I feel bad for the people who've gotten dragged by the SJ crowd but I'm hoping that when the dust settles, a whole lot of the SJWs just fuck right off into the sunset and never come back to RPGs or wargaming ever again.

You just can't trust the sjws.  If your the enemy, then all tactics are good tactics no matter how deceitful it is.  Their saying is literally, "There is no bad tactics.  Just bad targets."

Quote from: SHARK;1084424Hey Jeff! I read somewhere in the news that such laws and codes have already been established in America. As I recall, in New York and maybe other states, you can be arrested and fined, as well as fired and evicted if you refer to Trans what the fuck by what they consider to be an improper pronoun. So, evidently it's already here, with other cities and states considering adopting similar laws to "protect" the trans people.

I have not seen anything like this, and the U.S. has stronger free speech protections than Canada. Without any sort of reference, I don't consider this evident.

New York does now have employment protection for transgender people - in the sense that an employer cannot fire an employee solely for being transgender, just as they cannot fire them just for being white, or just for being Catholic. That's very different than your claim, though. Free speech protects that you can use offensive language without being arrested or fined - but you can indeed be fired or evicted for it, because most employment is at will. If I call my boss a freak or a deviant, then they can fire me for it.

Quote from: wmarshal;1084412... based on Frog God's statement after the event acknowledging Bill had done something wrong.

wmarshal, please bear with me - I'm not actually responding to you per se, but have keyed in on the bit quoted above to get on my soapbox about a larger trend I've seen. Feel free to ignore me as you see fit.

This (the quoted portion) appears to be how most people interpreted that statement from FFG, but that's a shaky interpretation at best. The "admission of guilt" part of their statements reads,

Quotemy understanding based on my investigation was that Bill Webb took an action and engaged in speech that could be construed as a sexual advance or as gender-dismissive

(emphasis mine)

"Could be construed as" does not equal "admits to having done so". It means, at absolute best, that Matt Finch, the writer of the statement (who spends a great deal of the actual written response stating how vague the whole situation is) can see how some action or speech might be taken a certain way. That's it. It's a far, far cry from an actual admission of wrongdoing.

Far too many people, if they've bothered reading that statement at all, have latched onto that bit and said, "oh, well, if it can be taken that way, then it must have been that way and they're admitting it"! I'm willing to bet dollars to pesos that most people didn't bother with actually reading the statement. They've instead taken it for granted that "reliable sources" have read the statement and because they say there was an unequivocal admission of guilt, then there must be one.

And lest anyone come along and conclude that my little rant here is a defense of Bill Webb. It's not. I don't know the guy and I wasn't there. He could be guilty as sin for all I know. All I'm pointing out is that there's an awful lot of people who repeat with conviction that there's been some admission of guilt. After several days of obsessing over digging into the data at hand on this like some sick voyeur (it's like not being able to look away when you damn well know you should), I do not share that conclusion.

Matt Finch stating that there's grounds for an apology to be issued is also not an admission of guilt. I myself, being a grown adult of reasonably sound mind, will often apologize not for something I've done nor the intent with which I've done it, but for how someone else might have received a thing I've done or said. It's called having empathy for the other  person's perspective. It's acknowledging that sometime misunderstandings happen, and that I'll try to be better next time.

That's what I took away from reading FGG's statement.

I guess to close this out I'll say I'm sorry to all of you in general if this is ground already well tread. I chose not to pay the slightest attention to the situation in 2017, and given the involvement of SJG now, I decided to look into it now - with some small amount of regret (I feel like the whole thing makes me dirty somehow).

Quote from: jhkim;1084431I have not seen anything like this, and the U.S. has stronger free speech protections than Canada. Without any sort of reference, I don't consider this evident.

I believe they're referring to California's SB-219.

https://leginfo.legislature.ca.gov/faces/billNavClient.xhtml?bill_id=201720180SB219

QuoteAmong other things, the bill would make it unlawful, except as specified, for any long-term care facility to take specified actions wholly or partially on the basis of a person's actual or perceived sexual orientation, gender identity, gender expression, or human immunodeficiency virus (HIV) status, including, among others, willfully and repeatedly failing to use a resident's preferred name or pronouns after being clearly informed of the preferred name or pronouns, or denying admission to a long-term care facility, transferring or refusing to transfer a resident within a facility or to another facility, or discharging or evicting a resident from a facility.

