Quote from: BoxCrayonTales on July 08, 2022, 11:11:22 AM
Here's what I would say if I ran my own game company: "My personal politics are none of your business. I just want your money and recognition of the effort I put into my product."

Sadly, for many people that would no longer be enough. Even I have reluctantly started considering the wisdom of not giving money to people who hate my beliefs and will actively work against them.  (Indeed, one of the reasons fans react so badly to finding out their favourite artists have politics different from their own is precisely this feeling of betrayal, of having had time and money "stolen" to promote something the fan hates.)

"Are the values we hold in common important enough to outweigh our conflict over the values we don't?" is a question that's going to trouble any personal, political or business relationship once it gets significant enough.

It's the eternal question of 'can you separate the art from the artist?'.

In the past, you kind of could, because most artists weren't strident about it. They didn't feel the need to act out performative virtue signaling for this or that sociopolitical agenda.

Nowadays, though, you will genuflect. You will kiss the ring. Or you will be smeared as a heretic and people will try to burn you to the ground, figuratively if not literally.

Quote from: Stephen Tannhauser on July 08, 2022, 11:27:33 AM

Quote from: BoxCrayonTales on July 08, 2022, 11:11:22 AM
Here's what I would say if I ran my own game company: "My personal politics are none of your business. I just want your money and recognition of the effort I put into my product."

Sadly, for many people that would no longer be enough. Even I have reluctantly started considering the wisdom of not giving money to people who hate my beliefs and will actively work against them.  (Indeed, one of the reasons fans react so badly to finding out their favourite artists have politics different from their own is precisely this feeling of betrayal, of having had time and money "stolen" to promote something the fan hates.)

"Are the values we hold in common important enough to outweigh our conflict over the values we don't?" is a question that's going to trouble any personal, political or business relationship once it gets significant enough.

Quote from: Ghostmaker on July 08, 2022, 11:31:14 AM
It's the eternal question of 'can you separate the art from the artist?'.

In the past, you kind of could, because most artists weren't strident about it. They didn't feel the need to act out performative virtue signaling for this or that sociopolitical agenda.

Nowadays, though, you will genuflect. You will kiss the ring. Or you will be smeared as a heretic and people will try to burn you to the ground, figuratively if not literally.

Yeah, it's this whole damned if you do damned if you don't thing. If you don't hold your audience's values, then they'll feel betrayed if they ever learn your personal politics. If you don't announce your politics and virtue signal, then people will burn you at the stake. It's impossible to win.

So let me revise my prior statement: "My personal politics are none of your damn business, but if you must know then I think both sides are equally stupid/evil/istaphobes. Happy? Now shut up and give me your money or fuck off."

Quote from: Ghostmaker on July 08, 2022, 11:31:14 AM
It's the eternal question of 'can you separate the art from the artist?'.

In the past, you kind of could, because most artists weren't strident about it. They didn't feel the need to act out performative virtue signaling for this or that sociopolitical agenda.
...

In the past they just used to STFU and not talk about their personal politics.

They understood that half of their audience (pick a half) paid their bills too.

Quote from: Cathode Ray on July 08, 2022, 06:28:28 AM
...
The entire company is in lockstep.  I wonder if this means people have to profess SJG's ideology before they can be employed.  That's discrimination.  If not, what do they do to the employees that SJG alienates?

In general - RPG companies only employ people that they or their employees know. The whole "rpg industry" is very incestuous. Outside of freelances that keep their mouths shut, it is the same everywhere.

WotC D&D only hires fellow travelers. Same with Baizuo etc..  It's just not that hard to sound someone out when you talk to them in casual conversation.

It's a kind of shadow discrimination that's very hard to actually prove... And all the major players do it.

Quote from: VisionStorm on July 08, 2022, 11:09:46 AM

Quote from: Dropbear on July 08, 2022, 10:22:33 AM

Quote from: VisionStorm on July 08, 2022, 09:54:16 AM

Quote from: S'mon on July 08, 2022, 06:21:58 AM

Quote from: Cathode Ray on July 08, 2022, 06:04:09 AM
Today's announcement from Steve Jackson Games is full-steam partisan/activist/pro-abortion.  I don't care what side you fall on: pro-abortion, or the side that's on the right side of history.  Right to privacy?  Keep your extremism private.

Official word from Steve Jackson, alienating the majority of people.
http://www.sjgames.com/ill/archive/July_08_2022/Roe_v_Wade

They states that they'll donate profits to help murder children.  (Link to the "charity" http://www.lilithfund.org )

Lilith fund?!  ROTFLMAO! They should have just called it the Moloch fund.

Seriously, when I saw that I was like "Jesus, fuck! Could you be a little less on the nose about it than naming your fund after a demon who steals and kills babies?"

And I don't even care about the unborn, but I'm also not on the other extreme lunatic "let's just murder actual babies while we're at it" side of this issue. Like WTF?

And when you go to their website, their About section is like 80% about affirming intersectional nonsense rather than actually saying what they do for women, cuz they can't, since that would go against their "gender-inclusive" stance.

