Censorship
The Blind Eternities forum
Posted on Aug. 22, 2021, 5:23 p.m. by Oof_Magic
Where is the line beyond which we can deprive someone there freedom of speech? I always was under the understanding that that line was at violence and not offense. I recently posted a thread that got pulled down for being offensive to someone. Now I personally find that to be an offensive action. Because someone took their hurt feelings up with someone else rather than voicing their opinion with me, I got my digital mouth stapled shut. I’ve had my opinions, which don’t target any particular group, shut down and had insults personally leveled against me. I’ve been called dismissive and then been dismissed. I’ve been called a troll and then had healthy debate closed down without dialogue. I’ve been told to conform my speech to be more inclusive or face being excluded.
What is the line of acceptable speech? I’m of the belief that allowing speech, even if ugly, allows those who see your speech or hear it to see you for what you think and make their own conclusions about you. It gives people a door to engage in your ideas and either agree or attempt to change your mind. Instead of putting me on blast, I’ve been swept under a rug. Has anyone else run into an issue where an opinion was deemed unacceptable by the powers that be?
If you’ve had your opinion stomped out or suppressed, get back to me and let me know how you handle it. It’s a scary world when a legally acceptable opinion is quashed for the sake of what is socially popular.
Note: I haven’t reiterated my so called ‘unacceptable opinion’ here so if this thread is blocked or suppressed or pulled down, it is a personal assault on me rather than protecting people from my ‘unacceptable opinion.’
Grubbernaut says... #3
Locking the threads is definitely a bad look.
I also don't find the "people reached out to me with their concerns" approach to be convincing of anything; reminds me of when a girlfriend/boyfriend says "I told my friends and they all agree that..."
Hobbies die when they become more about politics than the game. Pretty much the history of every "nerds make a cool thing and then it becomes popular" activity.
August 22, 2021 5:38 p.m.
Daveslab2022 says... #4
It wasn’t because you were trying to have an open and honest debate. You were being snarky in the post, and was so upset when it was deleted that you posted two more times, and once to your own profile.
You can be upset about the events that transpired, but it was simply because this website has had a large amount of bickering lately, and it’s causing the community to leave.
I’m sorry you felt silenced, but it wasn’t a topic conducive to Magic, or anything related to it.
August 22, 2021 6:53 p.m.
Times are just different now... even in the history of magic cards/art there are now forbidden Crusade, Invoke Prejudice, Jihad, Cleanse, Stone-Throwing Devils, Imprison ect ect...
This hasnt happened to me personally no....but iv'e seen wild threads in the blind eternities that went on that had less to do with magic/the game than Oof_Magic's original/copied posts.
If someone where to make a post saying that they were upset with the author of the war of the sparks decision to undo Nissa and Chandras relationship/sexual preferences that would be allowed to let the conversation develop..... I cant say the same would be allowed/tolerated if it went the other direction. If someone were to make a post/thread about Niko Aris and their opinions surrounding the planswalkers lore and creation I could also only assume the conversation would be allowed to go one way as well.
August 22, 2021 7:04 p.m.
yeaGO I never believed it to be but at least the existence of a line has been made clear. Who gets to determine the line of something as subjective as politeness?
Grubbernaut Agree or not with what I’ve said, I appreciate you acknowledging that there is hypocrisy when the inclusivity crowd excludes disagreeable opinions. It really struck me as off-putting that an individual cited their ownership of a degree and the existence of studies without actually citing the studies themselves because they assumed I wouldn’t accept them.
Daveslab2022 Snarky is a subjective opinion. You don’t have to agree with me but I was indeed trying to have an open and honest debate. That’s why I reposted my comments. It’s not for some authority to dictate where subjective lines lie. I’ve taken my fair degree of insults and have made no retaliation against such individuals including a discussion in our past when I was called stupid for not including a specific card in a deck. For as disagreeable as I may be, I do so in polite fashion and the responses often go beyond the scale of anything I’ve said. If I left because of the backlash I have faced, no one would bat an eye. Instead, I stand my ground until a rational and polite conversation can be had. I never targeted a specific group with hateful speech (which ought to be allowed if for no other reason than to allow others to make their own determination on my character) and the warriors of inclusion exclude me, validating my opinions on the meritlessness of inclusivity for its own sake. I think the subject of keeping Magic magical and fantastical is conducive to Magic. That is however, a subjective statement. As is the opinion that my opinion is not conducive to the game.
Icbrgr I do think there is one acceptable side. I don’t agree that there should be but there clearly is when the warriors of inclusivity seek to exclude me for having an unfavorable opinion that doesn’t even target specific groups. I didn’t even say there shouldn’t be straight, gay, non-binary, insert color here characters. I love Teferi’s character arc. My love of his character has nothing to do with him being whatever passes as black on Dominaria. I love that character because his intentions and how this leads him to a catastrophic course of action and the heartbreaking struggle this puts on him. My point was that characteristics aren’t paramount to making a well developed character. That’s not to say they shouldn’t exist but they aren’t in my calculation of whether a character is well developed or not.
