|
|
|
|
Author |
Topic: First persistant world to ban homosexuality? (Read 516 times) |
|
ThCromwell
Expert Poster
Last On: 11/14/09
View Profile
Message Player
United States
Posts: 122
|
on Jun 10, 2005, 12:58 PM, Dane Bramage wrote:| It is time to move beyond the "well, he sux" content and bring it to something that can benefit the community. |
|
It may be a good idea to make some policies concerning issues such as this.
I believe a non-discrimination policy (in writing) may be in order. I know its going to create more work for the moderators, but its the only way to be sure that noone here reflects those sort of attitudes (we don't want a repeat of the "Christian only" group).
Second, I really do believe that any and all political discussions should be banned from these forums. Political discussions and personal beliefs can cause huge rifts in an otherwise tranquil society. Trust me on this, I have lost friends due to my support of "liberal" ideals. Any future discussions of this sort should be off this site. I have a website at:
http//spaces.msn.com/members/CromwellsCastle
I created this website mainly for political discussions and for people to express opinions about issues of the day. All opinions are welcome, I don't discriminate.
|
| « Last Edit: on: Jun 10, 2005, 2:59PM » |
 I.P. Logged |
|
|
|
Dane Bramage
Forum God
Last On: 12/05/11
View Profile
Message Player
United States
Posts: 2637
|
I agree completely, Cromwell. This is no place to discuss politics.
Policy is one thing... politics is an entirely different animal. Unfortunately, it is very difficult to discuss policy without bringing politics and personal belive into the picture.
One of the really great things about this community is the lack of "wave makers". We exist as a community with very little strife, and that is a very good thing. I belive it is possilbe to contiue our peacful existance with out the harsh reality of rules. We all mostly know what is apropriate and what is not. This would be only the second time something controvertial came up in the forums since I joined over 2 years ago. That's prety damned good, IMO.
It may be better to leave up to the individual. If anyone gets out of hand, then there will be outcry and the community can deal with the offender.
Other than an initial complaint about the PW and its creator, I feel that this has been a good discussion. It is possible for something good to come out of a bad situation (the Welcome Inn is a perfect example).
DB.
|
|
I.P. Logged |
|
|
|
J'Dai Voisin
Forum God
Last On: 12/13/07
View Profile
Message Player
United States
Posts: 4596
|
The thread hasn't been locked because there IS mature discussion taking place that isn't limited to politics.
A question was asked about how people deal with the cybersex issue and, I imagine, there's good amount of dialog to be had.
Further, without me launching into a tirade, we have enough trouble accomplishing the work that is underway. Policies require authors, enforcement and a litany of other activities that rely on resources. Dane's point speaks to the truth, we simply don't need more rules because - thus far - the community has been able to manage itself.
I'm not looking for a drawn out discussion, but this is the second instance I've observed where ThCromwell has suggested a more rigid structure in response to something that he viewed as unacceptable. The fact of the matter is that the site is not designed for policing and most of the members want to keep it that way. We are mature people and handle issues in ways that I've never seen on another board. I'd like to think that it can stay this way for a very long time.
I will not hestiate to lock the thread - nor would any other Moderator - if the tone changes or the topic falls off track. Until that time I welcome and look forward to reading what people have to share.
Carry on...
|
|
I.P. Logged |
|
|
|
Gornt
Forum God
Last On: 06/09/11
View Profile
Message Player
United States
Posts: 758
|
To muddy the waters slightly, there is a difference between saying *who* can play and setting rules on *how* or *what* you can play (although this case, it the rules are sort of inflammatory). I wouldn't want NWC setting behavior guidelines in my games, so, as unpleasant as it is, I don't think they should take a stand on what goes on inside of PWs, either.
And, I don't think it's logistically sensible to try and set a policy regarding the content of servers or mods or individual games for that matter. I think this marketplace of ideas does a pretty good job of sorting things out. Look what's happened over a relatively minor PW that has almost no presence here.
Lastly, at the risk of seeming to side with a position I don't entirely support: what's really wrong with a particular group with a uniting characteristic (eg Christians) making their own guild? It would be nice if they were more flexible, but if they prefer to have games with those themes and interests, isn't that their business? This is a matchmaking site, to try and help people find others with similar interests. For example, there is an Order of Old Fogeys that prefers people over 30.
It's natural when we see intolerance to want to act to repair the wrongs it creates. But, over-reacting or reacting dogmatically on a case-by-case basis isn't good either.
|
|
I.P. Logged |
|
|
|
Dane Bramage
Forum God
Last On: 12/05/11
View Profile
Message Player
United States
Posts: 2637
|
Well Gront, you have said a mouthful.