Quote from: Ratman_tf;1084433I believe they're referring to California's SB-219.

https://leginfo.legislature.ca.gov/faces/billNavClient.xhtml?bill_id=201720180SB219

Greetings!

Exactly, Ratman. I read of something similar about that, as well as employees being fired, and tenants in apartments being evicted--if they didn't use the right pronoun prefered by the trans.

It's fucking BS.

And, Jhkim, I don't have the link to the story I read about happening in New York. It's all just a trainload of more special rights for trans, and punishing normal people. I don't think that's right. You can look up whatever they have going on in New York and California. It's there, and it's happening. More special rights and coddling for mentally ill people, and punishing normal people that don't buy into their mental delusion and illness.

Semper Fidelis,

SHARK

Quote from: Ratman_tf;1084433I believe they're referring to California's SB-219.

https://leginfo.legislature.ca.gov/faces/billNavClient.xhtml?bill_id=201720180SB219

That bill is specifically about regulating how an employee treats someone who is their *patient* in a long-term senior care facility. That's very different than a general free-speech case.

I will absolutely fight for the right of a bigot to be able to call someone a n***er or a f***ot or similar on the street. That's their free speech right. If someone is a *patient* of a bigot, though, that's a different situation - especially if they're a senior citizen who probably has limited ability to change doctors or facilities. I'm OK with some regulation of on-the-job treatment of patients.

Quote from: SHARK;1084436Exactly, Ratman. I read of something similar about that, as well as employees being fired, and tenants in apartments being evicted--if they didn't use the right pronoun prefered by the trans.

It sounds like what you're seeking is special rights for bigots to be able to say whatever they like and not get fired. I don't support that. If I call my boss a f***ot, then I can expect to get fired. Likewise, if I persistently call my male boss "she", then similarly, I can expect to get fired. That's on-the-job behavior that I control. Being able to fire me isn't some special right for trans people - it's a right that bosses generally have. If I insult or am rude to a conservative boss, they could fire me too.

Quote from: thedungeondelver;1084316Nick Reikeita just dropped the news:

Beard, Harris, Bullock & Hughes of Texas are suing B.J. Hensley, Stacey Dellaforino, Jessica Price and Christopher Helton on behalf of Frog God Games.

Steve Jackson games are 100% behind FGG.

Nick delivered a message on behalf of BHB&H:  "We will be in touch."

Wow things just got real.

Quote from: jhkim;1084439That bill is specifically about regulating how an employee treats someone who is their *patient* in a long-term senior care facility. That's very different than a general free-speech case.

I will absolutely fight for the right of a bigot to be able to call someone a n***er or a f***ot or similar on the street. That's their free speech right. If someone is a *patient* of a bigot, though, that's a different situation - especially if they're a senior citizen who probably has limited ability to change doctors or facilities. I'm OK with some regulation of on-the-job treatment of patients.

In this case, it's a criminal offense. I'm all for employers being able to set reasonable expectations on employees, and being able to fire them for unacceptable behavior. But this isn't about the employer, this is about the government stepping in an making it a criminal case. (If I am reading the bill correctly)

Quote from: Antiquation!;1084381TBP put up a thread about the potential lawsuit.

https://forum.rpg.net/index.php?threads/frog-god-games-threatens-to-sue-bill-webbs-victim-and-others-read-redtext-in-post-13-before-replying-suit-not-yet-actually-filed.844987/

What's interesting is that everyone there seems to have a very dramatic opinion about it, while no one seems to have actually watched the video in question because it's "too toxic." Nobody has even mentioned the possibility that Bill Webb did not harass the alleged victim at all, it's all cries of "legally silencing the victim" without even knowing the details of what they're talking about (sort of like in the SJG thread).

