Quote from: Kyle Aaron;351527Reckall, don't be a cocksmock.

Freedom of speech means people can write and publish a gang rape experience if they want to, they can even wrongly call it a "game" if they want to.

Freedom of speech also means people can then call the first lot reprehensible and puerile wankers.

There's a whole subclass of people on the internet who conflate freedom of speech issues about published material with censorship issues about published material.

No matter how many times you tell them that if you want your freedom to talk about your child nazi rapist necrophilliac game, then i also have the freedom to call you a freak, they fall back on 'calling' freedom of speech as if the critic shouldn't have any.

It's only censorship, fuckwads, if whatever you are peddling is altered by outside forces against the will of the originator. Calling it fucked up should not be conflated with calling for it to be censored, those are two different flavours of ice-cream.

Quote from: One Horse Town;351533There's a whole subclass of people on the internet who conflate freedom of speech issues about published material with censorship issues about published material.

No matter how many times you tell them that if you want your freedom to talk about your child nazi rapist necrophilliac game, then i also have the freedom to call you a freak, they fall back on 'calling' freedom of speech as if the critic shouldn't have any.

It's only censorship, fuckwads, if whatever you are peddling is altered by outside forces against the will of the originator. Calling it fucked up should not be conflated with calling for it to be censored, those are two different flavours of ice-cream.

 Allow the scum to speak, flip em off when they do, and shoot them when they act upon the bullshit they speak.
 
   Furthermore, how is one supposed to know if this is a roleplayed gangrape or real? I mean, if I see somebody getting assaulted like this, my first reaction would be to start swinging a crowbar at the assailants.

Quote from: Kyle Aaron;351527Reckall, don't be a cocksmock.

Freedom of speech means people can write and publish a gang rape experience if they want to, they can even wrongly call it a "game" if they want to.

Freedom of speech also means people can then call the first lot reprehensible and puerile wankers.

Since it seems that more than one people is posting without reading this thread, I'll quote some relevant parts by myself

Quote from: Reckall;349912My opinion.

Well, "freedom of expression" is still a valued right (as long as one remembers that "freedom" doesn't make the expression interesting, smart or valuable).

So, thank you for underlying what I already said, like, one week ago.

And my overall idea of the game:

Quote from: Reckall;349912...It seems to me that this is only a slight variation of the usual "GMs are sexual molesters!!!!" forgite rally cry. A really sad state of affairs (and minds) IMHO.

Same post by me - the above conclusion justified with quotes from the very text of the product we are talking about.

Quote from: Kyle Aaron;351527I'm calling you on your bullshit. If you want to defend this non-game, go ahead.

See above about my opinion on the product, my (unexistant) willingness to defend it, and why I came to my conclusions about it. As I said, one only had to read the thread.

Quote from: Kyle Aaron;351527Don't be a wuss about it and babble on about the unrelated issue of freedom of speech.

Except, however, that it is not unrelated. Actually, you are taking advantage of this right to express your opinion right here - something on which, I see, we all agree.

Then, since I defended "Freedom of Speech" as a principle, I'm invited to speak about it elsewhere. Whoa! what a forgite approach to the idea! "We don't deny FoS: we simply consider it something to be brought elsewhere if we don't like what you say!" One can imagine on some other much-despised-over-here boards people "explaining" how you should speak of things, and what is considered acceptable in what you say about them.

Actually, I don't even have to imagine it. I came here after an almost month long debate on the Italian RPG newsgroup against some "New Wave Prophets" who simply couldn't accept... yup! my right to exercise "FoS", and choose to be the GM (in my private life) in games that could be compared to child molesting. Something which, to them, is totally true: they say so :rolleyes:

And I didn't even went into a slightly more deep analysis of the topic being discussed here. The creators of "Gang Rape" state that they created an active narrative experience, not meant to be fun, because they want to explore some of the darker areas of human soul, via creative expression, in a protected environment (and it is worth mentioning how it turned out their game was diffused without their consent; if it true that it is damaging, then the ones diffusing it spread the damage much more than the game authors ever did  - under the righteous shield of "informing the unshaven masses about these horripilations!", of course...)

Anyway, shame and rejection on the creators of GR the RPG!!! Fine. And I even agree! - mostly thank the very unfortunate parallelism the game explicitly traces between gang rape and a GM running a traditional game.