Your first point is exactly what I was referring to above. They are free to do what ever they want on thier own server and forums. But as soon as they start to us the NWC forums or game pages to forward thier views, then we have no jurisdiction to do anything about it... and no reason to restrict thier use of our facilities.
And your second point is even more important. We live in a world where the freedom of ideas works for the positive and for the negative. Just as much as it is okay for me to think that bigotry is wrong, he is entiteled to associate with whomever he chooses. It is then our choice to associate with him nor not. It's all about the choice.
It's a very tricky concept that has both good and bad implications. But isn't good and bad even a subjective idea based on one's own perspective (starting to sound like Obi-wan).
Thank you... thank you... Can I count on your vote in '08?
DB for President!!!
|
|
I.P. Logged |
|
|
|
zimith
Newbie Poster
Last On: 06/14/05
View Profile
Message Player
Unknown
Posts: 5
|
on Jun 10, 2005, 4:31 PM, Gornt wrote:
Lastly, at the risk of seeming to side with a position I don't entirely support: what's really wrong with a particular group with a uniting characteristic (eg Christians) making their own guild? It would be nice if they were more flexible, but if they prefer to have games with those themes and interests, isn't that their business? This is a matchmaking site, to try and help people find others with similar interests. For example, there is an Order of Old Fogeys that prefers people over 30. |
|
This is not the matter here. If a couple of Smashing Pumpkins fans wanna make their own NWN server for exclusively Smashing Pumpkins-fans, that would be totally ok. To i.e. (because that is to 100% certainty what will happen) exclude a minority from a server is something else. What if a server had an expressed rule about black pc:s? I think the example it perfectly relevant and since many of us may have an easier time identifying with that minority, maybe that's the light in which this issue should be seen.
|
|
I.P. Logged |
|
|
|
Dane Bramage
Forum God
Last On: 12/05/11
View Profile
Message Player
United States
Posts: 2637
|
on Jun 10, 2005, 5:16 PM, zimith wrote:| To exclude a minority from a server is something else. What if a server had an expressed rule about black pc:s? I think the example it perfectly relevant and since many of us may have an easier time identifying with that minority, maybe that's the light in which this issue should be seen. |
|
And Agusta National doesn't admit women members. It happens all the time. Does that make it right? No. Does that make it wrong? Probably, but THAT is not the issue as far as it concerns this community.
We are not here to discuss the political ramifications of some other server and ITS community. I have a feeling (and I'm sorry to be harsh) that the only reason you bring this to our attention is that you have probably been banned from posting on thier forum. Again... I hate to be harsh (dodges J'Dia's broom of smiting), but the only post you have ever made to this forum are on this subjet. I belive you last couple of posts amount to trolling and are not contibutory to the discussion.
I have probably already taken this too far, and I think I hear the swish of J'Dai's boom.
If not... then game on!
DB.
|
| « Last Edit: on: Jun 10, 2005, 5:39PM » |
I.P. Logged |
|
|
|
J'Dai Voisin
Forum God
Last On: 12/13/07
View Profile
Message Player
United States
Posts: 4596
|
Zimith, at the risk of over-simplifying this issue, I think you are either trying to stir the pot or force a reaction from this community. A number of people have voiced their concerns and their feelings in a respectful manner. However, to continue to pursue this as you are is not constructive.
To put it directly, rants and trolling are not the way to make your point. I believe you have stated your feelings. To engage in a debate is to effectively lock this thread. Please allow others to discuss this constructively.
|
|
I.P. Logged |
|
|
|
shfree
Forum God
Last On: 04/04/10
View Profile
Message Player
United States
Posts: 1749
|
I think that the most that can be done about this particular issue, as far as this site is concerned, is to put up a disclaimer that NWC is not responsible for a game's or PW's content and rules, and don't represent the views of the site. (or something along those lines) Because really, where would we draw the line, at what level of content?
I think it goes without saying that we certainly don't wanting to be in a position where we are promoting, say, a white supremacist PW, however, the level of policing necessary to examine content would be more than we have, or even should have.
But given that we don't want to appear to be in support of sites that are intolerant, I think a disclaimer would be a good idea.
|
|
I.P. Logged |
|
|
|
LIONofHUME
Forum God
Last On: 01/10/12
View Profile
Message Player
United States
Posts: 916
|
on Jun 10, 2005, 5:16 PM, zimith wrote:on Jun 10, 2005, 4:31 PM, Gornt wrote:
Lastly, at the risk of seeming to side with a position I don't entirely support: what's really wrong with a particular group with a uniting characteristic (eg Christians) making their own guild? It would be nice if they were more flexible, but if they prefer to have games with those themes and interests, isn't that their business? This is a matchmaking site, to try and help people find others with similar interests. For example, there is an Order of Old Fogeys that prefers people over 30. |
|
This is not the matter here. If a couple of Smashing Pumpkins fans wanna make their own NWN server for exclusively Smashing Pumpkins-fans, that would be totally ok. To i.e. (because that is to 100% certainty what will happen) exclude a minority from a server is something else. What if a server had an expressed rule about black pc:s? I think the example it perfectly relevant and since many of us may have an easier time identifying with that minority, maybe that's the light in which this issue should be seen. |
|
Being gay is no where near being in the same "LIGHT" as being black dude.