August 22, 2021 7:38 p.m.
I don't know if there's an answer to a question so philosophical... i certainly don't think I'm capable of answering it. I only seek to achieve a satisfactory discussion environment but after a decade I'm content in the thought that T/O cannot be all things to all people. Politeness is just a sense for me.
August 22, 2021 8:02 p.m. Edited.
Well, the only speech that needs protecting is the speech you find offensive. If nobody found it offensive it wouldn't need to be protected. That being said this is a deck building website. Coming on here and going on a political/racial/religious/any topic beyond deck building rant that has nothing to do with MTG deck building would be inappropriate.
August 22, 2021 8:24 p.m.
Gidgetimer says... #9
Free speech is not guaranteed on a social media platform, especially a small and narrowly focussed one. The entire point of a moderation team is to be an authority to dictate where a subjective line lies in the context of the content they are moderating.
If you were honestly interested in an open and honest discussion you would have had a conversation about where you crossed the line that the mod team had drawn and tried to rewrite your post to respect where the limits were. Instead you copy/pasted the same thing over and over again. It seems pretty logical to me that if one thread gets locked an exact copy will also.
I am hard on the "censorship is wrong" side of discourse, but this means that people also have the right to not interact with you. Additionally you weren't even censored. All three threads are still up and readable. The moderation team (in part or in full) made a decision that the thread would probably turn toxic and turned off comments.
Unfortunately, this thread also has the possibility to turn toxic and should probably have comments turned off. But then you would, as you have already stated, think that it was some sort of personal vendetta. Because what other explanation would there be for turning off comments in which someone is acting like a petulant child with a victim complex? It isn't as if they will not consider any point of view besides their own. Right? RIGHT?
Don't bother @-ing me. I won't respond. I have already made my own conclusions about you from your speech. And that conclusion is that there is no point in talking to you because your viewpoints are inflexible.
August 22, 2021 8:27 p.m.
Gidgetimer I don’t think free speech is guaranteed but I think it ought to be. A moderation team should be a guarding force to police threatening content, not offensive content. And there should be a clear line between the two.
I crossed a subjective line that wasn’t established until after crossing it and I reposted it because rather than having my offense explained, why it was offensive and how I was shut down. I would say that if I can’t post on my own thread, that’s censoring. I follow the logic that if one post gets pulled down, even if not explained why, an exact copy would as well. But I was muted because rather than explaining it to me, it was easier to shut me down. You can indeed go into the threads, but they don’t take comments anymore. That’s pretty clear censorship. I don’t see that as a vendetta against me but my opinions which may be shared by others and I would expect that if they shared those opinions, they too would face similar repercussions. At least I think so. I’ve had insults leveled on me, by those who blocked me and yet I can’t air my grievance about such insults. When those with the power to censor are also firing insults directly to me, that crosses a line into the personal. A line that can only be crossed one way. I do think it devolves the thread into toxicity when users resort to insults such as petulant and childish. Unless you know who I can defer to to have these insults dealt with. I could be wrong about these individuals accountable. If you have advice on that it would be greatly appreciated. Also, if you’re going to end a comment with, don’t respond, maybe don’t make the comment?
Yisan The only speech that should be protected is all speech that isn’t a direct threat. If you saw the original thread I engaged in, you might have context for why it went the direction it went. I’m not trying to be dismissive of you, just to say that there was a through line that got to where I came in. It didn’t come out of the blue. Otherwise, what’s the social tab on Forums for?
August 22, 2021 8:44 p.m. Edited.
wallisface says... #11
Not knowing anything about this background (and not wanting to know), but some very generic thoughts:
-
moderators/admins of sites are fully allowed to shut down activity they don’t want to be happening on their site, after all, it is their site, and they’re free to do with it as they wish. This not only applies to websites, but practically any business or property in the real world too. The people that run the site want to ensure that it continues to develop in a way they deem healthy and focused on what the “brand” should be promoting. Considering the overall awesome community we have here at TappedOut, i’d say they’re doing a bloody-good job.
-
Now, that may mean there are times where people want to steer conversation away from the sites desired vision/direction. People seem to conflate “freedom of speech” with “freedom of reach” - and while nobodies going to jail you for wanting to push particular concepts, nobody is under any requirement to allow you a platform to do it.
August 22, 2021 8:47 p.m.
Suffice it to say identity is not merely an academic discussion to everyone. It's important to take a lot of care and to tread with extraordinary amounts of care because of that, and to frequently invite feedback, especially when it may be among groups who haven't really enjoyed a lot of casual representation. You have to realize that a lot of people had to sit around and watch things like endless moaning because Spike turned out to be a young woman. There's a history there that perhaps explains some of the impatience with some attitudes on the subject.