They are essentially clapping their hands over their ears and screaming. How embarrassing.

I'd love to see FGG sue rpg.net out of existence for their support of this nonsense.

Quote from: goblinslayer;1084442I'd love to see FGG sue rpg.net out of existence for their support of this nonsense.

I'd say that's nearly impossible but I've heard rumors that Anime News Network could be looking down the barrel of a lawsuit with the Mignogna case, too, so hope springs eternal.

Quote from: jhkim;1084439It sounds like what you're seeking is special rights for bigots to be able to say whatever they like and not get fired. I don't support that. If I call my boss a f***ot, then I can expect to get fired. Likewise, if I persistently call my male boss "she", then similarly, I can expect to get fired.

Calling a woman a woman is not bigotry. It's a statement of fact. Trans ideology requiring mandated pronouns is an attack on reality that goes beyond previous Progressive causes. It's very like requiring people to say that the Sun goes round the Earth.

Can we split off the Pronouns thread on its own and focus on the boom which is about to be lowered upon Price et al?

Quote from: thedungeondelver;1084447Can we split off the Pronouns thread on its own and focus on the boom which is about to be lowered upon Price et al?

First, it's so very unsettling to see how much fame Jessica Price has amassed for herself following her ArenaNet shenanigans in particular. I didn't know who this Stacy person was coming into this thread, but JP...sadly yes.

Second, I haven't actually heard of something being filed in an actual court. Just some innuendo about it "coming". But most lawyers I know are very tight lipped about this kind of thing. Has there actually been some kind of legal action or is this all just a bunch of huffing and puffing? I did watch the youtube vid, but that didn't strike me as very reliable as a source.

Quote from: jhkim;1084439That bill is specifically about regulating how an employee treats someone who is their *patient* in a long-term senior care facility. That's very different than a general free-speech case.

I will absolutely fight for the right of a bigot to be able to call someone a n***er or a f***ot or similar on the street. That's their free speech right. If someone is a *patient* of a bigot, though, that's a different situation - especially if they're a senior citizen who probably has limited ability to change doctors or facilities. I'm OK with some regulation of on-the-job treatment of patients.



It sounds like what you're seeking is special rights for bigots to be able to say whatever they like and not get fired. I don't support that. If I call my boss a f***ot, then I can expect to get fired. Likewise, if I persistently call my male boss "she", then similarly, I can expect to get fired. That's on-the-job behavior that I control. Being able to fire me isn't some special right for trans people - it's a right that bosses generally have. If I insult or am rude to a conservative boss, they could fire me too.

Greetings!

No, Jhkim. I'm not seeking special rights for anyone. That includes any kinds of regulations or laws forcing normal people to participate in mentally ill people's delusions. Noone should be penalized in any way, because they didn't use some "prefered pronoun."

The whole ramping up and codification of speech codes, "hate speech" "Speech is violence" and all the other BS that SJW's love to circle-jerk themselves with is the problem. The constant intrusion of free speech so that SJW's can live in Happy Barneyland. And no, directly insulting your boss by what normal people hold isn't the issue. It is the constant wormy interpretation of whiny SJW's that is corrosive to our society. Inventing new words, and inventing new ways for someone, anyone, everywhere to always somehow be offended. And, of course, with the constant moving goal-posts of SJW's and their twisted definition of words and language usage, the definition is always growing. Then, well, if someone is offended, that means someone has to be fired, fined, or imprisoned, and or otherwise have their careers ruined. It's all part of the same float of horse shit that SJW's normally wallow in, Jhkim.

So, I don't think that new laws and new regulations and new policies need to be made for the benefit of SJW's, trans, and so on. Anyone really. Existing laws are fine. Not using some stupid pronoun isn't a crime--and shouldn't be. Noone should be punished in any way because they didn't use someone's "preferred pronoun." That's just fucking stupid. Being called by a specific pronoun--or not--is not a a special right. No one gives a fuck about someone's "preferred pronoun" except in circles of snivelling, pearl-clutching SJW's.

Semper Fidelis,

SHARK