I'll tell ya what, "YOU" do not have a monopoly on being discriminated against. We all at one time or another have felt slighted in some way. Either to short, to dumb, to ugly, to fat, etc...Ya know what? We got over it. We deal with it and move on. You have to stop looking for negatives in the world, trust me they'll find you. Now go out and buy “Maiden of Pain” by Kameron M. Franklin and tell me what ya think about it. Enjoy your life brother it's shorter then you think.
|
|
I.P. Logged |
|
|
|
Erik_the_Celt
Extreme Poster
Last On: 11/03/06
View Profile
Message Player
Canada
Posts: 502
|
This is from the NWC Terms of Use:
You agree to not use the Service to:
a. upload, post, email, transmit or otherwise make available any Content that is unlawful, harmful, threatening, abusive, harassing, tortuous, defamatory, vulgar, obscene, libelous, invasive of another's privacy, hateful, or racially, ethnically or otherwise objectionable;
I think this covers the issue. It would need a lawyer to determine if the PW has posted anything here that violates the terms of use, but I would be surprised if they have. I think we have done what we can do as far as disclaimers are concerned.
All we can do now is try to promote enlightenment and tolerance.
|
| « Last Edit: on: Jun 10, 2005, 6:36PM » |
I.P. Logged |
|
|
|
Dane Bramage
Forum God
Last On: 12/05/11
View Profile
Message Player
United States
Posts: 2637
|
on Jun 10, 2005, 6:16 PM, J'Dai Voisin wrote:| Besides, are we certain that it's not part of the account sign up lingo? Frankly THAT is where it should be, as a Term/Condition of the site. |
|
Not sure on that, J'Dai... but if it is, then that is perfect.
on Jun 10, 2005, 6:27 PM, LIONofHUME wrote:| I'll tell ya what, "YOU" do not have a monopoly on being discriminated against. We all at one time or another have felt slighted in some way. Either to short, to dumb, to ugly, to fat, etc...Ya know what? We got over it. We deal with it and move on. You have to stop looking for negatives in the world, trust me they'll find you. Now go out and buy “Maiden of Pain” by Kameron M. Franklin and tell me what ya think about it. Enjoy your life brother it's shorter then you think. |
|
*doing my best Joe Dirt imitation*
Daaaaaang...
on Jun 10, 2005, 6:34 PM, Erik_the_Celt wrote:I think we have done what we can do as far as disclaimers are concerned.
All we can do now is try to promote enlightenment and tolerance. |
|
Spot on, Erik.
DB.
|
|
I.P. Logged |
|
|
|
Rofelli
Forum God
Last On: 12/04/08
View Profile
Message Player
United States
Posts: 1433
|
on Jun 10, 2005, 6:27 PM, LIONofHUME wrote:| We all at one time or another have felt slighted in some way. |
|
Heck, I learned a racial slur that way. 
As for terms of use, if the PW used this site to promote itself (or did somebody who did not represent the server post it?), then, Do/Did PWs have a TOS that they must abide by? If they do, then we look at the TOS. If they didn't, then they were free to do as they pleased.
As for lawyer...ah...no, not quite. That involves, you know, rules and discipline and stuff. And then, on top of all that, they make me wear a tie? Every day? Better than some other people's guesses about me at NWC, though. 
|
|
I.P. Logged |
|
|
|
Carlo One
Forum God
Last On: 02/08/12
View Profile
Message Player
United States
Posts: 2250
|
No offense meant, but why is there a NWC topic at all about this, if no one has an agenda? I mean, this isn't exactly the first stop on the PW drama forum exchange. Thankfully.
|
|
I.P. Logged |
|
|
|
FreakyFerret
Newbie Poster
Last On: 06/11/05
View Profile
Message Player
Unknown
Posts: 3
|
Issue 1: NWC policy
Does policy allow an "Only Gay Players" server to advertise here? If so, then a "Straights Only" server should be allowed to advertise. Some people like to joke they are only intolerant of intolerance. While it may be cute, it is hypocritical. If you want the right to form groups based on criteria you like, you have to extend the same right to others no matter how you disagree with them. If you want the right to voice your opinion, you have to extend the same right to others. No matter how distasteful you may find the others, the minute you stop respecting their rights, you become exactly what you were fighting against.