August 22, 2021 8:49 p.m.
wallisface I don’t think there is such a concept as freedom of reach. That’s a hollow term to allow for the restriction of speech. I do believe that private companies have a right to moderate their platform. But when moderators are throwing out insults as they do it, that is a clear hypocritical abuse of power. Shut me down, fine. But to throw out insults as you do so? What does that say about those moderators? TappedOut does a good job until it’s you they come for. And they won’t tell you until what that line is until you’ve crossed it. Because that line is measured subjectively for offense rather than objectively for threats. I never expected to have a thread taken down and I didn’t even think what I said was offensive as I never targeted a specific group. As that’s a subjective measure, I can’t say that what I said wasn’t offensive, just that I didn’t see it that way. But as an objective measure, I made no threat to anyone. I never called anyone names and meanwhile, those with the powers to ban are using name calling. That definitely seems weird. I don’t think someone should have the power to shut down a conversation for being insulting if they would resort to using insults themselves.
August 22, 2021 8:59 p.m.
yeaGO I resorted to this thread to invite that feedback. To open the door to both assent and dissent.
What’s a Spike?
August 22, 2021 9 p.m.
Doors open, i ain't coming for you :)
Spike, Tournament Grinder was somehow controversial in some corners .... if you'd believe it
August 22, 2021 9:03 p.m. Edited.
TypicalTimmy says... #16
As far as I understand it, the freedom of speech exists entirely outside the "freedom of consequence". A classic example is shouting you have a bomb in the airport. While you may freely use such words, the implication and harm those words bring can and will be detrimental to many. For example, if you are on a plane itself and you shout that, passengers will now fear for their lives. This level of distress caused was entirely pointless and the damage could be irrevocable. For example, an elderly woman having a heart attack, or a Machismo guy thinking he can save he day by attempting to take you down. There is also the financial burden of forcing a plane to land, the government involvement for a terroristic threat, the insurance costs, lawsuits, shareholders pulling out due to fear, etc.
Nothing "prevents" you from saying you have a bomb. But nothing "protects" you from the consequences, either.
In terms of your original post, I may have brazenly said in a dismissive and mocking tone that I am what others might consider a "CIS-gendered white male", because I personally disagree with gender politics.
That's not to say I am against people living their lives and finding love within their hearts. What I am against is using such a factor for political gain.
Love shouldn't be political, and yet we see an ever-increasing divide among and within the communities over it. Take the constant in-fighting in the LGBT+ community on whether or not being bisexual is "valid". Uh, why wouldn't it be? All it means is you are attracted to both, men and women?
What I am against is the political push of it all. I wholly and firmly disagree with how Blue's Clues used sexual propaganda on a show aimed at toddlers and young children. I am firmly against the teaching of gender in elementary schools as I believe a child shouldn't be subjected to that type of discussion at such a young age, as it can and often does lead to grooming.
There is a right way to do this, and a horribly wrong and destructive way.
- BUT--- take a look at the other side.
Basically anybody who wasn't "straight" were brutally beaten, chastised and even killed over it for what essentially amounts to the majority of Human existence. While it is true that some large nations in the past openly accepted certain elements of their culture and way of life, most nations fought against it hard.
To this day, there are nations where you can and will be murdered in the streets for being homosexual or transgender.
Consider that even here in America, people within the LGBT community were basically the last group of people to be given full rights, and even then we, as a nation, still rail hard against them.
Just look at how much backlash Pride Month gets every single year as an example.
Imagine growing up with that much unearned hatred toward you, never seeing anyone "like you" in any form of entertainment, and then learning someone like Alesha or Niko exists. And while it may only be a small handful of names at this current time, it's the fact they exist that shows a cultural embrace and a path toward harmony.
By saying that you disagree with this, it's saying you disagree with them.
The difference, I feel, between your stance and my stance is I feel that many times we see representation "pushed" for financial and political gains. That the motivation for such representation is not to draw a larger audience, shatter perception and build a community, but rather it's to pander to what's currently a hot-topic so you can cash in on a hot new thing.
That's marginalizing an entire group for selfish gains and, to me, that's disgusting.
I have no problem seeing anyone from all walks of life represented in all media.
I take issue with it being done so out of a shallow attempt to profit off of broken hearts.
I also strongly disagree with any topic of the sort being taught to children, especially some of the children's literature I've seen on the matter which borders on, if not fully is, propaganda. Leave the damn children out of it, already.
Like it, hate it, that's my stance and opinion.
- Embracing a community out of love is honorable and noble
- Marginalizing a community for profit is disgusting and irrefutable
- Leave children out of the conversation
- But at the end of the day, my thoughts don't actually matter. It's not my battle, it's theirs. And unfortunately, in 2021, many of them are still fighting, even in "developed, free" nations. That's just heartbreaking.
We, as a nation and as a race, are getting "better", but we are far from where we should be.
