Gaffer:
Maybe this pamphlet isn't the right way to go about it or maybe some of us aren't comfortable with its recommendations.
I'm not "comfortable" with the authoritarian principles on the side that is presenting these 'recommendations'.
People are already being banned from conventions because their politics "hurt other people's feelings". If this invades gaming cons (and it is) then the authoritarians will be in charge of what you and aren't allowed to game about.
Redsun Rising:
Perhaps the ethics presented make you uncomfortable - the question you must ask yourself is, "Why?"
I take umbrage with constraints to and enforced requirements on my behavior and speech outside the normal constraints and requirements of civilized society.
quote:
You do, however, live in a world with consequences.
And this is the rub. The authoritarian side that hounds your workplace, your personal life, and has caused deaths, all because your politics, your 'purity' to the cause, or some other arbitrary measurement is lacking.
Those are the tools on the side that front these sorts of "recommendations".
quote:
This work acknowledges that. It removes blinders, and is uncomfortable on purpose. It stings you, challenges you to notice things you would rather not, dares you to elevate your morals.
We clearly read different pdfs. The one I read did none of that. It trend over tired ground that adults who understand how to communicate long ago learned to walk.
quote:
That is all. I do not know if this helped, but hopefully someone will get something of value from it, neutral though I try to be.
"Neutral"? Hah. Also this isn't as binary as you're presenting it.
engine:
I have not. My apologies for not being more forthcoming about that.
About what I figured based on your response.
</quote>That may be how some people see it, though I doubt that's the majority. The point, as I see it, of having either a visible checklist...
quote:
If it were just a 'checklist' it would be two* pages tops. And I say that with the implied notion that the one page checklist wouldn't be increasing in size, but there'd be a page describing how best to use and enforce the checklist.
This pdf is steeped in the language of intersectionality and in the notion that increasing your fragility is what is best.
* Okay, it would be two pages if they didn't format so stupidly and if it were written by someone who could cut to the point and not bloviate uselessly. As it is "Using the Consent Checklist" takes up 3 pages and then there is the checklist page.
<quote>...or some other upfront discussion of the content of a game and someone's likes and dislikes...
Pretty sure I mentioned that that is the best way to handle a group, and adults already know how to do this.
quote:
The GM modifies the game. I get the impression that you see this is a very terrible thing, but not all GMs are going to see it that way in every case.
If I'm so Player starved I can't handle losing one person, then sure. I'll except some limitations on what is allowable. I absolutely will not cater to
demands though. Phrase it as a request and accept that you won't get everything you want, and we're good.
The problem (that you're missing since you've not read the manuscript) the demanded behavior of the 'X Card'. By which I mean, if a Player plays their 'X Card', you
have to change the scene to comply with that Players demands.
This doesn't fly at my table.
quote:
The word "cater" gets tossed around a lot as if catering to one's player's is some sort of weakness, but some GMs regularly do this and even want to do this.
I'll 'cater' to requests* but I will never cater to demands.
* It depends on the request. And yes, to some degrees who is requesting. Some animals are more equal than others.
quote:
But okay, if someone doesn't want to modify their game, the other thing happens, which is that the GM and the player part ways before the game starts. This seems like an unequivocal good to me, because I wouldn't want (and I don't think most GMs want) players who aren't going to enjoy their game, or are even just constantly worried that they won't. Which doesn't require any kind of value judgment on anyone; not every game is for every player.
Agreed.
quote:
But, again, so what? We already have to do that on this site, by indicating whether games will have adult themes.
Ah, no. That's explicitly different. If I label my game as adult, all manner of happenstance, outside of what is very narrowly banned (by RPoL), could occur. This doesn't mean it will. Infact... it it's "adult' probably won't.
I'm not likely to use the adult rating to screen for adult themes, but to weed out non-adults, and in case a Player goes over the bounds of 'non-adult' themes so I don't have get ban-hammery or edit the Player's posts.
In fact, every Adult game I've been in here has been run that way.
quote:
And say you're "forced" to do this.
"X Card", read the manuscript.
And if it becomes part and parcel with con/FLGS rules, it's either "cater or don't run/play at cons/FLGS".
quote:
Because you clearly don't like this concept it's strongly implied that you're using the term as an insult.
It's a descriptor that describes "that which is easily broken". It fits people, things, events, etc. It's also pretty neutral.
quote:
You also seem fixated on the extreme end of this issue...<quote>
Read The Manuscript.
