Quote from: GameDaddy;1037684I really wish I was wrong on this, however gaming in public spaces has changed significantly in the last couple of decades, and it seems like event staff / publishers just can't keep their minds/hands off each other, and their guests, and focus on the games on the table instead of the other game that is going on in their heads, an unasked for additional game i would add, that is ruining the tabletop games for everyone else, ...by the way.

I also believe firmly that this at the very least questionable behavior is not limited to just Independent Game Publishers, and is prevalent with some of the staff from larger gaming companies, which are currently being deliberately excluded from being in the spotlight of the general public. It seems to me, that the larger gaming companies are gaining market share at the expense of the independent gaming companies, and I find this especially disconcerting, because the Indy people are actually not being convicted of any actual crime, their names are just being dragged through the mud.

OK, I will leave it to your compatriots to answer the USA-specific part.

As for the part about big companies, I know business is a dirty game, but can't accuse anyone of that without proof:).

Quote from: S'mon;1037723They disgust me. I'm sorry for all the many years I spent there.

I especially liked the very last (as of now) post: Have you ever interrupted a woman? Then you're a harasser. Have you ever looked at a woman's cleavage? Then you're a harasser.

So, if you're a hetero or bi male, you're a harrasser. If you are gay and are anything but the most meek and polite guy ever, you're also a harrasser.
Presumably the above only applies to males,  if not, the number of harasser would grow even more.

You can quote the calculation, if you like;).

This whole thing reminds me of the satanic ritual abuse bollocks in the 80's.

This whole thing reminds me of a quote I heard once:

"Sucks to suck."

I read that ENWorld thread, and the only thing I discovered is that if you dare question the veracity of a woman's sexual harassment allegation, you're just a horrible misogynist.

Quote from: Brad;1037793I read that ENWorld bread, and the only thing I discovered is that if you dare question the veracity of a woman's sexual harassment allegation, you're just a horrible misogynist.

Have they ever heard of Emmett Till?

https://www.nytimes.com/2017/01/27/us/emmett-till-lynching-carolyn-bryant-donham.html

QuoteWoman Linked to 1955 Emmett Till Murder Tells Historian Her Claims Were False

Quote from: S'mon;1037723They disgust me. I'm sorry for all the many years I spent there.

You shouldn't feel bad for partaking in a forum in the past.  Current changes shouldn't dismiss all the fun debates and socialization from its history.  When you think about it, ENWorld has been in existence in one form or another for almost 20 years.  That's a long time and think about how many things change in two decades.

Speaking of that, is Morrus (the owner) the only person left there in terms of moderation?  I was poking around and it seems like all of the old moderating team left.  I bookmark the thread where Gary Gygax had a gaming session with a lot of the mods in the final year of his life, and I don't see them around anymore.  People like Piratecat, Rel, Hypersmurf, etc.  If the mods have changed over time it can explain why things have changed.  

I have to wonder how much of the changes are due to the general climate in general and what millennials expect in a forum or a reflection of how partisan we've become as a society.  Or if it's just because Morrus sees this as a business and not just a fan thing.  

I am disappointed--I've been dropping out of most forum participation in general, but when I see all this stuff I sort of lament when ENWorld was mostly a great place to discuss gaming and didn't really bother trying to be a news site--of course, Eric Noah's intent was that, but now it's a lot of freelancer contributed content and some of those guys have an agenda--entertainment reporting in general suffers now from a sort of puritanical tone where you can't review a movie or a video game without discussing problematic elements, etc.

Quote from: JRT;1037801Speaking of that, is Morrus (the owner) the only person left there in terms of moderation?  

Seems that way. And he decided around 6 years ago in the 2012 hysteria to replace the commendable 'no politics' policy with 'SJW politics' - though very heavily emphasising sex over race. It's gotten much worse since.