Again, since I know I'll be called out for it, I'll reiterate:
-
Making characters to represent a group of people simply to profit off of them is a horrible thing, and I feel many companies do this for that specific reason. They conduct social surveys and polls and see that X and Y are trending, so they make commercials and content to "push" it for profit. Once the "trend" of X and Y cease, so does the consideration of the company. I think we can all agree that's horribly wrong.
-
Showing representation because it builds genuine character growth and development and drives a story is a beautiful and wonderful thing. You are now putting your audience above your bottom-line. I think we can all agree that is the correct way to do things.
-
And just my personal stance: Leave the children alone.
I'm not reading or replying to this thread. I'm sure some people will agree and merely leave a silent and unnamed "like", while those vocally against it will call me out.
I'm not here to argue. Just give my two cents and leave. But again,
- My words are meaningless, as it's not my fight. Merely the perspective of an outsider looking in. I think the reason your words, Oof_Magic came off as so painful is because your phrasing makes it seem like an outright and full dismissal of an entire group of people for what essentially amounts to, and quite literally, "muh feelings".
And, in my opinion, that's an example of the wrong way to do it.
August 22, 2021 9:05 p.m.
wallisface says... #17
Oof_Magic I can’t comment on your specific situation, because I wasn’t present for it. I was simply drawing up a picture of roles of a site admin vs a site user.
“Freedom of Reach” is a pretty common concept, and disagreeing its existence doesn’t mean it doesn’t exist. Even if you disregard the term, the meaning is pretty obvious. “Freedom of Speech” doesn’t mean anyone has to grant you a platform for that speech, or that anyone has to listen.
As I’m not part of the original issue, i’m not really looking to get dragged into it, but your position seems to be one of entitlement - no site or business can be forced into promoting a viewpoint they don’t want to, and as a user, they don’t have to accept your patronage. You seem to be of the view that a site/business has to cater towards everyone and everything, and that’s simply not the case.
August 22, 2021 9:07 p.m.
I don’t see the controversy with Spike. I can see the confusion but have a conversation and clear the air. Spike’s a woman. Maybe not as prominent in certain characteristics and some might desire but I don’t personally care. And not just because it’s an un-set card. Not every woman in Magic needs to be a Liliana clone.
❤️Liliana
August 22, 2021 9:10 p.m.
TypicalTimmy says... #19
As a simple example, before I see myself out:
-
Ral Zarek is gay. Alesha is trans. These were beautifully written stories and character development, exploring the delicate nature of their core beings. We can all lovingly embrace this as it feels both naturally developed and carefully thought.
-
Niko is non-binary. The amount of headlining, forced material and almost jarring approach came off as shallow and click-baity in that it feels as if WOTC had a white board where they went "ALRIGHT GANG WE NEED LGBT REPRESENTATION THIS MONTH! ANDY, WHAT HAVE YOU GOT FOR ME?!"
That's wrong.
And the Chandra / Nissa arc? Jesus Christ never again. That's just genuinely giving the community love and support and clawing their hearts out immediately afterwards. Shame on you, WOTC, for hurting so many people like that.
August 22, 2021 9:11 p.m.
The "fraudulent pandering representation" note was at play there. I didn't really get it either
August 22, 2021 9:12 p.m.
Wendithewendigo says... #21
The problem wasn't that you had a different viewpoint or that you were discussing it, the problem is the way you spoke about it. You spoke in a way that made people uncomfortable and showed no wish to learn or better yourself through discussions with people on the sort end of the stick. Also I do not believe that a post talking about cishet people in a way that made people them uncomfortable and feel unwelcome would be allowed to go on. Also there's an important difference between LGBTQ+ people and cis people, because lgbtq people historically and currently have many less rights than cishet people and use the internet as a place they can be safe from physical harm and where they can block people who try to attack them so taking that away has much more profound affects than making fun of how cishet people all hate their spouses. You had the reasoning of why your thread got taken down explained to you and you refused to respect the moderators judgment and instead reposted the exact same thing. The fact that you refuse to accept that you were offending people and that the moderators would like you to use better language. Identity is not always an academic debate is because for some people it is frequently disregarded, disrespected, and degraded.
August 22, 2021 9:15 p.m.
plakjekaas says... #22
Freedom of speech doesn't mean freedom of consequences. When you voice an unpopular opinion, that will make you impopular. It's incredibly hypocrite to think it won't. No matter how legally valid it is. You got shut down by a mod of the forum, with links to examples of how your dismissive opinion was not applicable to the topic you were discussing, while describing the merits of what you called 'shallow characteristics' only implemented to relate to for minorities of sorts.
After being shut down by a higher authority, you decided to rebel, not by expanding on your argument, but by literally copypasting the exact same post that was shut down. What did you think would happen there? What drove you to do that AGAIN after the second one was shut down as well? Why couldn't you just take the L and move on? Instead you made this topic, portraying yourself as a victim and a champion for freedom of speech, which is exactly the unproductive discussion that gets really emotional without helping anyone. You even raised the possibility that it's all a ploy to silence you personally. I think it's very paranoid to even believe mods are after you specifically, instead of guarding the health of the community.
