Curious, why do you say ESG the heart of this?

Quote from: Chainsaw on January 10, 2023, 11:40:07 AM
Curious, why do you say ESG the heart of this?

Crush the competition by declaring them *phobes and *ists

Quote from: Chainsaw on January 10, 2023, 11:40:07 AM
Curious, why do you say ESG the heart of this?

Because the ESG pours money into the corporation as long as they push the woke agenda, and we're talking about billions.

In the case of big bussinesses it's not
Get woke go broke

It's the other way around:
Go broke, Get woke

Because then the ESG pours and unending stream of money into them.

Quote from: THE_Leopold on January 10, 2023, 11:42:57 AM

Quote from: Chainsaw on January 10, 2023, 11:40:07 AM
Curious, why do you say ESG the heart of this?

Crush the competition by declaring them *phobes and *ists

I think the heart of it is re-establishing 100% dominance over the brand for monetization purposes, especially in the digital world. The political angle you mention is a just a perk, imo.

Quote from: GeekyBugle on January 10, 2023, 11:50:23 AM

Quote from: Chainsaw on January 10, 2023, 11:40:07 AM
Curious, why do you say ESG the heart of this?

Because the ESG pours money into the corporation as long as they push the woke agenda, and we're talking about billions.

In the case of big bussinesses it's not
Get woke go broke

It's the other way around:
Go broke, Get woke

Because then the ESG pours and unending stream of money into them.

Pretty much. The commentary in the leaked doc mentioned the need to shut down problematic content in multiple places. Playing morality police to cancel opposing voices is clearly a part of the agenda... whether it's primary or secondary to wringing money out of past content creators is fairly irrelevant because clearly the OGL1.1 approaches it as a case of "why not both?"

Quote from: Chainsaw on January 10, 2023, 11:40:07 AM
Curious, why do you say ESG the heart of this?

ESG is a metric, if not the primary metric, for stock value these days. I won't comment on that any further because I'm not an economics guy.

Look back at what pushed WOTC to dirty deal with the Hickmans two years ago. They were pushed by the mentally ill left to get rid of certain "problematic" elements in the game, and they tried to break the deal with the Hickmans. That didn't end well.

Rather than have their brand sullied by people who are not mental, WOTC needs to get its property until its total control. It keeps 3PPs in business, but their material is completely subject to WOTC's approval.  Read that OGL 1.1 with this in mind, and it makes perfect sense.

Lose some valuable customers? Hey, there's always more customers... and the prices of the books and other material will go up because the Wokies will pay it in order to keep a "good thing" going.

Now let me throw something else in: YT is overrun with lawyers giving their opinions as to whether or not the 1.0a can be revoked. That's just that: opinions. All attorneys have opinions until a judge rules.

Prediction (and I hope I'm wrong): at least Paizo, and probably other larger 3PP like FGG will sign onto 1.1. They'll have to do it.

Quote from: Semaj Khan on January 10, 2023, 12:18:50 PM
Prediction (and I hope I'm wrong): at least Paizo, and probably other larger 3PP like FGG will sign onto 1.1. They'll have to do it.

Without some special provisions I'm not sure they can afford to sign on and give away such a huge percentage of their gross.

Quote from: Semaj Khan on January 10, 2023, 12:18:50 PM

Quote from: Chainsaw on January 10, 2023, 11:40:07 AM
Curious, why do you say ESG the heart of this?

ESG is a metric, if not the primary metric, for stock value these days. I won't comment on that any further because I'm not an economics guy.

I haved advised institutional investors (mutual funds, pension funds, hedge funds, etc) via my job on the trading floor of a major investment bank for 20 years. In my experience, it's barely a top ten consideration. YMMV.

Quote from: Ruprecht on January 10, 2023, 12:23:22 PM

Quote from: Semaj Khan on January 10, 2023, 12:18:50 PM
Prediction (and I hope I'm wrong): at least Paizo, and probably other larger 3PP like FGG will sign onto 1.1. They'll have to do it.

Without some special provisions I'm not sure they can afford to sign on and give away such a huge percentage of their gross.

Who knows? I'm not privvy to anything going on up there, but it may be a case of "half a loaf." Bill Webb has been ass deep in the OGL since the beginning. Can he walk away now?

Can Paizo?

I dunno. We'll see.

So far I haven't heard of a single third-party indicating they'll be signing onto the OGL1.1. Paizo's said the OGL for PF2e was a formality (i.e. they're not going to get roped into the 1.1 travesty). Frog God and Kobold Press have indicated similarly.

So, what happens when you release a predatory license intended to capture all third-party content to enrich yourself and no one steps into the trap?

All that goodwill nuked, all that potential free supporting content that would have encouraged spending on their core products gone, with nothing to even show for it.

I mean, we're still waiting on Critical Role I guess, but at this point it looks like damnably near every major third party creator is saying "sayonara" to the OGL and support for D&D.

Even Kickstarter only engaged to extent that they were seeking better terms for those who might use the OGL1.1, not that they'd play policeman looking for enough similarities in Non-OGL Kickstarters to SRD material to report them to Hasbro/WotC.

Similarly, unless Hasbro buys it outright, I don't see OneBookShelf/DTRPG wanting to play IP policeman for WotC on whether all the Non-OGL producers are sufficiently different from WotC's IP (if Hasbro bought them then every non-D&D product would need to find a new distribution company anyway).

Basically, what we're seeing right now is a reverse bandwagon effect, as more people abandon D&D proper the pressure mounts for others to do the same. At the rate things are moving by the time WotC actually officially releases the new OGL1.1 there might not be any companies left for them to try and extort with it.