Quote from: GRIM;1037716ENWorld seems as lost as TBP to any sort of reasoned discussion, but maybe this place will be better.

https://postmortemstudios.wordpress.com/2018/05/05/rpg-ttrpg-more-on-sean-patrick-fannon-con-community-issues/

 felt the need to comment on a forum, but me and forums (or at least moderators) don't tend to get on, however reasonable I'm being at the time. So I'm putting a copy here since I want to preserve what I've written, just in case.

Update: Seems this was a good idea and that ENWorld is also lost!

"Welcome back. Probably should have checked the rules before trotting out derogatory terms like "social justice warrior" and "virtue signalling". Don't post in the thread again, please."

Oy gevalt... the below was me being PAINFULLY diplomatic and careful.

***

Eh, probably not a good idea to stick my neck out and make this my 're-entry' to this forum, but what the heck. There's a heck of a lot of stuff here to address and talk about.

I can't say that Sean and I got on and, in fact, I probably have every reason to celebrate his 'fall from grace'. As a member of the extreme end of 'social justice warriors,' he's in good company having had this happen though. It's almost a trope. He helped the campaign to have at least one of my games pulled from sale – and yes, that is a form of censorship according to the ACLU and I'm sure other people can point to other well-meaning misdeeds on his behalf. That seems to be something that has been mentioned in this thread.

From what I can decipher of what he's said, this seems roughly analogous to the accusations made against Lawrence Krauss, which read as socially awkward misunderstandings and cringeworthy obliviousness. Social awkwardness and people on the spectrum may be something both the skeptic community and the gaming community have in common, which could account for the bacchanal atmosphere some 'Nerd Proms' descend into.

Even though I've got a good reason to personally dislike him on that basis, I'm just not prepared to throw him under the bus any more than I would anyone else. There are accusations, but that doesn't make them facts. As others have pointed out we have a legal principle of 'innocent until proven guilty'. Others have suggested that this is somehow a bad principle or limited to a purely legal context. That isn't the case, it's a basic logical principle – the burden of proof – which is why it's utilised in legal cases as well as science, and why it's a good general rule for life. Sure, personal bias and relationships can get in the way, but that's precisely why we have processes in both these spheres to encourage objectivity.

We are, however, operating in the social sphere and it seems unlikely that any legal action will result from this. So we have a largely anonymous set of claims against a publicly identified figure, with no way for most of us to confirm whether or not any of it has happened. Furthermore, he's apparently not allowed to present his side of things without being censored. This hardly seems fair or just, though one can certainly appreciate why it would worry people for accusers to be identified. Ideally, this would be handled by the courts and both accuser and accused would remain anonymous until such time as a judgement was rendered.

The world is less than ideal though and we must make do.

Part of that 'making do' should be extending the benefit of the doubt. Accusations such as this, true or false, ruin people. As little as a couple of tweets can see people lose their relationships, jobs, future prospects and end up with an internet profile that renders them socially toxic and unemployable for years to come. This happens whether or not they've actually done anything at all. Surely we can agree that this isn't a good way to proceed? To – metaphorically – lynch someone, purely because an accusation is made? That can lead to some very dark places.

By all means take precautions, investigate further, but don't lose sight of the principle of justice and fairness in the pursuit of social 'justice'.

Contrary to what some likely think, I'm all for social justice in terms of treating people equally and fairly. Ironically it's these left/lib values that are the very things that have lead me to oppose the ideologically drive 'regressive left' which seems to be in full voice throughout this thread. That doesn't mean I'm on the side of the populist right, the Jordan Petersons and their ilk either, certainly not on the side of them 'they're all lying' kind of people in this thread.

That said, it's worth pointing out that this kind of thing isn't unknown, certainly in activist circles. There was collusion and plotting in the case against Gregory Allen Elliot and, more sinisterly, in the Jian Ghomeshi trial – both instances in Canada. I'm most aware of issues in Canada thanks to Diana Davison's work with The Lighthouse Project. The fact of the matter is that we really have no idea how many accusations are false. Estimates vary horrendously and while people rightly decry how few sexual misconduct or rape cases are prosecuted, the same is true – perhaps even more so – for false accusations. They're hard to prosecute for many of the same reasons that sex crimes are hard to prosecute, with additional political issues not unlike the ones that have caused problems with prosecuting grooming gangs in the UK.

