”ism, that usually happens.
 
Kobayashi said:
Let's take a game like Cy-borg for example, the book clearly states that you can't play a corporate agent or a cop because they are the enemy.
Seeing cops as a tool of oppression was not "invented" by Cy-borg and it's a direct reference to a political vision of the role of police in society.

If you (a general you, not "you" specifically) say: "you can talk about that as long as you don't reference real events of police brutality and its use by governments" you actively support the whole discourse of those who don't want to have a discussion on the subject and want to minimize or erase any discussion of police brutality or abuse.

I'll repeat what I said in my original post: if you don't want any reference to subjects like racism, class inequality, women's right and the like, whose discourse are you supporting in the end? The one of those who want those exact subjects to be ignored or dismissed as well.
Click to expand...

That isn't a good argument in my opinion. You can support discussion those things, but not want to talk about them when you pick yup your car at the garage or when you are playing chess with a friend. Equating trying to cultivate a forum that doesn't devolve into political mudslinging by having a no politics rule, with supporting oppression I think doesn't make a whole lot of sense.
 
You said everything revolves around a certain principle
You said everything depends upon our understanding of the political

And now I'm off to listen to some old Machines of Loving Grace tunes.
 
Kobayashi said:
As I said having an "in-depth discussion" of a fantasy form of government implies reference to real-world politics, you cant' get around that. It's a bit like saying "you can talk about 1984's description of government without talking about the author's views on the subject and in what political atmosphere the book came to be".
Click to expand...

I don't think the rule is meant to prohibit mentioning an RPG writer's political views if they are relevant to a game that they designed or something. I think it is more about not having discussions become proxy battles for political disputes, and not having threads devoted to politics.
 
Kobayashi said:
As I said having an "in-depth discussion" of a fantasy form of government implies reference to real-world politics, you cant' get around that. It's a bit like saying "you can talk about 1984's description of government without talking about the author's views on the subject and in what political atmosphere the book came to be".
Click to expand...
Which I have done, so I can obviously do exactly that:thumbsup:.

BedrockBrendan said:
That isn't a good argument in my opinion. You can support discussion those things, but not want to talk about them when you pick yup your car at the garage or when you are playing chess with a friend. Equating trying to cultivate a forum that doesn't devolve into political mudslinging by having a no politics rule, with supporting oppression I think doesn't make a whole lot of sense.
Click to expand...
Also, this. Discuss politics anywhere...just not where I go for my hobbies. I do them to get away from all of that BS:shade:!
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Banner: The best cosmic horror & Cthulhu Mythos @ DriveThruRPG.com
Back
Top