This is potentially getting far off from RPGs, which Pundit has said is a no-no for this forum. Keeping this on Wizards of the Coast, the relevance is about how apparently the D&D upper management is 100% white men.

It seems weird to me that Brinks has somehow spun there being 100% white male D&D management into posters suggesting that WotC is representative of the height of wokeness, and that what he says demonstrates what progressives are like.

I'd want to make clear that as a non-white person and as a progressive, I don't for a second think that WotC is on my side.  Just a few weeks ago, it seemed like there was unity that WotC is a soulless corporation - and everyone, woke and non-woke alike, rejected their OGL license nonsense. And now WotC is deliberately trying to drive a wedge into that.

-----

EDITED TO ADD: Cross-posted with Pen and Ghostmaker's comments. The stuff off-topic from RPGs was about women coding, discrimination lawsuits, and similar.

Quote from: Ghostmaker on February 08, 2023, 02:54:35 PM
Between this and the Bank of America report on Hasbro stumbling, I suspect the course correction is coming sooner rather than later.

Wouldn't a course correction right now be intrinsically associated with the OGL fiasco and the D&D beyond loss of subscribers? They might do it before the q1 2023 report, but I don't think it will be that fast.

Quote from: jhkim on February 08, 2023, 03:16:41 PM
This is potentially getting far off from RPGs, which Pundit has said is a no-no for this forum. Keeping this on Wizards of the Coast, the relevance is about how apparently the D&D upper management is 100% white men.

It seems weird to me that Brinks has somehow spun there being 100% white male D&D management into posters suggesting that WotC is representative of the height of wokeness, and that what he says demonstrates what progressives are like.

I'd want to make clear that as a non-white person and as a progressive, I don't for a second think that WotC is on my side.  Just a few weeks ago, it seemed like there was unity that WotC is a soulless corporation - and everyone, woke and non-woke alike, rejected their OGL license nonsense. And now WotC is deliberately trying to drive a wedge into that.

-----

EDITED TO ADD: Cross-posted with Pen and Ghostmaker's comments. The stuff off-topic from RPGs was about women coding, discrimination lawsuits, and similar.

Would it surprize you that some progressives on the twatters ARE throwing themselves in front of the train to protect Wotzi?

Going as far as to call me racist for saying (and I quote): "Exactly, just like I wouldn't buy from a white supremacists I will also not buy from any other type of racist".

Now, if that makes me a racist then I'll wear the badge with pride.

What did you think the morality clause was all about? To point to ALL that opposed Wotzi and call them istophobes and enlist the woke as their shield and cudgel.

Yes, Kyle Brink is a complete sociopath....but he's only saying what his bosses have told him to say. That worm is just following orders. He was GIVEN ORDERS to openly engage in blatant anti-white demoralization tactics. He was ordered to engage in psychological warfare against Hasbro's white male customers for D&D. This only seems insane if you don't understand why they're doing it. Most of Hasbro's shares are held by large financial institutions like Blackrock and Vanguard. I guarantee you that the owners of the giant asset management firms are giving orders to the corporate worms at Hasbro to push anti-white/CRT/DEI initiatives. This is not something new; it's happening at all billion dollar western corporations.

Hasbro is NOT controlled by gaming nerds.

A black employee at Hasbro was already punished for revealing that Hasbro is deliberately targeting children with weaponized CRT propaganda. The men who control the giant asset management firms do not care about making money. Why would they? After all, the giant asset management firms are controlled by the same people who print the money for our corrupt western system of fiat currency. In other words, they care about something else....and that's power.

What's happening here should not surprise anyone.

Quote from: GeekyBugle on February 08, 2023, 03:29:27 PM

Quote from: jhkim on February 08, 2023, 03:16:41 PM
I'd want to make clear that as a non-white person and as a progressive, I don't for a second think that WotC is on my side.  Just a few weeks ago, it seemed like there was unity that WotC is a soulless corporation - and everyone, woke and non-woke alike, rejected their OGL license nonsense. And now WotC is deliberately trying to drive a wedge into that.

Would it surprize you that some progressives on the twatters ARE throwing themselves in front of the train to protect Wotzi?

Going as far as to call me racist for saying (and I quote): "Exactly, just like I wouldn't buy from a white supremacists I will also not buy from any other type of racist".

Now, if that makes me a racist then I'll wear the badge with pride.

What did you think the morality clause was all about? To point to ALL that opposed Wotzi and call them istophobes and enlist the woke as their shield and cudgel.

I agree that WotC were using the morality clause to try to enlist progressives to their OGL v1.2. I also note that it failed miserably. Woke creators all immediately abandoned WotC - including all the red list companies. And woke gamers were completely against it as well - dropping their D&DBeyond subscriptions in droves.

Here they're trying again, and I'm not surprised that some people fell for it. It's trivially easy to get people to fight left/right partisanship.

