Quote from: S'mon;1083827I think most of us here are just soft left liberals who didn't change our views. If we were soft left in 1996, we're hard right now.

I can definitely see that. As a 90's teen I always held views that were, for the time left-leaning, and really never felt like I've shifted my views that much (maybe a little here and there on a case by case basis, but not really overall). But according to the NPC's at TBP I'm far alt-right. For my part I tend to think they're a mix of the certifiably insane and people too young to know better. So, whatever.

Quote from: Steven Mitchell;1083837It's political everywhere.  People are simply more honest about that fact here.

It's identity politics everywhere online it seems. I'd like to think that, IRL, the majority of us don't introduce ourselves starting with ideology. In the forums, though, the label seems to come first, and this site is certainly no different. Skipping the most obvious bitch-threads is the only way to have a discussion about everyone's common interest, gaming. The difference between this site and TBP, to me, is that it's pretty easy to ID the blowhard rants here. All you need do is read the thread title, and you know what to skip. TBP's agenda's are a bit more subtle. For instance, I know to skip the "De-colonizing D&D" thread on TBP, just as I know to ignore anything with "SJW" in the title here. You offer a competing view, you catch shit. As far as whether it's more "honest" here, I would only offer that "honesty" is too often used as a rationale for relentless douche-baggery, because being a douche evidently makes some folks happy. I don't believe most of us are that douchey IRL. But you wouldn't know that, based only on what we see posted here (or in TBP, for that matter). Don't get me wrong--I'm guilty of it, too, more than once. But some folks seem only to engage with the e-world in one way, all the time. I don't know about everyone else, but, at this point, the constant, singular drumbeat of the same ol' shit has got me fatigued. When it comes to the game, I'll run with almost anyone. Because life's too short to be so angry all the time.

One interesting thing that I thought would be good to discuss is this little gem:

QuoteIt seems profoundly odd to me that, "Hey, let's not condone and support the harassment and assault of women," is considered controversial.

Is there anyone here that condones and supports the harassment and assault of women?

I think the main problem is the missing step in the causation chain that goes from:

Step 1: Boycott SJGs

Step 2: To be determined

Step 3: No more harassment and assault of women

Any thoughts?

Quote from: Shasarak;1083883Is there anyone here that condones and supports the harassment and assault of women?

No, but TBP has non-reality-based definitions of "harassment"  & "assault"

...and "women"

Quote from: Shasarak;1083883One interesting thing that I thought would be good to discuss is this little gem:



Is there anyone here that condones and supports the harassment and assault of women?

I think the main problem is the missing step in the causation chain that goes from:

Step 1: Boycott SJGs

Step 2: To be determined

Step 3: No more harassment and assault of women

Any thoughts?

Step 2 is: Slander SJG constantly on social media.

Quote from: cranebump;1083878It's identity politics everywhere online it seems. I'd like to think that, IRL, the majority of us don't introduce ourselves starting with ideology. In the forums, though, the label seems to come first, and this site is certainly no different. Skipping the most obvious bitch-threads is the only way to have a discussion about everyone's common interest, gaming. The difference between this site and TBP, to me, is that it's pretty easy to ID the blowhard rants here. All you need do is read the thread title, and you know what to skip. TBP's agenda's are a bit more subtle. For instance, I know to skip the "De-colonizing D&D" thread on TBP, just as I know to ignore anything with "SJW" in the title here. You offer a competing view, you catch shit. As far as whether it's more "honest" here, I would only offer that "honesty" is too often used as a rationale for relentless douche-baggery, because being a douche evidently makes some folks happy. I don't believe most of us are that douchey IRL. But you wouldn't know that, based only on what we see posted here (or in TBP, for that matter). Don't get me wrong--I'm guilty of it, too, more than once. But some folks seem only to engage with the e-world in one way, all the time. I don't know about everyone else, but, at this point, the constant, singular drumbeat of the same ol' shit has got me fatigued. When it comes to the game, I'll run with almost anyone. Because life's too short to be so angry all the time.

That's true.  My point about the honesty is that the stuff lurks everywhere.  Otherwise, you wouldn't need to decide which threads you want to visit by title.  I've avoided plenty of discussions here for the simple reason that I tend to mimic the tone as I find it, and some of the discussions, I don't want that tone associated with anything I post.  But I also don't care to post at places that pretend they moderate out the politics, but allow a relentless, unchallenged drumbeat implying I'm a Nazi.  Manners may be pretend politeness, but there's a point where the people faking it have to be called out or shunned, lest the whole thing collapse on itself.