It's anywhere from that tiny percentage we're aware of, up to the full number of claims that are never prosecuted. Neither extreme is likely, but anecdotally police officers and investigators state that it's higher than we might think. Still that's colloquial and we shouldn't put too much weight on that either.

It's a conundrum. How do we address the clear issues that there are in prosecuting these cases while still providing due process and consideration for the accused? That's a problem more for the courts than us, but not prosecuting witchhunts also seems like a no-brainer. 'Trust but verify' rather than 'Listen and believe' as we used to say in GG. Speaking of which, it was brought up in the context of supposedly being a hate movement, which it was not and actual evidence exists contrary to that belief. That just goes to show that even evidence won't convince some people.

Some people want to address it by lowering the standard of evidence, but the advent of genetic forensics has cleared a lot of people who were convicted on the basis of testimony and accusations. Lowering the standard of evidence doesn't seem like a good idea and that does mean that guilty people are going to go free. Blackstone's Formulation remains a useful ethical guide and it was rather horrifying to see people in this thread decrying it and being willing to see innocent people jailed, or worse.

Others, even more horrifyingly, have tried to get things shifted to an inquisitorial system of justice in sexual cases. Why this is a terrible idea should be clear to anyone.

So there doesn't appear to be any good solutions to that problem, but that's one for the legal systems and the courts. I would suggest that we – as individuals – give the benefit of the doubt and try to take some of the heat out of this febrile atmosphere, but I don't see that kind of logic going over too well with many people. In fact, it – and much of this post most likely – will be taken as something that it isn't. A protection of abusers, or an attack on the (allegedly) abused. That's how bad things have gotten. Not to mention that often the people you have to defend the rights of, are unpleasant. They might be creepy, they might be fascists, they might be paedophiles, but even genuinely, provenly repugnant people still have human rights.

As to conventions? I don't think anti-harassment policies are a good idea. I think we already have a societal one called 'the law'. This doesn't mean I'm pro-harassment, and I have had to intercede myself at events in the past. I am, however, concerned about these policies as many of them seem to be ideologically driven and to 'Trojan Horse' agendas and censorship. I've attended more than one convention which, if the policy were strictly enforced, would have had no sales room and no games. Many of these policies derive from the pattern on the Geek Feminism Wiki, and this has caused problems elsewhere, let alone gaming cons. I am very pleased to see that Dragonmeet has walked back their version some since the last one I attended. Still, they seem completely unnecessary and very open for abuse. All it takes is one person to be a jerk and either the con staff will be outed as hypocrites, or things will go horribly wrong.

Between the law and looking out for each other, I think we have all the tools we need. Having anti-harassment policies seems pointless and, I hate to say it since the term gets abused, but it seems like 'virtue signalling'. I mean, they're even measuring skirts at PAX now. It's like we've gone back in time 70 years, not forward, and yet it's being driven by people who call themselves 'progressive'. It's all rather confusing to a grumpy old leftie libertine.

Of course, these things all move so fast that something else may have come out even while I was writing this, but I think there's enough there that's generally applicable to the broader issue I think.

To reiterate, because people tend to be a bit hard of understanding on these issues and to infer things that aren't said.

These are serious issues, which I take seriously.
Sexual crimes and misdemeanours are horrible and a strong stance should be taken against them.
Accusations should be taken seriously.
I don't think the current witchhunt atmosphere is productive or useful and may have gone too far the other way.
Justice and fairness demand we consider people innocent until proven guilty, even in our personal lives.
People shouldn't be ruined on the basis of a mere accusation alone.
These things are business for the courts.
Antiharassment policies are unnecessary, which doesn't mean I accept or condone harassment.
Hopefully people will address the points.