Quote from: DocJones on February 07, 2023, 10:25:29 AM
I take it Kyle Brink has never been to a TTRPG convention.

Now, if we were talking about CCGs, then at least in gender terms his perception of the game's audience would be correct. I went to check out a place the other day where I could revive my old open game tables, it was a decent space, the owners friendly - they had a CCG tournament on, and it was a total sausage-fest. At least 60 people there, all male.

But the males included a variety of ethnic groups. I didn't enquire about their sexualities, there are things man was not meant to know.

Perhaps that's where his perception comes from, the CCG half. Of course, this is what a good marketing department is supposed to do, give you a good idea of your current customer demographic. Evidently their marketing department is failing in this.

Quote from: Kyle Aaron on February 08, 2023, 05:13:59 PM\Evidently their marketing department is failing in this.

He IS doing the marketing. "Our geeky looser product is diverse and hip and for all of those up-and-coming girl bosses!".

Quote from: DocJones on February 07, 2023, 10:25:29 AM
I take it Kyle Brink has never been to a TTRPG convention.

Now, if we were talking about CCGs, then at least in gender terms his perception of the game's audience would be correct. I went to check out a place the other day where I could revive my old open game tables, it was a decent space, the owners friendly - they had a CCG tournament on, and it was a total sausage-fest. At least 60 people there, all male.

But the males included a variety of ethnic groups. I didn't enquire about their sexualities, there are things man was not meant to know.

Perhaps that's where his perception comes from, the CCG half. Of course, this is what a good marketing department is supposed to do, give you a good idea of your current customer demographic. Evidently their marketing department is failing in this.

Quote from: NaisomethingIt's a tangent to this thread, but there's pretty good data showing that young 20-year-old guys can *completely unintentionally* drive young 20-year-old women out of the career, and that changing how we teach introductory computer science and even doing some sex-segregated classes can radically improve the young womens' success & mastery.

I can see that. What I will say is that previously in game clubs what I saw was that the demographics of the game table simply reflected the demographics of the local universities, more or less. The friendly welcoming game table with the individual gamers reaching out to people to bring them in is how a lot of us got introduced to the hobby, generally some time between the middle of high school and the start of university, if we did uni.

My own game table slanted older and male, but that was because of the focus we had on older game systems, and because in the 30+ age group people have work and families, and the systemic sexism of our society means that it's more likely men will take an evening out away from the kids to game (or play tennis, or whatever) than it is that women will. However, we had all ethnicities, sexualities etc.

Bear in mind that most entertainers and entertainment companies are far more accustomed to the far left Twitterati causing corporations grief than the actual clientele. I'm not actually surprised by what Brink said because I am well aware that pandering left is a well tuned reflex. We all know he didn't actually believe what he said. He just has absolutely no idea what else to say. That said, a lie everyone can see through is still a lie.

It just goes to show that no one should associate with WotC anymore.

It is impressive of them to refocus the debate and shift the battleground. Presto, the conversation is no longer about WotC trying to demolish the market and strongarm competitors and fans alike into a way more precarious position just a few weeks ago, which united fans, industry players, and the wider media against them in an unprecedented way. It is now a battle on a much more favourable ground where they hold strategic advantage, and the enemy will be divided and fighting among itself. This is how the fate of great battles that seem already won is turned.

If it was intentional, I must congratulate Kyle Brink, who has steered the conversation in an expert way with a few off-hand remarks. That's a textbook example of how you wedge a coalition aligned against you. If it was just a gaffe, it could not have happened at a better moment. Either way, he has earned his keep from his paymasters. In their place, I would give this man a hefty bonus.

   Against WOTC, I do not care if a progressive feels they are also against them since the progressives have long since stated they are 100 percent on board with the less white men ideology.  I do not pick a side when 2 enemies fight, I just let them fight and hope they both expire. 

   WOTC has made it clear where they stood for a long time, I find it refreshing they have decided to just play the game with the mask off.  I said it earlier and it bears repeating, once someone has been thoughtful (or maybe thoughtless) enough to openly state I am their enemy I am clear to respond in kind.  No more looking for common ground or stupidity around "we mostly want the same things".   WOTC is run by people who want men in women's bathrooms and to see zero white people working in RPGs.  No need for anyone to be mad.  Just leave them. Forever.  Done.

Quote from: jhkim on February 08, 2023, 03:16:41 PM
I'd want to make clear that as a non-white person and as a progressive, I don't for a second think that WotC is on my side.  Just a few weeks ago, it seemed like there was unity that WotC is a soulless corporation - and everyone, woke and non-woke alike, rejected their OGL license nonsense. And now WotC is deliberately trying to drive a wedge into that.

I'm genuinely curious when you came to that realization? We've only been saying it for years here. But I can't remember when you've ever uttered those words before. So what was it that brought you to this conclusion?