Posting the same topic with dismissive opinion which you were warned about 3 times in a row does make you look like you want to go any length to offend people under disguise of "good storytelling". Even though the topic was closed, your opinion is still visible, anyone wondering what you're thinking about it can still reach that information. Site management intervened, closed up your topic, probably because it's a touchy subject and discussing it has a high risk of crossing lines, doing a lot more harm than good. You didn't heed the warning and started an open rebellion against them. There is "the line beyond which we can deprive someone there freedom of speech" (their freedom btw, but considering the topic, I can see why the correct pronoun wouldn't be your forte).
As for what you can do now that you had your "opinion stomped out"... how about showing some empathy? You could apologize to the people you have offended. Even if you didn't mean to, even if that wasn't the intended topic of your discussions, you haven't tried to make amends, or even considered you might have partly been wrong or have hurt anyone anywhere yourself. Start repairing, show some good intentions, lose the attitude that the whole world should submit to your point of view and anyone who doesn't is actively trying to discredit you.
Show compassion for the people around you, sacrifice some of yourself for the good of the world. That's what heroes do, even in the face of adversity. That's how to give your own story a real life happy ending.
August 22, 2021 9:15 p.m.
Grubbernaut says... #23
Is it really too much to ask that a site about MtG stay relegated to MtG?
Can we all just shut up about politics? Nobody is going to have their mind changed on this forum. It's either showmanship to feel better than those who disagree with you, or circlejerking for the people who do agree with you.
August 22, 2021 9:20 p.m.
Thank you, TypicalTimmy. I’m definitely in agreement with most of what you said. Freedom of speech opens the door to the consequence that speech comes with. I don’t think it should come with banning but honest analysis and ridicule. I iterated repeatedly that I adore characters across many characteristic groups. My stance was that there characteristic groups are not why I love them. I definitely concede that I can be crass but I think crass is also a term for those who hear and not those who speak. I prefer straightforward, unrestrained, raw? But again, I’ve stated my ‘approval’(?) for characters across characteristics. I wasn’t trying to say those shouldn’t exist but that those characteristics are not in the calculation of a well developed character. Teferi isn’t great for being black. Teferi is great because his good intentions lost him everything he holds dear. That’s nothing to do with race or gender or sexuality. I don’t care if Niko Aris is non-binary. I care if Niko Aris goes through a powerful struggle from well developed motivations. Just as I fell of the MCU after it reached its culmination with Endgame, so too did I fall off the lore of mtg with the culmination of the Gatewatch story arc in War of the Spark.
I greatly appreciate your input. Thank you for stopping by.
August 22, 2021 9:32 p.m.
Wendithewendigo says... #25
Sorry I didn't respond to more things in my comment, I got what they like to call over in the card creation thread "ninja'd"
Damn, even this got ninja'd when I hit preview
August 22, 2021 9:40 p.m.
Wendithewendigo The problem is that when that line uses subjective terminology, it falls apart quickly. I was dismissed and insulted and took no course of retaliation. Perhaps something to learn from. I didn’t post this thread until I got shut down. Furthermore I was called dismissive as I was being told by another that I wouldn’t change my mind. That’s weird. I also personally inquired with the individual for an acceptable write up of my comments. I haven’t gotten word back from them. I do think that shows a willingness to learn, even if it runs into an unwillingness to teach (include). I’m not going to engage in conversing about the difference in rights of the alphabet community as I think that’s exactly the type of conversations that are meant for other platforms. Ironically, I never targeted a specific group. I simply staked the claim that motivations are what makes for interesting characters regardless of characteristics. Teferi is probably next to Karn (also hard to personally relate to on characteristics) as the best characters in the lore. I’ll iterate for the dozenth time; Their characteristics are not a part of my calculation in what makes those characters great.
What’s a cishet? What’s ninja’d?
August 22, 2021 9:46 p.m. Edited.
plakjekaas Problem is those people I offended didn’t comment to me directly or provide advice on how to amend my comments. The individual who shut me down specifically said they didn’t want to deal with me directly and it would seem a hollow apology to come out and say ‘To those I offended, I’m sorry.’ I don’t even know what I said that was offensive. Maybe blunt, but nothing I wouldn’t say to someone’s face. And I would engage in a direct conversation with those complainants if they would reveal themselves. The aether is nothing I would apologize to. I’m not posting myself as the victim for my opinions but I was shut down. You can think what you want but I will push and push until I get an adequate explanation and no further.
Grubbernaut I appreciate your opinion. I wouldn’t be having this conversation if I had known where the line was. That was essentially the point of this thread. Find the line.
August 22, 2021 9:53 p.m.
TypicalTimmy says... #28
Against what I said about seeing myself out, I need to pop in and make a correction.