You were more charitable than I, hoss.

VS

Quote from: GameDaddy;1037619That's because you haven't unknowingly and unwillingly been around other staff at conventions that have been convicted of rape, and then had to deal with the fallout of all that without somehow destroying the convention, ...like I have.

What happened?

Quote from: GRIM;1037716ENWorld seems as lost as TBP to any sort of reasoned discussion, but maybe this place will be better.

Always good to read your thoughts. I was just flipping through your SciFi seeds book this afternoon.

theRPGsite isn't perfect, but its a unsafe place with unsafe speech. We've got freedom of speech, so its messy, but worth the occasional ass explosion.

Hope you jump into some RPG threads and talk about your recent work.

That goes for you too Venger.

Quote from: trechriron;1037765Nicely said Grim. I am not checking news or posts out there any longer. I'm pretty soured from the whole experience.

Remember though, as a D.O.N.G Black Belt you have to stick to your principles.  

You've said you try to separate the personal lives of the author from the game they produce.  Now you have a game you like and an author who's doing something that really pisses you off.  Don't give up on WOIN yet, you sounded really inspired and wanting to publish your own OGL/CC content.

Don't let the politics affect your gaming...that's what also-ran's like Helton want.

So in other words, before you toss the hardcopies of WOIN on the bonfire, and purge your digital copies, take some time to write out that long, in-depth review of the game highlighting everything that you liked about it that set your creativity into high gear.

Hi Grim, very calm, logical, reasoned post.  I'm sure you'll be banned for posting it anywhere but here.

Good to see you posting, hoping everything is going good for you personally and professionally.  Maybe you'll stick around some and talk about your games.

Quote from: Brad;1037793I read that ENWorld thread, and the only thing I discovered is that if you dare question the veracity of a woman's sexual harassment allegation, you're just a horrible misogynist.

Margaret frickin' Atwood herself has learned this the hard way. Seems Millennial women think she's a bad feminist because she still believes in the rule of law and the presumption of innocence.

Seriously, next time some True Believer starts spouting their pieties, just reply with an unattributed quote from Atwood about the presumption of innocence from this opinion piece show wrote. Maybe this line:

QuoteMy fundamental position is that women are human beings, with the full range of saintly and demonic behaviours this entails, including criminal ones. They're not angels, incapable of wrongdoing. If they were, we wouldn't need a legal system.

And when the True Believers go into their typical hysterics, reveal the source of the quote. If nothing else, it's good for a laugh.

Quote from: Haffrung;1037910Margaret frickin' Atwood herself has learned this the hard way. Seems Millennial women think she's a bad feminist because she still believes in the rule of law and the presumption of innocence.

Seriously, next time some True Believer starts spouting their pieties, just reply with an unattributed quote from Atwood about the presumption of innocence from this opinion piece show wrote. Maybe this line:



And when the True Believers go into their typical hysterics, reveal the source of the quote. If nothing else, it's good for a laugh.

Whenever I hear the line "Women don't lie about these things." it equates in my mind to them saying "Women aren't human."

The sad part the same people in the hobby will in five to ten years time wonder why no men want to have women at their table. Pretend to wonder why no men want to talk to women at conventions, outside of them or in general. Pretend to wonder why men walk on eggshells around women all the time. While then using it as pure 1000% evidence that men hate women and are misogynistic etc.

Quote from: sureshot;1037931The sad part the same people in the hobby will in five to ten years time wonder why no men want to have women at their table. Pretend to wonder why no men want to talk to women at conventions, outside of them or in general. Pretend to wonder why men walk on eggshells around women all the time. While then using it as pure 1000% evidence that men hate women and are misogynistic etc.

  From my point of view, the tragic irony is that most of these people, or their intellectual and spiritual forbears, have spent the past half-century trying to dismiss, denigrate and demolish nearly every conceivable curb on sexual desire ... and are now acting shocked at the current state of affairs.

  Hosea 8:7. See also Humanae Vitae.