The thing about her showing up as a panelist...

If...I dunno, "Joe Smith, Random Internet Complainer" sat down and did a panel, he might generate a tiny bit of controversy, but of course we don't know him, and as pointed out Gen Con panelists so who cares.

But Sarkeesian brings her own baggage, and it is large.  She drags a comet-tail of virtue signalers and white knights and on and on behind her.

Quote from: Omega;1041654But, and this is why some actually git irked over all this, is the fact that designers and occasional execs and the rare distributor do attend these things and Nutcases spewing their latest screed can end up infesting product or causing trouble down the line.  You can bet good money that Anita will poison a few minds while there because she is really good at weaving falsehoods with cherry-picked examples and then champion how to "fix" things. Which will make the allready troubled RPG biz even more precarious.

This is the sort of language I associate with anti-free-speech arguments.  The opposition's words are "poison" that will "infest" others if they're allowed to talk. The implied conclusion is that they have to be silenced to prevent this infestation.

I disagree. And in particular, I don't think one can deploy this kind of argument - and simultaneously have a problem with opponents who do the same.

Quote from: jhkim;1041669This is the sort of language I associate with anti-free-speech arguments.  The opposition's words are "poison" that will "infest" others if they're allowed to talk. The implied conclusion is that they have to be silenced to prevent this infestation.

I disagree. And in particular, I don't think one can deploy this kind of argument - and simultaneously have a problem with opponents who do the same.

Nice try.
The difference being, Omega's not going to don a mask and throw a brick at her head.  He's saying she will have an effect, no matter how much people might think no one cares, and she shouldn't have been chosen.  However, having been chosen, he's not saying she has no right to speak.

Quote from: Mike the Mage;1041575LOL

Yep, this is all to launch her follow up to Tropes vs. Women in Video Games.

You guessed it! Tropes vs. Women in Tabletop Games.

She'll hang around no longer than she has to in order to launch and promote that.

You read it here first.

What other reason is there to honor her other than to say "Hey, our hobby needs Anita too?" #TableTopToo

I'm glad Anita is attending.

It let's me know who amongst the tabletop developers don't want my money. The woman is terrible at promoting anything except her fucked up view of the world. When she promoted a "good game" on her channel?

Nobody bought it. Not a single up tick in sales for the month. She can't harm the hobby, only the reputations of the people who support her.

Quote from: jhkim;1041669This is the sort of language I associate with anti-free-speech arguments.  The opposition's words are "poison" that will "infest" others if they're allowed to talk. The implied conclusion is that they have to be silenced to prevent this infestation.

I disagree. And in particular, I don't think one can deploy this kind of argument - and simultaneously have a problem with opponents who do the same.

Would you support having Milo as a guest of honour at Gencon? He is the anti SJW equivalent of Sarkeesian.

Quote from: S'mon;1041674Would you support having Milo as a guest of honour at Gencon? He is the anti SJW equivalent of Sarkeesian.

I would not give a shit, in equal measure.

Who the fuck is Milo?

But on a good note, of the three honored guests, one is actually a game designer, Jordan Wiseman, worthy of the honor, whose companies include...

• FASA (Star Trek, Battletech, Shadowrun, Earthdawn, Crimson Skies)
• Virtual Worlds (Battletech Pods)
• Wiz Kids (RPGs, Cardgames, minigames like HeroClix)
• Harebrained Schemes (Shadowrun and Battletech video games)

The guy's been kicking ass in all aspects of the industry for 30+ years.

Quote from: S'mon;1041674Would you support having Milo as a guest of honour at Gencon? He is the anti SJW equivalent of Sarkeesian.

No. Absolutely and utterly not, unless Milo is a tabletop gamer and game designer on the side.

My problem with Anita as GoH has ZERO to do with her politics. If it was Social Media PoliticsCon, she's be a perfect GoH. GenCon is supposed to be about tabletop games and we have PLENTY of people inside the hobby worthy of that honor.

Larry Correia (who SJWs got tossed from Origins GoH spot) is an author and lifelong RPG gamer, and if he's an GoH, I don't want any politics out of him, just discussion about his books, games based on his books and getting his ass to game tables to game with fans. Absolutely ZERO political talk.

Quote from: jhkim;1041669The opposition's words are "poison" that will "infest" others if they're allowed to talk. The implied conclusion is that they have to be silenced to prevent this infestation.

Anita should be free now and forever to spew her stupid. I absolutely defend her right to babble forth dumb.

She didn't invite herself to GenCon. Utter fucknuts inside GenCon invited her ONLY because they want GenCon to become SJWCon.

They, not her, are the source of the bad decision, and as I stated above, the bad decision is based on Anita not being part of the tabletop industry.

Quote from: Warboss Squee;1041672It let's me know who amongst the tabletop developers don't want my money.

How will you know?