A very helpful user linked me some content on Niko. It's very possible I was viewing their introduction through a bias lens and that I was effectively noticing the negative marketing and not the positive character growth.
If that is the case, I owe the community an apology as I let my own view taint the topic at hand.
August 22, 2021 9:56 p.m.
Omniscience_is_life says... #29
Oof_Magic you keep mentioning how you didn't know what you were saying was offensive, ostensibly because you think no one explained why to you. However, that was the purpose of almost literally the entirety of the comments directed towards you on that original thread--but you seem to have only seen the "insults".
If you want an adequate answer for why what you said is so grating and hurtful, look no further than the answers you've already gotten from the people whom you don't agree with. It's hard to actually read what they're saying--and even harder to not dismiss it as not applying to you--but you've received some quite concise explanations.
Ultimately, it's up to you to decide what an "adequate explanation" is; you can, of course, choose to wait until someone provides an explanation that exonerates and deifies you, but I wouldn't hold your breath. The most adequate explanations are the ones you refuse to accept.
August 22, 2021 10:08 p.m.
Wendithewendigo says... #30
Also a cishet person is a cisgender heterosexual person (not lgbtq+)
August 22, 2021 10:35 p.m.
plakjekaas says... #31
I love how TypicalTimmy immediately showcased wonderfully how to handle unknowingly saying the wrong thing, right after Oof_Magic explained how he couldn't see the point of exactly that approach.
August 22, 2021 11:25 p.m.
Omniscience_is_life I see hurtful over and over again. Perhaps my language lost my message? I understand the concept of inclusion but have heard little about story. I should emphasize that inclusion can exist. I just see it as secondary to motivation. For those that look for characteristics to please then, I hope they find something satisfying. I personally look for compelling stories to sell a character. Teferi’s tragedy in spite of his intentions is what makes him compelling to me. A similar angle could be said of Karn. That Gerrard was forced to fight his father and that gods father sacrificed him (do I have my lore correct?) is what makes those characters compelling to me. That some in the community can relate to their characteristics is great for those who seek it. For me, it’s the tragedies and triumphs those characters endure that I find compelling. Cards like Planar Collapse, Teferi's Protection, Karn's Temporal Sundering, OG art Cathartic Reunion, and OG art Phyrexian Arena are great examples of compelling storytelling through the cards. None of these have anything to do with any of their characteristics. The only reason characteristics came up as a subject in the discussion was as a response to a discussion on representation. My point was that you can have that representation but, to me, it is the conflicts and triumphs that make for compelling storytelling and characters.
August 22, 2021 11:28 p.m.
Omniscience_is_life says... #33
Oof_Magic I do not see the point to your post.
August 23, 2021 12:15 a.m.
Last_Laugh says... #34
I'm with the OP on this one and almost left the site entirely a few months back.
I've had posts deleted because I was being an "asshole" by calling out rude ungrateful people... an action I'll take EVERY time.
I personally hate it when someone posts advice, gets no response (or cards added etc.), and then the OP continues to deckcycle or makes additional posts/changes. I understand if you're not around, but it's easy to spot the difference and it's fucking rude to ignore someone else volunteering their time/knowledge to help.
August 23, 2021 12:16 a.m. Edited.
Omniscience_is_life Perhaps because I was using this thread as an extension of my response in another.
Last_Laugh I’ll tell ya, this whole ordeal has gotten me close but I think that does nothing to fortify one’s case. I think it shows strength of conviction to stand one’s ground and let reality sway you as opposed to opinions, no matter how popular they be. To take it to the title, if I leave this site, it won’t be because some disagree with me but because voicing my opinion leads to being silenced rather discussion. I won’t leave the site unless the site leaves me. I’ll take the insults without retaliation. I won’t take being shut out of my own thread post. I don’t find it insulting but rather ironic and comical that the warriors of inclusivity are rather exclusive.
August 23, 2021 12:40 a.m.
Omniscience_is_life says... #36
Oof_Magic not the original post--just your rebuttal to my most recent. I don't get how what you said in comment #32 in any way dealt with any of the issues people are having with your actions.
August 23, 2021 12:58 a.m.
plakjekaas says... #37
Oof_Magic It's not your opinion that got you silenced, it's the inability to reflect how your words might impact other people. Even if you don't care for a fictional character's characteristics, your words are very dismissive towards people who do care, you flat-out stated that it was not meaningful to mention. You paint a picture of not being able to imagine how it could be relevant, do you really not think something like that wouldn't influence a person's decision-making?
The way you focus on invalidating caring about something you don't care for really radiates ignorance that taints your opinion even before the reader can get to the subject-matter of your actual opinion. I don't think anyone would disagree with the opinion that conflict is the base of good storytelling, that a nice packaging doesn't guarantee a nice product, but dismissing the need for packaging is dismissing a substantial part of reality that actually has a measurable impact on every context of the product. Everyone partly based in that part of reality will loathe you for your ignorance, even if you still care for their product. Someone who's concern is public safety, preventing fights from breaking out, might think it's best to isolate you from direct incendiary influences. That's why we can't comment on your posts anymore.