Just curious. Where's this About section? Not seeing it...

It's at the Lilith Fund website, specific page here: https://www.lilithfund.org/portfolio/about/

Quote from: Battlemaster on July 08, 2022, 10:38:15 AM

Quote from: Chris24601 on July 08, 2022, 10:19:27 AM

Quote from: Battlemaster on July 08, 2022, 09:40:02 AM
So would your church consider NOT killing a gay person to be an intrinsically evil act? After all, 'duh buybull sez...! '

What does this have to do with Steve Jackson Games deciding to Woke virtue signal in a way that alienates at least half his potential customers?

The issue of abortion is divisive political one that one side considers government sanctioned murder of innocent children. Game companies need have nothing to do with the issue and yet Steve Jackson has chosen to insert his company into the issue in way that specifically says "by buying my products you will be supporting something half the country finds morally objectionable."

That is textbook Red company behavior and so is absolutely relevant to the discussions in this forum on how politics relates to gaming (which is what Reckall is getting wrong... it's not a no politics forum, it's no politics unrelated to gaming... Steve Jackson's decision to go political on the issue makes it a valid topic in discussing why it's a boneheaded move to alienate a huge swath of people who think abortion is murder and will no longer be buying his products as a result).

But in typical idiot Lefty fashion, you can't win that argument so you try to drag people off the topic into general politics hoping that Pundit will react as he should to off topic posts and then stand there feigning innocence. My only comment to your attempted derail is that I believe the following in total; https://www.vatican.va/archive/ENG0015/_INDEX.HTM

I also do not consider it an accident that your avatar is a Big Purple Troll.

.  Your kind want to force people to have babies against their will, and then force your fucking religion on people on every other issue eventually.


Well,  we're not going to let you.

If you want to keep on trying,  you'd better be ready for a fucking war, a real war.

None of that addresses what Chris actually said or has anything to do with this discussion, but it's just idle speculation on your part and kinda reaching.

Also, might wanna pipe down on openly declaring war on the side who has all the guns and knows how to use them, and acting like you already won this conflict when you probably won't if it comes to that.

Thanks! I think for some reason I was under the impression the original post was detailing the About section of SJG. I suppose I should be getting more caffeine into my system.

Quote from: Ghostmaker on July 08, 2022, 11:31:14 AM
It's the eternal question of 'can you separate the art from the artist?'.

In the past, you kind of could, because most artists weren't strident about it. They didn't feel the need to act out performative virtue signaling for this or that sociopolitical agenda.

Nowadays, though, you will genuflect. You will kiss the ring. Or you will be smeared as a heretic and people will try to burn you to the ground, figuratively if not literally.

Separating the art from the artist is a lot easier when the artist is dead, dearie. The longer he's been dead the easier it gets.

Classic Greek artists were pretty sexist, no one gets that upset anymore, except for the extreme woke as they've been dead for millennia.

Shakespeare?  Sexist and racist, but dead for centuries. More people find him objectionable.

Lovecraft? Dead a lifetime, so lots if people bitch about bis racism. But most let it go.

M. A. R. Barker? Dead for a decade. Mention him on tbp without spitting and your permabanned.

I was never into tekumel,  and tho I acknowledge his contributions to gaming , having tekumel out in 75, I could not buy or read his work after learning of 'Serpent's walk'.

Quote from: Stephen Tannhauser on July 08, 2022, 11:27:33 AM

Quote from: BoxCrayonTales on July 08, 2022, 11:11:22 AM
Here's what I would say if I ran my own game company: "My personal politics are none of your business. I just want your money and recognition of the effort I put into my product."

Sadly, for many people that would no longer be enough. Even I have reluctantly started considering the wisdom of not giving money to people who hate my beliefs and will actively work against them.  (Indeed, one of the reasons fans react so badly to finding out their favourite artists have politics different from their own is precisely this feeling of betrayal, of having had time and money "stolen" to promote something the fan hates.)

"Are the values we hold in common important enough to outweigh our conflict over the values we don't?" is a question that's going to trouble any personal, political or business relationship once it gets significant enough.

Quote from: Ghostmaker on July 08, 2022, 11:31:14 AM
It's the eternal question of 'can you separate the art from the artist?'.

In the past, you kind of could, because most artists weren't strident about it. They didn't feel the need to act out performative virtue signaling for this or that sociopolitical agenda.

Nowadays, though, you will genuflect. You will kiss the ring. Or you will be smeared as a heretic and people will try to burn you to the ground, figuratively if not literally.

I don't even care if artists are vocal about their politics or religious beliefs—specially if we're talking actual artists and not RPG designers, since there's a certain degree of expectation that art may have a message and that that message might be religious or political. But even with RPG designers I don't really care if they want to be vocal about certain stuff. I wouldn't even care on this instance, since I'm pro-choice and barely give a shit about the unborn, unless they're far enough in the pregnancy to practically be a full blown baby. So I should ostensibly be on their side of the issue, if they weren't outright pro-abortion "my body my choice, right up to the moment of conception (and anything less amounts to a theofascist takeover out to trample minority rights)" lunatics that are full of shit.