Quote from: Gronan of Simmerya;1041675Who the fuck is Milo?

He's a gay and Jewish "political provocateur" and married to a black dude, but his views are considered Alt-Right so he's literally Hitler.

But he loves being controversial and feeds on the outrage.

Quote from: jhkim;1041628Like Gronan, I don't particularly care who the guests of honor are. I couldn't tell you who the guests of honor were for previous Gen Con, or for pretty much any convention I've been to. I'm there to game.

The guests of honor last year were mostly a bunch of barely known feminists who had blogs about how awful D&D is, and Mike Pondsmith. The latter has impeccable RPG credentials, of course, but it was blatantly obvious that he was chosen to headline because he's black. If he were white and say, Kevin Siembieda were black, it would have been Kevin and not him there.

QuoteMy main issue with Sarkeesian is that as far as I know, all her commentary has been about video gaming, not tabletop gaming. So she seems like an odd choice.

They've clearly decided that they're powerful enough that they can entirely do away with the illusion of even bothering to invite someone like Pondsmith. They can just directly move into making their headline guest of honor a Totalitarian Leftist with no qualifications or connections to the RPG hobby whatsoever.

QuoteBut I don't make any sort of deal over conservative guests of honor at a con.

That's a bit of a ridiculous statement because it's very clear there will never be another conservative guest of honor at Gencon, for as long as these people are in power.

Quote from: jhkim;1041669This is the sort of language I associate with anti-free-speech arguments.  The opposition's words are "poison" that will "infest" others if they're allowed to talk. The implied conclusion is that they have to be silenced to prevent this infestation.

I disagree. And in particular, I don't think one can deploy this kind of argument - and simultaneously have a problem with opponents who do the same.

This is also disingenuous. I don't think Omega was suggesting she should be 'silenced', nor would she need to be silenced. Her feminist cancer can be countered with words. The problem is that those words ARE NOT ALLOWED at Gencon.

So your friends are stacking the deck, no-platforming anyone who disagrees with them, stifling all debate, and then you claim that if we criticize her brand of civilizational AIDS it means we're trying to censor her?

I absolutely do not want to censor her. I want to have a debate with her, on stage, in front of everyone, on a fair and even basis. I know I'd win because she's selling lies and I'm selling truth, and she's not even good enough at rhetoric to edge out someone half as good as me at debating. That's the whole reason she and all the other Identity Politics Totalitarians go for censorship: they're fundamentally incompetents and in an even playing field they'd be a laughing stock.

It's letting the camel's nose into the tent.

Sark the Shark coming into tabletop because she couldn't keep up her racket in videogames is one thing. Who's looking to benefit from making this happen is the real issue; folks we already talk about here are looking to use Sark to normalize SJW bullshit (and the centralization of authority required to make it stick) in tabletop. It seems quixotic, but the SJWs do know that folks who can freely participate can't be shamed into compliance or be frozen out at the gate. If there is a goal to be advanced here, it's to be found in whipping up hysteria sufficient to give justification for imposing and enforcing Codes of Conduct meant to freeze out Wrongthinkers and deny their influence. They think that if they control what is published, promoted, and talked about well enough they can do to tabletop RPGs what they did to science fiction generations before. (It seems quixotic, until you account for things like the EU's draft regulations on copyright currently being formulated.)

And as we've seen in how the perception of D&D--and thus of what RPGs are about--changed with entirely accidental shifts in demographics coupled with fumbling business leadership, to the detriment of the hobby, one can see how deliberately engineering a scene to bring about a desired change in a similar manner (drive off the existing customers; replace with ones you can easily influence) is not out of line to consider as being possible.

Sark the Shark being around is not a good sign. By itself, she's nothing; as part of a larger picture, she's the symptom of a larger problem being manifest.

Quote from: Spinachcat;1041680How will you know?

Because they'll tell us themselves.  Some out of agreement, others because they're afraid of the tornado of idiots she can brew up.

I've little use for either.

Quote from: S'mon;1041674Would you support having Milo as a guest of honour at Gencon? He is the anti SJW equivalent of Sarkeesian.

If I may answer for myself.....

No.

Why? Because both Sarkeesian and Milo know fuck-all about the tabletop RPG hobby or industry and GenCon was supposed to be about tabletop gaming.

People like Anita and the other SJW hipster scum who support censorship is precisely why you guys need to support me and the Cowboy movement as whole.

Make the Democratic Party Great Again! Kick out the SJW's and other supporters of censorship! That is what we Cowboys are all about.

Seriously, Anita Sarkeesian is like the Wyatt Earp of Internet Leftists. And I don't mean that in a good way.

Much like Earp, she's a thug, a grifter, and a brute with the blessing of mainstream media support, which means she can worm her way into other hobbies and bully people like the PC thug she is.

I'm like Johnny Ringo, and I am standing up to Anita by NOT going to GenCon.