Shyfer @ Shyfer @ttrpg.network

Posts

11

Comments

863

Joined

2 yr. ago

Some of those quotes blew my mind. It sounded exactly like FATAL. I couldn't believe it lol.

Yet apparently a bunch of people need to learn that, because according to the author when they brought up his flaws in a book, people were falling over themselves to say he was besmirching his good name or slandering Gygax and stuff like that. People need to learn their heroes aren't perfect, even now, and that's why I think it's good this article is spread and read. Not everyone knows to separate the author and their work.

I would blame social media for encouraging parasocial relations, but this is the kind of stuff that existed before the internet, with other musicians and artists and authors, and it's brought up in academic courses on similar work, so I guess it's just a human thing that people need to be aware of.

Good point, and I think that was main thesis of the article. There were sexist parts of the game, but nothing easily fixable. Gygax and Arneson created something greater than themselves, that could live beyond any flaws they had (well, Gygax, so far nothing on Arneson luckily).

I mean there's a pretty blatant quote in there, too.

I'd like to get more tabletop rpg content back on ttrpg.network if possible. So in that spirit, just want to remind people that

!dndnext@ttrpg.network !rpg@ttrpg.network

Both exist

Great movie. Almost up there with the Princess Bride for me in terms of nice, romantic, feel-good fantasy movies I can watch to always feel better.

I remember those! Wow, I haven't thought about one of those in forever.

I agree. It doesn't mean we ignore all the good they did, but it does give us a more well-rounded view of our heroes, which I think is useful to humanize them. We can take the good and evolve from the bad. This blog post isn't asking anyone to quit D&D, it's asking people to recognize the flaws of our forefathers of the hobby, recognize that the hobby has changed from that time, and to look forward to further change, growth, and inclusion for all of us. They created a game that will live beyond them, which is kind of awesome. At least that's how I read it.

Hell maybe one day I'll have kids and grandkids and they'll think I'm backwards in some way, and I'll be worried or skeptical because I think they're too radical or weird in some way. But in the end, I'll hope they're right despite my misgivings, because the world is better that way - if the world's next generation is able to carry things on and improve the state of affairs at the same time. We should want that and cheer it on. And looking back at things like this, including acknowledging the flaws of our progenitors and ourselves in addition to their great works, it let's us see all that and celebrate it, the path we've taken from there to here.

I'd agree with that, and I think that's what makes it acceptable to play the game nowadays and not be ashamed. If we didn't move past that as a hobby, it would be bad and we should boycott it. But because we have, it means we can instead acknowledge the past and learn from it. So there's no need to ignore it or hide from it.

Thanks, I dislike that, too. The difference between this genocide and others, is that the US is directly involved in this one. Palestinian children are being killed by our bombs, dropped by equipment based on our technology, from deals we've given them, and ordered by politicians we are supporting. If the US wasn't involved, I wouldn't care as much. But they are. Blinken runs interference for them, defending Israel at every opportunity. We block resolutions against them in the UN. The press uses loaded language with Hamas and the passive voice with Israel caused tragedies and massacres. We promise retribution against the ICC if they prosecute Netanyahu (if you ever need proof we're the baddies, look at that. Threatening vengeance against international court when they are trying to punish a genocide). Biden has gone around Congress to give stuff to Israel multiple times. They avoid applying any pressure to Israel to let in aid, instead using the vastly inefficient and more expensive failure of a pier. He keeps saying it's not a genocide despite a bunch of other countries saying it is. They block news of bad things Israel does and actively lie about it. People in his administration have left over these things. I agree with you that the US should be less involved and not be the World Police. But you seem to think this means I want us to go in. If we were not involved, that would be a VAST improvement over the status of quo, of being involved in purely bad ways. At least if we weren't involved, I wouldn't feel responsible as an American in a democracy to use my vote to affect change in some way, to do good, agonizing over whether to vote for a "Hitler" because his holocaust is abroad and he's got better domestic policies. I hate the DNC for putting those of us with a conscience in this position.

Now, this doesn't mean I think people should vote for Trump. Maybe I should've emphasized that more. He's obviously worse. But he's not causing this right now, Biden is. So he's a bad President. I can acknowledge he's better than Trump on this and all other issues, and still criticize him for that.

I agree some explanation would be nice at least.

Any President who encourages a genocide is by definition a bad President I'm sorry to say. The ethnic cleansing campaign is already almost complete, all on his watch with his defending Israel and giving them weapons and cover in the UN and in public. Hell, he even lied about the reason on the debate (the one thing he lied about and Trump told the truth about lol). People should still feel free to vote for him, especially if you live in a swing state, but we shouldn't minimize that millions of Gazans are currently refugees. I hope he fucking shapes up on this issue by November. I don't want him to take all these votes for him as an endorsement of his pro genocide policies.

Ohio used to be a swing state, too, right? Not sure of it still is or if it isn't, how that turned around. But maybe they should be in the list?

Right? I don't remember seeing a debate or anything. It's equivalent to those elections people make fun of in North Korea, where the choices are the leader and nobody.

Thanks!

Arrest you for protesting a genocide or trying to get an abortion? No, sorry, that's something people in the US have to worry about when their government has their data, not China.

Considering our data is being bought and sold by US companies to whoever I don't think this is going to help with that. Tbh, I'm more scared of the US having our data than China. The US can use it to find people seeking abortions, or to track protestors trying to get human rights, or things like that. Not China. I'd rather they make a general law to preserve privacy, but this half-assed measure to preserve US monopolies.

The revealed their code to a US company already: Oracle.

They just don't like that the youth use it to see what's happening in other parts of the world, like Palestine. They want to be able to keep the US populace within their propaganda bubble, in the state we were in when we didn't know about things like the Irgun or The Great March of Return.

The problem is even when they have control they can barely do anything because of dumb rules like the filibuster, or blue dog senators.

Biden also doesn't act very left. He's passed a couple good pieces of legislation, but he doesn't support popular movements like labor strikes and prefers to make backroom deals (which residues their power for the future organizing), and he's very staunchly pro genocide for some reason, and been as hard on the border as Trump. He's just not as fascist as Trump but don't let the skewed Overton Window deceive you. He's a centrist moderate Democrat, like an Obama who learned to stop trying to reason with Republicans earlier and picked a few really good people for some cabinet positions (not Blinken, but like for the Secretary of the Interior BLM or FTC) and many meh people for others.

Left voters showed up to vote for him and then he basically abandoned the coalition he formed. He had a super majority and did like one, watered down Republican healthcare policy. He should've kept up the organizations and email lists he utilized to get into office to keep up the pressure on Congress in midterm elections, but that basically stopped as soon as he became President. He's not unusual in that regard, every President except for Trump, does this. But it's especially annoying for Obama because he had the closest to a broad coalition in recent history and it got him a super majority.

Bernie is basically the only Presidential candidate who has shown any awareness of how bottom up coalitions are used, not just to get one into office, but to continue to pressure with the power of the people. That's why socialists were excited for him. Because he would've been an organizer-in-chief. Every other politician rules the same standard way.

Well, Trump does a bit of the organizing thing, too, makes good use of the bully pulpit, and keeps up his movement between election cycles, but mostly to keep himself in power and enrich himself from them. Still, he's done a similar thing of gotten a lot of non-voters to show up, and pushed the party right. Democrats could do the same thing, and actually push the party left if they wanted to try, instead of showing open contempt for leftists, but it's admittedly harder because you'd have to fight the corporate owned media and pass legislation, or show you're actually trying hard to help normal people in public.

Sure, by that logic Putin and Kim Jong IL are legitimate Presidents as well. The other candidates should've tried harder.