Even though you seem to be hated for a different conviction, we all still care enough to try and explain to you where you went wrong. Even though I don't agree with the way you presented your opinion, I'd still hate to see someone leave the site over it. Especially now that you feel marginalized yourself, I hope this is an opportunity to learn how bad it feels when you're told that what you believe in doesn't matter. We would love to see less of that happening in this world, at least I would.
August 23, 2021 1:21 a.m.
Omniscience_is_life I believe dismissive was a popular term even though I dismiss my own characteristics. I believe it was a lot of ‘that’s hurtful’ without really offering much compelling explanation for why. I especially miss all that when I have insults thrown my way. Not that they bother me but they invalidate any complaint of comments being hurtful. I was called a troll, dismissive, rude, wrong and I let that roll off of me. If I happen to offend someone without targeting a specific group or individual, they can throw insults at me. But I’m supposed to take their offense seriously?
August 23, 2021 1:28 a.m.
Last_Laugh says... #39
Oof_Magic - Yeah, I didn't almost leave the site because of a disagreement but rather a combination of 2 things.
First was the fact that my posts were being deleted by YeaGo and I felt silenced EXACTLY as you described.
Second, and more importantly. I was PISSED that yeaGO had the fucking gall to respond with his insensitive bs that translates to "tough titty, your words are falling on deaf ears and you can take your 'free speech' and shove it" exactly like he responded to this thread. That attitude is complete and utter garbage and I have ZERO respect for this sites shitty admins as a direct result!
August 23, 2021 1:34 a.m.
i guess you don't have to take anything seriously... but unsuccessful conversations do tend to get shut down when it seems like everyone is just talking past each other. setting aside the issue of who's fault or who offended who first etc.... as the OP if you really want to lead a delicate topic its better to stay out of the whole who insulted who first slugfest if you really are looking for a successful dialog with the community.
...and if you're taking that as a 'shove it' or whatever, i hope not and that you can continue to be part of the community as you have for years already regardless of how your notions on some particular topic are perceived.
August 23, 2021 1:40 a.m.
Last_Laugh says... #41
yeaGO I can honestly say I haven't seen any of the discussion in question. However, having been at the receiving end of your personal censorship on this site it makes me more inclined to agree with the OP regardless. Your actions, just like anyone else's, have consequences... and your actions left a sour taste in my mouth!
Your 'shove it' part is post #2 here on this thread. If you have a different translation or a better less dickish way of wording that... that'd be great.
August 23, 2021 1:47 a.m. Edited.
well, sorry. its just that it was the only way for me to make this mission manageable for me. it was only after several years of users compelling me that forums exist here at all. but i think there are bright sides, such as if someone is hounding your deck or something that they don't happen to like, freedom of speech is nowhere to be found--they will move on politely, hopefully on their own volition, but if not we are happy to help.
August 23, 2021 1:56 a.m. Edited.
plakjekaas What would I need to reflect on? Serious question. If you’re saying my opinion was fine but I could have said it better than I can accept that an invite you to be a guide. I don’t see why people make that a factor in decision making, though I do see it happen. I explicitly said that I understand the need for motivations to be contained within functional vessels via characters. I think the latter half of that second paragraph is just meant to be deluge of insult? Okay. I encourage anyone to say what they want of me.
That last paragraph comes off gentle enough, then that second to last sentence came in. I don’t care if some people think my opinion doesn’t matter. I care that I got shut out of commenting on my own thread. I politely saw my way out the door on the original poster’s thread. And then when I made my own, it got pulled down. There was voiced dissent but it didn’t stay there. It didn’t stay in dialogue. The dialogue got destroyed. Anyone is free to disagree with me but talk it out. While I may have been disagreeable, I was staying relevant, in subject, to the thread and if this site isn’t for discussion so long as it’s relevant then there’s plenty of other deck building tools/apps/sites. I just wanted to know if I sit on the ‘wrong’ side of the line so, like with that original poster’s thread, I can politely see myself to the door.
August 23, 2021 2:01 a.m.
Last_Laugh I wouldn’t block you but I do tend to attempt not to be insulting. I think you may have a genuine frustration but where I said ‘shallow’ at worst, you’re going with dickish. I also refrain from swearing even though I’ve got one hell of a mouth on me. I just try to speak how I speak in reality? I keep a clean mouth that tends to match how dirty the room is around me? I don’t like the notion of blocking any speech and I’m pretty loose about it with my kid because I have practiced restraint myself and taught him definition, context, audience, and discretion. Ok that note, I wouldn’t discredit your opinion. I would say you may try keeping it to hospital lobby vocab? I don’t know your experience but aim to convey it like there’s children on here with parents less lenient about terms like ‘dickish’ than I.