Their games are representative of the corporations agenda, and the people they've hired to be the games custodians. It's *been* this way for a long time. I used to be "Ride or Die" for D&D... but after freelancing with them, it was glaringly apparent what they were about. I was skeptical when Pundit and Zak was brought on as consultants for 5e, not because I thought they didn't have good things to contribute, but because I never believed Mearls had the clout with the higher-ups to take anything useful from them to make 5e what it could have been in the long-run, and the progressive pogrom would ruin anything good that could have come of it.

And you, in particular, have been pretty vocal in your rationalization for their behavior. What changed?

Quote from: Fheredin on February 08, 2023, 05:58:00 PM
Bear in mind that most entertainers and entertainment companies are far more accustomed to the far left Twitterati causing corporations grief than the actual clientele. I'm not actually surprised by what Brink said because I am well aware that pandering left is a well tuned reflex. We all know he didn't actually believe what he said. He just has absolutely no idea what else to say. That said, a lie everyone can see through is still a lie.

It just goes to show that no one should associate with WotC anymore.

The thing is, are we the current WoTC clientele? At my LGS I only see people with pink or blue hair wearing D&D merch, running a table or buying books. I think that the majority of "the old guard" spends a lot less than the "twitterati" on new products, since most of us are mature enough to avoid the hype of a new book, or as we see more and more the anti-consumer practices of WoTc, we don't buy their product's at all. I'd say people that have been playing RPGs for a long time are malso ore likely to try new stuff and stick with it (or never let go of older stuff, like me and 3.5).


WoTC for sure has insight on their consumer demographics, and as they see older people not buying, they gonna go all out on the new consumers. Publicly saying that white people are unwanted is just the next step on what I believe is WotC main marketing strategy.

Quote from: ZeroZero on February 09, 2023, 12:11:46 PM

Quote from: Fheredin on February 08, 2023, 05:58:00 PM
Bear in mind that most entertainers and entertainment companies are far more accustomed to the far left Twitterati causing corporations grief than the actual clientele. I'm not actually surprised by what Brink said because I am well aware that pandering left is a well tuned reflex. We all know he didn't actually believe what he said. He just has absolutely no idea what else to say. That said, a lie everyone can see through is still a lie.

It just goes to show that no one should associate with WotC anymore.

The thing is, are we the current WoTC clientele? At my LGS I only see people with pink or blue hair wearing D&D merch, running a table or buying books. I think that the majority of "the old guard" spend a lot less than the "twitterati" on new products, since most of us are mature enough to avoid the hype of a new book, or as we see more and more the anti-consumer practices of WoTc, we don't buy their product's at all. I'd say people that have been playing RPGs for a long time are malso ore likely to try new stuff and stick with it (or never let go of older stuff, like me and 3.5).


WoTC for sure has insight on their consumer demographics, and as they see older people not buying, they gonna go all out on the new consumers. Publicly saying that white people are unwanted is just the next step on what I believe is WotC main marketing strategy.

Much like with twitter, this is an iceberg situation.

Any space where danger-hairs infest, they drive out anyone that isn't a danger-hair, either through coercion, or merely being there. The people who used to be on Twitter, and go to the game store, didn't cease to exist, they simply went elsewhere.

Old white guys don't game at stores anymore, because they're as welcome there as Jesse Jackson at a Klan BBQ. They play at home, or find a group online that aren't lunatics.

Old white guys are the RPG iceberg, with a tip of clowns showing above the water.

Quote from: jhkim on February 08, 2023, 03:16:41 PM
This is potentially getting far off from RPGs, which Pundit has said is a no-no for this forum. Keeping this on Wizards of the Coast, the relevance is about how apparently the D&D upper management is 100% white men.

It seems weird to me that Brinks has somehow spun there being 100% white male D&D management into posters suggesting that WotC is representative of the height of wokeness, and that what he says demonstrates what progressives are like.

I'd want to make clear that as a non-white person and as a progressive, I don't for a second think that WotC is on my side.  Just a few weeks ago, it seemed like there was unity that WotC is a soulless corporation - and everyone, woke and non-woke alike, rejected their OGL license nonsense. And now WotC is deliberately trying to drive a wedge into that.

Funny how being the height of wokeness involves 'cis' white guys saying
"I can't wait until all the people like me have left!" *stays put*

I think WoTC can definitely be both 'the height of wokeness' and a bunch of exploitative scumbags. I noticed Brink was trying to spin diversity hire *writers* - who are paid peanuts - as somehow indicative that WoTC was just about to replace all the cisgender straight white men like him in well paid senior positions with Diversity. Yeah right.
BTW John, Diversity does not mean you. A half Chinese female writer friend of mine sometimes gets a bit peeved that she and people like her do all the actual writing work while 'properly Diverse' POCs are put front & centre and given all the credit. Not that the Properly Diverse get actual power or (much) money, they are there to POC-wash the Corporate image.