Quote from: thedungeondelver;1083886Step 2 is: Slander SJG constantly on social media.

Ha yeah, I would have rolled that in to Step 1.

Quote from: Shasarak;1083896Ha yeah, I would have rolled that in to Step 1.

You can definitely make a case for it, but I figured they would come in "high" first, you know, appear righteous and teary-eyed and ready to Stand Up For Virtue, and then if the opponent resists, doesn't genuflect or apologize, then out comes the slander (again, see the case of Vic Mignogna).  But yeah it could go hand in glove with step 1.

Quote from: thedungeondelver;1083869...I think SJG is getting ready to sue...

Wow, do I hope you're right.  All this crap of internet-torches-and-pitchforks needs to have some consequences for the mob instigators.  They were finally dumb enough to take a swing at somebody with enough money for lawyers and who has actually beaten the federal government.  I may have to buy some Munchkin or GURPS stuff just on general principle now.

Quote from: S'mon;1083885No, but TBP has non-reality-based definitions of "harassment"  & "assault"

...and "women"

and "discussion"

Quote from: Almost_Useless;1083899Wow, do I hope you're right.  All this crap of internet-torches-and-pitchforks needs to have some consequences for the mob instigators.  They were finally dumb enough to take a swing at somebody with enough money for lawyers and who has actually beaten the federal government.  I may have to buy some Munchkin or GURPS stuff just on general principle now.

And honestly, it's time.  It's past time.  I can only think of a few cases where egregious behavior like this has faced real, true consequences (Melissa Click and the woman involved in getting a guy fired over his "dongles" joke at a developer's convention, and perhaps the Chick-fil-A guy).  Honestly the sooner, the messier, and the louder these people get shut up and shut down and shown that fake virtue signaling has consequences, the better to stanch this constant flood of bile from them that is ruining various hobbies and vocations.  If it could happen to a higher profile individual (a Zoe Quinn or Anita Sarkeesian) that'd be better, but for our little corner of the world I'll settle for Jessica Price or Stacey Dellaforino having to put their money where their mouth is.  They wanna talk the talk?  Then they'd best walk the walk.  They're entitled to their opinions, but they're not entitled to made-up facts that they then spread in public in an attempt to ruin, deplatform, and otherwise trash individuals or businesses.

Steve Jackson Games has successfully squared off against the Secret Service and FBI.  If they're the ones filing the suit, woe to those who have pissed them off.  Doubly so since Ty Beard is on the case.

Quote from: thedungeondelver;1083869So what this has to do with Steve Jackson Games, and this situation is: I think SJG is getting ready to sue Jessica Price and associated individuals and I cannot fucking wait for the shoe to drop.

Here's last night's stream:

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=mzP7TdTZHq8

Skip up to 1:48:51

Interesting... But the thing I don't get is that at 1:50:15 he says "this has been going on a much longer time..."
Isn't Stacy's problem with SJ Games a recent development? The earliest tweet I can see is on 13 April. That's 6 days ago.

Quote from: Aglondir;1083912Interesting... But the thing I don't get is that at 1:50:15 he says "this has been going on a much longer time..."
Isn't Stacy's problem with SJ Games a recent development? The earliest tweet I can see is on 13 April. That's 6 days ago.

Maybe he was referencing the fact that she has been doing this for quite a while, even if SJ Games just became a target a week ago?

Quote from: Aglondir;1083912Interesting... But the thing I don't get is that at 1:50:15 he says "this has been going on a much longer time..."
Isn't Stacy's problem with SJ Games a recent development? The earliest tweet I can see is on 13 April. That's 6 days ago.

Yeah...yeah that's right they did.  Huh.

Well, part of the Mignogna suit involves tortious interference (that is, starting a whisper campaign to try and get people booted out of work or conventions or whatever, basically interfering with a tort, a contract)...so I wonder if the length of time has to do with a behind closed doors attempt, with Stacy keeping her mouth shut until the 13th or so.  Y'know?  Note I'm not saying that's what happened, just speculating.

That's all this is on my part: speculation.

The attacks on Frog God Games have been going on for quite a while.  The youtube guy said they were waiting for a certain event to take place in the next few days.  If I had to guess, they're probably expecting someone to try to get them (SJ Games) kicked from an upcoming convention to show a provable loss of income.