Unless you want to ban all servers with any form of exclusion policy, you have to allow all of them. So long as they don't try to enforce their views on people other than their own players, let them have whatever setting and player base they want. This goes for servers that are "Only Gay Players" as well as "Only Straight Players" and any other qualifications you want to list.
Issue 2: Cybersex and its place in NWN
On another server, we had a definite problem of lesbianism and cyber. I mean that in the sense 80% of the female player characters were lesbian. A good handful wanted to be good drow or half-drow lesbians as well. All most of them would do is log on and cyber when they weren't out powergaming.
Most of our player would use cyber as a roleplaying tool. They would roleplay their character normally. When he or she encountered someone they wanted to have a romantic sidestory with, they did. When the time was right, they would play out the act of sex. Most times only the initial act was roleplayed in an attempt to help better understand the dynamic of the relationship. It wasn't graphic or done for hours at a time. Their cyber was a tool to help flesh (no pun intended) out the character and nothing more. (Sometimes it was done for fun by even these players, but they quickly bored of it.)
Then there were the lesbians. They would go into graphic detail (including where each drop of fluid went) about the encounter. It would last for hours at a time. It was (pretty much) all they ever did. None of these players were there to roleplay. They were there for a cheap thrill and nothing more. I was a DM on that server (not Mirellest), and I was one of the first to call for a ban on lesbian characters at the time. It wasn't our attempt to ban lesbianism in and of itself. It was our attempt to return the server to a roleplaying one rather than a cyberchat channel with 3D avatars. One of our choices was to ban all cyber. Most of the player populace used it within reason, so we didn't want to punish the good players because of the bad ones. We could have banned the players responsible, but we tried to avoid banning players at all. We hoped to act as a learning experience and help encourage more people to actually roleplay. Our next option was to just ban lesbianism. It worked, and we managed to do it without pissing off the players we valued. Of course, we also honestly explained in detail why we were doing what we did and our discussions and reasonings on the matter. After things had settled down, the ban was lifted.
Issue 3: Mirellest
I had extensive interaction with the Mirellest creators on another server before they made it. One it was for nearly two years. The other I would guess a little less than a year. I roleplayed for hours a day with them (though usually in a group setting). Speaking as someone who knows them, I find their recent ban offensive. It offended me so much, I had to take a full day before replying here, so I could be calm and rational. I'm still not calm on the matter to be honest, but hopefully I'm rational. I don't find the ban offensive cause they banned gays. I find the ban offensive because they lied about their reasons. I won't go into too many details, but their reason for the ban was not because it was out of place with the setting. While an abundance of lesbian characters and out of control cybering may have fortified the ban being put into place, it isn't the reason either. The sole reason they did it was out of personal distaste for the homosexuality. I want to use the word "hate" for the nice emotional jolt it gives, but it really just comes down to their own discomfort. To me, this is worse than the hate. They truly believe they're open-minded on the topic, yet they're just as "homophobic" as the ranting zealot. That they hide behind so thinly disguised reasoning is just salt in the wound and in my opinion cowardly.
My opinion of Mirellest and its DM and player base had already sunken low though when I heard they had a shop selling sexual toys of various nature. When have a shop exclusively for that, what message are you sending the players? What behavior are you encouraging? All of the lesbian character players from the server discussed above were major players on Mirellest as well. A good number of them became DMs. I can understand why cyber became a rampant problem on there.
|
|
I.P. Logged |
|
|
|
Dane Bramage
Forum God
Last On: 12/05/11
View Profile
Message Player
United States
Posts: 2637
|
If they have a shop selling sex toys, then it doesn't seem that they think cyber is a problem for them. Obviously, they encourage it. That is their perogitive.
There are plenty of non sexual oriented PWs out there to play on. Fine one. It is unfortunate to invest so much time into a community that eventually turns into something that you don't like, but life is often unfair.
But alas, I still don't think we, as a website, are advertising for them. I am not sure if you were really saying that, but it seems like it was part of your point. I just did a search for it and came across its listing on the server... amung the other 1110 servers in our Dbase. The description says nothing of this policy; therefore, there is nothing for us to regulate.
Their policy offends me too, but as long as they are not spreading thier ideals around our forms or game pages, then what are we supposed to do?
|
|
I.P. Logged |
|
|
|
|
|
|
If have been precieved as aggressive in any form, i also apologize; my only goal is to achieve what we have been doing so far, have a constructive discussion about it. But i do feel strongly about the subject and i do think the decision by the Mirellest staff is outrageous.