An important notice on political threads in the main forum

[Shasarak]

I'm sure that thoroughly dismissing or outright banning people for having the audacity to ask why anyone would oppose BLM will not be used by detractors as ammunition to claim that this is some sort of "alt-right" forum full hypocrites who don't really believe in free speech, or unwittingly lead to it becoming an echo chamber where everyone just agrees with each other. :rolleyes:

Rabble rabble  I agree  rabble rabble.

[Kyle Aaron]

Or answer with "if you need validation of X then you're too stupid to be participating in this conversation about role-playing topic Y."

It's derisive AND on topic.

And that's important skill of a DM. A DM acts as a moderator in the old debate class sense, ensuring everyone has a turn and remains on topic. Players will of course occasionally go off on tangents, but when the tangent becomes the main time-user at the game table, the game suffers. Sometimes the DM needs to steer things gently, sometimes they need to be derisive.

The real, hard boundary can't be explicitly defined, and amounts to, "Pundit will know it when he sees it."

Another DMing skill is using common sense. "I know it when I see it" is a series of rulings at the game table. Invariably, players have no problem with arbitrary ruling which favour them, but often have problems with arbitrary rulings which go against them. And this is why the DM wears the Viking Hat, to slap down any whinging.

I'm sure that thoroughly dismissing or outright banning people for having the audacity to ask why anyone would oppose BLM will not be used by detractors as ammunition to claim that this is some sort of "alt-right" forum full hypocrites who don't really believe in free speech, or unwittingly lead to it becoming an echo chamber where everyone just agrees with each other. :rolleyes:

A good game group will be indifferent to the opinions of other gamers about their play. And arbitrary rulings by the DM prohibiting excessive off-topic talk at the game table do not ever lead to the game group becoming an echo chamber, they lead to the game group focusing on the game.

when you get together with friends at a bar for wings, beer, and cigars, who stands over your shoulder telling you that you can't talk about A or B? No one does that.

That's the difference between a group gathering for purely social reasons, and a group gathering for a social creative hobby. Pure social gatherings do not require very strong boundaries. Social gatherings which are also for an rpg session, for a football game or whatever, do require some boundaries. Being at a D&D session and complaining that the DM expects you to play D&D is like being at a football game and complaining that the referee won't let you shoot hoops. That's not what you're there for.

Rabble rabble  I agree  rabble rabble.

Random interjections from players rarely help the flow of the game session. Wait for your turn in combat.

[Sable Wyvern]

Another DMing skill is using common sense. "I know it when I see it" is a series of rulings at the game table. Invariably, players have no problem with arbitrary ruling which favour them, but often have problems with arbitrary rulings which go against them. And this is why the DM wears the Viking Hat, to slap down any whinging.

And, if the players aren't clear on the boundaries, PCs will be killed off when they misjudge how the DM is going to rule. Fortunately, if the DM is consistent and the players pay attention, they will eventually learn from their mistakes and reach an understanding of what works and what doesn't in the DM's world.

Of course, that doesn't work if PC death also involves the player being booted permanently from the game.

[Kyle Aaron]

Ah, but that player will learn an important lesson! As will their comrades.

I was booted from my first game group. I learned a lesson: run my own group!

[Sable Wyvern]

Ah, but that player will learn an important lesson! As will their comrades.

I was booted from my first game group. I learned a lesson: run my own group!

I have to say, you are one of the most annoying posters here. In part, because no matter how much shit you talk, there is pretty much always at least a kernel of truth in there somewhere.

[VisionStorm]

A good game group will be indifferent to the opinions of other gamers about their play. And arbitrary rulings by the DM prohibiting excessive off-topic talk at the game table do not ever lead to the game group becoming an echo chamber, they lead to the game group focusing on the game.

Until the DM is forced to close shop, because the group was playing in an online platform where the DM relied on paid adds and traffic, as well as promoting his own products, to generate revenue to keep the platform running, support his expensive hobby and keep the players entertained. But with dwindling traffic due to mounting defamation from his detractors, as well as his own reputation for permanently expulsing players from his campaign for asking simple questions (as you suggest), he was eventually no longer able to maintain the platform.

So the players are forced to disband and look for another game group, but no one will have them because others had been spreading rumors, unchallenged, that they were Neo-Nazis for too long, and now everyone regards as such and don't want them in their group. So now they're unable to either talk off-topic or focus on the game.

[Spinachcat]

Fuck it. The more I think about this, the more getting banned sounds kinda fun.

I'm living in an America on self-destruct. Ain't got the energy to care about game forum "decorum".  

Getting banned just means becoming a lurker. AKA, being able to gain anything useful from theRPGsite without adding anything.

[VisionStorm]

Fuck it. The more I think about this, the more getting banned sounds kinda fun.