But, since the context is explore some of the darker areas of human soul, via creative expression, in a protected environment what about an actor interested in an evil and disturbing role, then? Should Bruno Ganz be put on trial for the best portrayal of Hitler ever put on screen? Should Patrick Wilson and Ellen Page be arrested for their excellent impersonation of a child molester and a creepily disturbed teen-ager in "Hard Candy". What about a writer writing a serial killer novel all from the killer's point of view? What about Damien Hirst? Since the dawn of time artists are interested in exploring the darker sides of the human being via creative expression. And they can do so, in advanced societies, due to Freedom of Speech - sometimes even getting ugly cultural reaction for that. Do you apply the same "boiling righteousness" to their craft? If yes, why? If no, why not? What about their public?

Is a forgite right and commendable when he intrudes in your private matters and accuses you of rendering people "unable to create by violating their young gamers' minds" - then diffusing to the four winds what happens in your private games along with his "commentary"?

At the end of the day, the story is always the same: a lot of people (but not all, thanks to God) are perfectly happy to judge things according to principles they wouldn't remotely accept were they the one judged. Interestingly enough, this is the first thing I noticed the first time I clashed with some forgite fundamentalist.

Sorry, Kyle, objections rejected. Next.

Reckall, I have to say, reading about your games, you're exactly the kind of cocksmock that would do very well in my crew, but what the fuck are you going on about ?

Could you point where anyone here has called for a ban of this game ? Could you point out where anyone mentioned this game within the context of freedom of speech (besides you, that is) ? Nobody is saying they can't create a game like this, talk about it (although the designers do seem to have a problem, with folks talking about their game) or even play it.

They just think it's a reprehensible product and want to talk about it. I think this game will have zero effect on the hobby. I get that this whole Forge/Swine war is BS. I get that the Pundit is a complete wanker, but what I don't get is why you seem to think that this is a free speech issue ?

Regards,
David R

Still, what would your first reaction be if you saw a group of people "playing" this?  What would actually happen if by "playing" this, it was used to actually perform a gang-rape?  What are the legal implications?  
 
 Unfuckingacceptable.

Quote from: David R;351539(although the designers do seem to have a problem, with folks talking about their game) or even play it.

Regards,
David R

Quite, almost as if they were ashamed.

That's pretty sad for several reasons, really.

Either -

A) They're freaks that don't want to be identified for their freaky fun and games involving role-playing gang-rape.

B) It actually is a 'therapy' excersise, but they are savvy enough to know that there are actual wierdos out there creating games in the same vein to be played for fun and they don't want to be associated with them.

C) They're freaks that don't have the courage of their designing convictions. Some forgites would be pimping this all over the place (under an assumed name like Lotus Blossoms, or something), but these guys lost their bottle and now fiddle with themselves in the basement.

Quote from: shalvayez;351540Still, what would your first reaction be if you saw a group of people "playing" this?  What would actually happen if by "playing" this, it was used to actually perform a gang-rape?  What are the legal implications?  
 
 Unfuckingacceptable.

There are two answers to this:

If the gang rape happens as a part of the game, then it is a crime and it will be prosecuted. The book I mentioned about the relationship between the US Law, religious belief, occult and even RPGs (!) is quite clear on this point: if a criminal act is part of these activities, then the crime is prosecuted - end of the story. However, the activity by itself isn't. This is why, for example, the practice of Satanism is still legal in the US even if some followers perpetrated dire things in the past.

If gang-rape is perpetrated by someone who played the game, then things are much less clear-cut - but there are many similar examples one can refer to. People playing FPS on the PC all-day long and then going out on a rampage and gunning down a score of classmates. People playing "Stormbringer" by Chaosium and then "sacrificing the cat to evoke Arioch". I won't even go into the whole religious polemics that surrounded D&D during the dark ages.

In all these instances you can find people pointing screaming to the former "recreative experience" as the culprit that turned the poor guy into a death-dealing sociopath. Sane opinion, as of 2009, is that the poor guy was probably a sociopath all along - pointing to the latest FPS/RPG/whatever session being only an easy scapegoat for denying the responsibilities both of the family and the society he grew up in.