<quote>And if anyone is really doing that, they're extremists. You're not going to have a moderate conversation with them about this, and if you insist on trying then you're in large part to blame for the reaction you get.
They already are. For reference see the UK and gendered speech laws as an application of this premise in practice.
quote:
And I know you don't like it when people do that to you.
/raisedeyebrow.gif
That's the third time you've ascribed motive and/or thoughts outside of what I've written. Is that the sort of person you normally are?
quote:
The whole point is about requesting in advance!
X Card. Read the Manuscript.
quote:
I shudder to think what hoops someone might have to jump through to "legitimize" their problems in your eyes.
Mention it in advance. If it really does come up at the table, solder through it and bring it up after (or in a break) and have a discussion.
Anyone throwing an 'X Card' isn't someone willing to come halfway or be adult about their problems.
quote:
From your use of the term "nonsense," I take it that neither you nor any of your loved ones have been subjected to an experience so bad that mere mention of it will cause them to panic. I hope you appreciate your good fortune.
I got over it.
However, I will concede that 'nonsense' is perhaps strong outside the confines of my colloquial group, where in it is used to describe the sort of behavior in which the triggered freak out, start screaming, flailing, flipping tables, and tantruming because they heard a
singular utterance of a word.
Yes, these people do exist. If you've never encountered one, you have been blessed.
And V_V, if you took shrapnel over this, you do not sound like the type I'd be describing with my use of "trigger word nonsense", I apologize.
quote:
Is it really your intent to decide on hard invisible lines that will force people to decide not to take a risk.
If you cannot handle risk, do not take the risk. Do not demand others sacrifice of themselves to shield you from it or temper themselves for you. If you have friends that will do so for you, great, cherish them, kindle that friendship. But to demand it of strangers? Really?
quote:
And what exactly are you concerned about? Is there a word you think someone isn't going to like that you're unlikely to allude to upfront and that, if you "catered" to them and stopped using it, would seriously inconvenience your game?
A 'word'? No.
But if I'm running a horror game and there is a scene where the specter of victims who were burned alive continuously replays itself to graphic and horrible detail... just to call out an example from this very thread.
quote:
Best to be clear about it up front then, huh?
I'm unclear what part of "and this is why adults have an adult conversation before the game" is somehow eluding you.
quote:
How so? The standard rules are generally not to start saying or keep saying things that we know those present find unpleasant.
No... those aren't the standards of civilized society. They're close enough though so I'll also overlook the subtle barb in the sentences I truncated...
It's one thing to maneuver oneself in a manner to present a pleasing demeanor, it's another thing entirely to have that demeanor and maneuvering be
demanded.
And yes, one can, right now, be unfailingly polite and civil in a social public discourse and be hailed the hero by the masses and still be absolutely cutting and vile to the target of your remarks. That is how our civilized, polite society operates.
quote:
See, the use of quotes makes me think that you think that people are literally saying this, whereas no one really is.
Admittedly, they didn't say "because I demand it and may pitch a fit otherwise", however, when those words that they demanded be or not be uttered were not or were uttered they did engage in throwing of fits, screaming, and temper tantrums.
Yes, they do exist. I can point you to a selection of youtube videos if you require proof.
quote:
You simply insist on interpreting what's being proposed here in the harshests, most impolite and inconvenient light possible. Why not stick with reality instead of trying to cast it in a harsh light?
1 - I am sticking with reality. I can predict how this will be implemented at cons/FLGS. I can do so because I can point to how similar things are being implemented in countries laws and in message board forums, on Twitter, on Facebook, etc...
2 - I do often argue from the stance of Devil's Advocate. And sure, I'm ramping some of this up to the extreme, but let's look at those extremists, the ones on the cutting edge of how this will be implemented...
quote:
That's a myth. Moderates don't like the extremists on their side either, and would much rather that the other side not engage with them, because it just makes their side seem worse.
Tell that to Alec Holowka. Where were these moderates to temper the extremists? That side is nothing but purity trials and extremism.
quote:
That doesn't mean the checklist is a bad idea, just that it can't solve or catch everything. I'd be surprised if anyone was saying that it would.
Sure. If a checklist would help you navigate the pitfalls of your friendships and the hidden waters of their weak points, use it.
It's the rest of the manuscript that's pretty intolerable.
quote:
But for goodness sake whatever you do don't come up with a reasonable blanket solution that you then suggest see wide usage among the hobby, because that's really going to tick some people off.
I know I'm probably harping at this point... but RTFM mate.
And then check into the extra links at the end right before the checklist.
'O Card'? /awhellnaw.jpg