My issue is all the brown nosing going on and outright lies and false framing that are being used in order to push a political agenda, where anyone who doesn't agree or immediately fall in line with the party's decrees without question is branded a heretic and willful bad actor consciously out to hurt "diverse" people from marginalized communities of many genders and colours, thereby necessitating and justifying their ostracization and retaliatory action taken out against them. This stuff is beyond merely expressing a political opinion. SJ's own statement not only voices support for abortion, but paints a false narrative that frames the opposition as gun toting "theofascists" out to enact sweeping legal changes that will trample on the rights of minorities everywhere, when all that the Supreme Court actually did was take down an authoritarian decree that actually trampled on state rights, even if you don't like what those states wanted to do with those rights—which regardless of what you may think about this issue do not amount to enacting a theofascist state where minorities everywhere have to live in constant fear and be forced to pay tithes and all the superfluous extra shit that SJ added to his statement. And it certainly doesn't imply that the Supreme Court is overreaching and engaging on a "power grab', when they are literally relinquishing power to the states, you fucking retards!

If you're gonna argue against shit or in favor of shit at least have the decency to talk about shit that is actually going on rather than framing your own version of reality and acting like your position is the only decent or possibly correct position, and anyone who doesn't agree can only possibly be an evil dictator and nothing else, when your position isn't even based on reality.

Quote from: Ghostmaker on July 08, 2022, 11:31:14 AM
It's the eternal question of 'can you separate the art from the artist?'.

Well, yes. Just consider that we know nothing about the guy who designed the Sphinx or the Parthenon. How can we admire these works when we have no clue if he beat his wife or if he was a first wave feminist?

We do know that many Renaissance artists were very bad people. Leonardo da Vinci was very possibly a closeted homosexual and a borderline pedophile (according to Freud, he never "practiced" - but Freud himself was the first that said how you can't professionally judge a person that you never met). Bad judgements can be given to a lot of musicians, both classical and modern.

Thomas Malory was accused of extortion, kidnapping, rape and "violent robberies rising over 100". This is not hearsay: there are documents from the era about these accusations (along with prison time that he cut short by possibly bribing his guardians). So, should we ditch "Le Morte d'Arthur"?

The idea that the artist cannot be separated from the art started, IMHO, with Harry Potter. We implicitly accept the past because... dunno, it is past. Either that, or no more trips to see the Sphinx until we know more.

Well, at least he made it easy for me with regard to still supporting his products

It's one thing for an artist to have different politics. I don't agree with everyone, but that's okay. We live in a society.

If you can't disagree with someone in this world, then you're probably socipathic.

It is another thing when sociopathic people demand that you must agree (or else you're a Nazi).
To me, that is also sociopathic behavior... the same inability to disagree in a civilized way.

That's the problem. People who are beyond reason.

I can support the art as separate from the artist until the artist rubs my nose in it.  Then I can't anymore.  Because when I try, instead of enjoying the art, all I can think about is, "This was made by that SOB that rubbed my nose in it." 

Separating the art from the artist is a two way street, and I don't see much work being done going down the opposite lane.

I can't in good conscience support SJG even if I do support abortion rights for women and girls, because the progressives believe that "women and girls" is just an idea in men's heads so it's okay to let dangerous men enter spaces previously reserved for women and girls.

Quote from: Steven Mitchell on July 08, 2022, 01:46:25 PM
I can support the art as separate from the artist until the artist rubs my nose in it.  Then I can't anymore.  Because when I try, instead of enjoying the art, all I can think about is, "This was made by that SOB that rubbed my nose in it." 

Separating the art from the artist is a two way street, and I don't see much work being done going down the opposite lane.

^ This right here.  Well said!

Forgiving an artist for believing things I think reprehensible is one thing, as is  separating my opinion of his art from my opinion of what I know of him personally. Wagner was a terrible anti-Semite but I see nothing wrong with loving the music of the Ring Cycle, which I do.

Knowing that the artist (or the holder of the artist's copyright, to broaden conditions) is going to take the money I give him and put it into reprehensible causes here, now, today is a much harder bar to overcome. SJG might still have been able to get my money if all Jackson had done was loudly tout his personal opinions. When he openly admitted part of his earnings would go directly to supporting evil? Sorry, at that point he made me (to use Catholic terminology) formally cooperative with that evil if I paid him money for his products while knowing that.

It can also be affected by knowing the artist's conscious intentions of the art. I can enjoy Tekumel because, loathsome as M.A.R. Barker's politics were, Tekumel specifically did nothing to advance them. I can't support Philip Pullman because, despite actually finding his anti-Christian politics more understandable in their own right, I know from his own explicit admission that "His Dark Materials" was consciously written to be the "anti-Narnia" and to try countering Christian ideals, images and themes in fantasy. That puts Pullman out of the "live and let live" box and squarely into the "I will not pay for the rope the seller wants to use to hang me" box.

Hey, Reckall.  I'm all for playing by the rules, but why admonish me but let our resident purple troll "Battlemaster", whose ramblings make me look benign, get three passes?