EDIT: My first reaction, should I happen on a stray game, would be to observe the proceedings with curiosity. My gut feeling is that I wouldn't try it, and that I'll probably neither decide to ever play it nor to actively seek someone who plays it.

Quote from: Reckall;351543There are two answers to this:

If the gang rape happens as a part of the game, then it is a crime and it will be prosecuted. The book I mentioned about the relationship between the US Law, religious belief, occult and even RPGs (!) is quite clear on this point: if a criminal act is part of these activities, then the crime is prosecuted - end of the story. However, the activity by itself isn't. This is why, for example, the practice of Satanism is still legal in the US even if some followers perpetrated dire things in the past.

If gang-rape is perpetrated by someone who played the game, then things are much less clear-cut - but there are many similar examples one can refer to. People playing FPS on the PC all-day long and then going out on a rampage and gunning down a score of classmates. People playing "Stormbringer" by Chaosium and then "sacrificing the cat to evoke Arioch". I won't even go into the whole religious polemics that surrounded D&D during the dark ages.

In all these instances you can find people pointing screaming to the former "recreative experience" as the culprit that turned the poor guy into a death-dealing sociopath. Sane opinion, as of 2009, is that the poor guy was probably a sociopath all along - pointing to the latest FPS/RPG/whatever session being only an easy scapegoat fora denying the responsibilities both of the family and the society he grew up in.

Except: "Your honor, she agreed to play Gang Rape with us, and one thing lead to another, and she was WILLING."  Rape is already rather difficult to prosecute if all directions lead to SEEMING willingness..

And even worse yet, you still have recent memory of that little twat at Duke U. claiming the lacrosse team had gang raped her. She admitted she lied after a few months, and it still SCREWED w/ their lives. This "game" is irresponsible on so many levels, it makes F.A.T.A.L. and RaHoWa seem appealing..

Quote from: shalvayez;351544Except: "Your honor, she agreed to play Gang Rape with us, and one thing lead to another, and she was WILLING."

Again, you could just find a lawyer that points to the rulebook - which clearly states no physical contact, and that she was willing to act - like in a reharsal for a play, in a role she was interested exploring. Then one thing lend to a crime - which is still a crime.

 

QuoteRape is already rather difficult to prosecute if all directions lead to SEEMING willingness..

"Rape" is such an evasive crime that non-rape can be transformed into rape as easily. Many guys who have consensual sex with a girl can find themselves accused of rape. Then either the girl or her parents point out to the authorities that the aforementioned guy has a game called "Gang Rape" in his home. There: poetic justice in action.

Beside, the rules also state that the game should be played with people you are confortable with. If someone frequents such a circle and still ends up being raped for real, my opinion is that soon or later it would have been happened anyway, probably in another occourrence. Belief is more often than not the justification for something one wants to do anyway - not the cause.

Quote from: Reckall;351549Again, you could just find a lawyer that points to the rulebook - which clearly states no physical contact, and that she was willing to act - like in a reharsal for a play, in a role she was interested exploring. Then one thing lend to a crime - which is still a crime.

 

"Rape" is such an evasive crime that non-rape can be transformed into rape as easily. Many guys who have consensual sex with a girl can find themselves accused of rape. Then either the girl or her parents point out to the authorities that the aforementioned guy has a game called "Gang Rape" in his home. There: poetic justice in action.

Beside, the rules also state that the game should be played with people you are confortable with. If someone frequents such a circle and still ends up being raped for real, my opinion is that soon or later it would have been happened anyway, probably in another occourrence. Belief is more often than not the justification for something one wants to do anyway - not the cause.

Then, why muddy it up even further with a stupid game?

Quote from: David R;351539I get that the Pundit is a complete wanker, but what I don't get is why you seem to think that this is a free speech issue ?

Regards,
David R

??  

No answer, old boy.

Quote from: One Horse Town;351551??  

No answer, old boy.

Well I'm a professional Pundit detractor (mind you, this is merely a side job to my regular NBNG gig), so I thought I'd just take a couple of random shots ! Y'know, for consistency.

Regards,
David R

Quote from: David R;351553Well I'm a professional Pundit detractor (mind you, this is merely a side job to my regular NBNG gig), so I thought I'd just take a couple of random shots ! Y'know, for consistency.

Regards,
David R

I was referring to no answer from Reckall to your question.

D'oh

Regards,
David R