ETA: This is also why I have argued that this whole 1.1 debacle was organized by a bunch of first stage thinkers. A huge part of 5e's appeal was the huge body of generally superior 3rd party content that non-the-less required WotC's core products to function. If the 3rd parties abandon D&D entirely they'll have only their in house designers and developers to produce content and they've already demonstrated they don't have the capability to keep the sort of schedule they'd need to match what the third parties have been providing them... and they're going to be in competition instead of working in unison with companies that produce better quality content... and they didn't see even the prospect of that coming.

Quote from: Chainsaw on January 10, 2023, 12:32:13 PM

Quote from: Semaj Khan on January 10, 2023, 12:18:50 PM

Quote from: Chainsaw on January 10, 2023, 11:40:07 AM
Curious, why do you say ESG the heart of this?

ESG is a metric, if not the primary metric, for stock value these days. I won't comment on that any further because I'm not an economics guy.

I haved advised institutional investors (mutual funds, pension funds, hedge funds, etc) via my job on the trading floor of a major investment bank for 20 years. In my experience, it's barely a top ten consideration. YMMV.

I hope you're correct and I'm wrong.

Given WOTCs recent past actions, I tend to think I am right... or at least it's about public perception if not outright stock value.

Quote from: Semaj Khan on January 10, 2023, 12:18:50 PM
Prediction (and I hope I'm wrong): at least Paizo, and probably other larger 3PP like FGG will sign onto 1.1. They'll have to do it.

Nope. Paizo and the other big 3pp who have way too much invested in the old OGL will cut backroom contracts that won't use the OGL at all. The more I read the leaked OGL, the more I agree that it's a poison pill. Read the section about Other Products. WotC straight up says they will take your content and use it however they damn well please, without paying you a red cent. There is no longer any "Product Identity" to secure your IP ; it's Their Content and Your Content, and all of Your Content becomes part of the upstream license.

Here's the other thing... Licensed Content only applies to the SRDv5.1.
The entire 3.5 SRD is now classified as Unlicensed Content, meaning Paizo would NEED to strike a custom agreement if they want to continue using the content and selling old books.

The entire thing is designed to put the smaller companies under their thumb until they "level up" to Expert Tier and pay WotC enough royalties to earn a custom contract. Calling this an "Open Gaming" license is a farce. It's highly restrictive and designed to establish a boy's club where only those loyal to WotC can get deals that don't fuck them sideways.

Quote from: Chris24601 on January 10, 2023, 12:33:34 PM
ETA: This is also why I have argued that this whole 1.1 debacle was organized by a bunch of first stage thinkers. A huge part of 5e's appeal was the huge body of generally superior 3rd party content that non-the-less required WotC's core products to function. If the 3rd parties abandon D&D entirely they'll have only their in house designers and developers to produce content and they've already demonstrated they don't have the capability to keep the sort of schedule they'd need to match what the third parties have been providing them... and they're going to be in competition instead of working in unison with companies that produce better quality content... and they didn't see even the prospect of that coming.

No kidding.  I only stuck with 5E as long as I did because of third party content.  And that was a GM building and running my own campaign settings for the game.  Without third party, I suspect I would have run a couple of concurrent campaigns of about 18 months, and then moved on to something else. 

Quote from: Semaj Khan on January 10, 2023, 12:34:34 PM

Quote from: Chainsaw on January 10, 2023, 12:32:13 PM

Quote from: Semaj Khan on January 10, 2023, 12:18:50 PM

Quote from: Chainsaw on January 10, 2023, 11:40:07 AM
Curious, why do you say ESG the heart of this?

ESG is a metric, if not the primary metric, for stock value these days. I won't comment on that any further because I'm not an economics guy.

I haved advised institutional investors (mutual funds, pension funds, hedge funds, etc) via my job on the trading floor of a major investment bank for 20 years. In my experience, it's barely a top ten consideration. YMMV.

I hope you're correct and I'm wrong.

Given WOTCs recent past actions, I tend to think I am right... or at least it's about public perception if not outright stock value.

He is correct.

So many around here read the earnings, saw tons of cash on hand, massive stock buybacks, and continued dividend growth/support, and still thought Hasbro was a company in trouble. They were wrong.

ESG does not move the needle. None of this OGL nonsense has moved the needle. Who Hasbro has sitting inside meeting rooms with fund managers, and what they are saying about the next 18 months is moving the needle. Selling off that entertainment company they purchased would move the needle. Would they like to have a bigger slice of ESG funds? Sure, they want to be in as many funds as possible. And yes, Vanguard is typically a top two institutional owner, but ESG funds are not flagship products yet, and likely won't be.

Long-term is a different story. If Hasbro makes another 4e mistake, and let's face it, they are on that path right now, that changes things. This is a hobby, and if it fails to maintain its momentum and attract new blood, it will fall apart for them. Investing in 300 developers for a virtual table top only makes sense if the hobby continues to grow at the present rate.

The more who divorce themselves from the OGL, even if Hasbro does a complete 180 on this, the better off this hobby will be. D&D was best when it was a door to the hobby, not the entire room.

I do not see WotC as being able to revoke OGL 1.0a.

Quote9. Updating the License: Wizards or its designated Agents may publish updated
versions of this License. You may use any authorized version of this License to
copy, modify and distribute any Open Game Content originally distributed under
any version of this License.

I don't see anyone at all using OGL 1.1 except
Only if they release a 6th edition D&D (One D&D) SRD licensed under OGL 1.1
Which in effect would kill most, if not all, 3rd party content for the new D&D.