I'm living in an America on self-destruct. Ain't got the energy to care about game forum "decorum".  

Getting banned just means becoming a lurker. AKA, being able to gain anything useful from theRPGsite without adding anything.

If Kyle (and others) has his way you probably won't be the one getting banned, though. It'll be people asking impertinent questions, like "Why would anyone oppose BLM?" So we'll able to complain about company X supporting BLM unimpeded--with minimal risk of getting banned--cuz there'd be no one to even object to our complaints and tempt us into straying into discussing broader national issues by addressing their concerns. So we'd be keeping the political talk within the confines of the RPG hobby, by virtue of being the only side of the discussion present.

[Kyle Aaron]

Until the DM is forced to close shop, because the group was playing in an online platform where the DM relied on paid adds and traffic -

What the fuck are you talking about?

[VisionStorm]

What the fuck are you talking about?

Damn, I should've asked you that same question instead of following your silly metaphors!

Anyways, scroll all the way up, then look at the upper right corner.

[Opaopajr]

Fuck it. The more I think about this, the more getting banned sounds kinda fun.

I'm living in an America on self-destruct. Ain't got the energy to care about game forum "decorum".  

Getting banned just means becoming a lurker. AKA, being able to gain anything useful from theRPGsite without adding anything.

Kumbaya, Spinichcat. Chill your tits and flame out another day, for this too shall pass -- and we need each other to slap each other in the face to remind us when we are playing the badwrongfun.

Besides it's in the friction that a lot of good RPG campaign fodder is made! Like for myself, my germinating In Nomine game where Demon Prince of Factions use PC-Police politics as a tool alongside Demon Princess of Freedom anti-social behavior to bring civil unrest and oppression to a modern world is writing itself out in exciting ways that surprise even me! I mean who expected a return of, let alone coalition with, the Demon Prince of Disease? I am most amused. I was thinking of a way to have Demon Prince of Lust work with Archangel of Flowers to end this rush towards Apocalypse... but most of the player character quests from that angle seem like a bizarre international "opposites attract" hate-fuck spiral of orgiastic proportions. I should write in another factor in their 'Save the World Coalition' -- I am thinking Archangel of Judgment, but that might be too odd, perhaps Archangel of Stone? (It'd have to be deep ops covert... or a play for a return of an Archangel of Love? Maybe one of the last of Andre's servitors picking up the old word from the Seraphim Council?)

Just relax, don't let the vibe of the times get under your skin! There's so much good gaming to talk about!

[GeekEclectic]

If the topic is, "I will no longer support gaming company X because they support cause Y", then the question, "What's the problem with cause Y?" is directly relevent to the topic and essential to meaningful conversation, and also apparently banned as not directly relevant to gaming. Hence the problem with Pundit's whole attitude to politics in the main forum.

Still seems pretty simple to me. If you have to go clearly out of bounds to respond to someone, assuming that person hasn't already crossed those bounds, and you can't find some other in-bounds aspect of the original issue to talk about, then perhaps the conversation has run its course. If you're unsure, well, that's on you and maybe you should just stay golden in such cases. Easy peasy, I expect to be here another 10 years lest I leave voluntarileezy.

[RPGPundit]

Jesus, people, is it really this difficult for you to not talk about general politics in the RPG thread? Even when you can talk about general politics in the Pundit's forum?!

[Jfrog]

Jesus, people, is it really this difficult for you to not talk about general politics in the RPG thread? Even when you can talk about general politics in the Pundit's forum?!

The problem for me is that I view general politics and rpg politics as interrelated and interconnected with no clear line separating them.  And Why?  Because it's the same underlying ideology that causes both and IMO if that can't be talked about then I'm afraid all we will get is a bunch of flaming on both sides as the actual issues causing that flaming can't be discussed where it comes up.

Not saying I won't try to abide by that rule but it has the potential to make many normal discussion flows feel like I am walking through a minefield.

[Manic Modron]

Jesus, people, is it really this difficult for you to not talk about general politics in the RPG thread? Even when you can talk about general politics in the Pundit's forum?!

Poster A: I say, those bounders at Acme Game Co are uo to some parliamentary schenanigans!

Poster B: Zounds, I don't care for that one bit!

Poster C: Pray, good fellow, would you care to expound on these notions?

Pundit: What devilry confounds your efforts to remain on task?  Though I am loathe to do so, I have a mind to escort you to the exit by summary force!

Pundit, for your own sanity, just make an industry forum apart from pure gaming.  Your sand-line is pretty arbitrary and is going to cause a lot of people to stumble over it in the course of normal conversation.  It is a half assed measure and I'm afraid it is going to need more heavy handed moderation than your personal philosophy is going to be comfortable with.

But hey, I have no real dog in this fight, so spike your blood pressure all you want.