Boy I flipped quick on language. But I do think there’s a distinction between a cleaner, if maligned term like ‘shallow’ and ‘fucking.’
August 23, 2021 2:15 a.m.
Last_Laugh I also don’t pay much kind to whether someone responds to deck advice or card suggestions. I put it out there and if it takes, then they probably have a meta or place of practice where it paid off. If it doesn’t, maybe the meta didn’t support the suggested change or whatever the circumstance may be. Blowing over your comments to respond to others after you is a little weird (can I say flaky?) but I don’t pay it much mind. No one is obligated to respond to someone, even if they have the red plus sign for advice wanted. I may be for free speech but I don’t compel it.
August 23, 2021 2:21 a.m.
plakjekaas says... #47
I was merely trying to explain why your topics got locked. How it wasn't just about you.
You said how identy should be the culmination of a character's choices and the journey their motivations take them on. You also say you don't care Teferi is black, you care about the hardships he had to endure to get where he's at. How Liliana's story wouldn't change if she'd be a man. And it sounds an awful lot like you don't care that Liliana, as a character, would care about being a woman. You don't care Teferi is black, but someone who is black, will be effected by being black, and therfore care about being black. That could be a considerate source of personal hardships to endure, instilling lots of motivation in a character.
People identifying to that by a shared background, getting more invested into a story, while not impairing anyone's joy who is not a part of the group in question, that's the value of representation you deem unworthy of mentioning. Dismissing that is short-sighted tunnelvision that some people just don't respond well to. That's where I believe the harm was in your words. Your thread was locked to prevent escalation from there.
A moderator receiving messages from people who felt uncomfortable sharing their feelings in public because of where the discussion was going, that should make anyone realize something was not okay. Instead you doubled down again and copied it in another forum. That's like: When you're being arrested for violent assault, the worst way to react is to punch the police officer in the face, saying: "I just want to talk!" I don't think that's smart behavior, maybe that's why I might sound condescending. Apologies if you took it worse than I meant it.
August 23, 2021 3:18 a.m.
I disagree with that point of view but respect that it exists.
I respect that Liliana is a woman but I don’t assess that in her character and Liliana probably has bigger concerns than her gender like a dead brother, corrupting a planeswalker, betraying others, and attempting to regain her soul which she sold to demons. Same goes for Teferi with his tragedies. Bigger things on their plate.
To that last point, I never targeted anyone. I never meant to offend anyone, even if it happened anyway. I think I see where you’re trying to go with the analogy but it gets lost in that I wasn’t violent. And I didn’t just get ‘arrested’ but insulted by the metaphorical ‘cop’. I think any form of police best have their own conduct in order when attempting to assert authority.
August 23, 2021 3:44 a.m. Edited.
EleshNornsFs says... #49
Oof_Magic You don't understand the point of representation. All representation matters, even if it is just "meaningless pandering" or product-pushing. You don't care that Teferi is black, that Liliana is a woman, or that Niko is nonbinary because you don't have to care. They don't represent you. But for those they do represent, it makes a world of difference. Kids, and even adults, need heroes who are just like them. Fun fact: Miles Morales is the first latino superhero to hit the big screen.
Also, it takes a special kind of person to say something insulting, not care that what they said was insulting (even rebranding rudeness as "crass," trying to say it's an admirable quality), amd then proceed to play the victim and claim that people are insulting you.
August 23, 2021 7:09 a.m.
sergiodelrio says... #50
We aim to live in a reality where "race" (put it in brackets because in regard to homo sapiens, being black/white/native american/etc. does, as backed and proven by science, in fact not qualify for categorization by race in a biological sense, and hence is purely a sociologial construct often misrepresented and misunderstood as a biological one), gender, sexual identity, and other traits often abused to discriminate against otherwise unaffiliated people, do not matter.
However, this reality is not the present. Could you think of something more trivial than XYZ head of state, singer songwriter or shop owner being heterosexual? Not worth mentioning unless you wanna date them or something. So why would other sexualities ever matter unless the plot is specifically revolving around that fact?
Since the aimed at normal is not yet the normal in peoples heads, many folks rightfully stress that fact in one way or another (without getting too political here, that's what BLM did in a nutshell, while everyone is aware that ALM, for obvious reasons it had to be stressed that BLM).
Another way to stress it is in pop culture.
That has obvious limits though, especially in fiction and even more so when your literary format is MTG story shorts. One is forced to use stereotypes in such limited environments. But they are trying to at least be as inclusive as possible.
Conclusively I want to stress one more thing: Most people don't live up to the labels other people push on them. We're like electrons that, most of the time, live within a blur of true statements about ourselves until someone demads a definitive answer at a certain point in time. As an example, I consider myself a heterosexual man, but once I have kissed another man in a non-funny/weird way. That could clearly be represented as a homosexual action, yet still I consider myself heterosexual.
Not entirely sure my post actually got anywhere, but I felt I had to get that off my chest. Peace
yeaGO says... #2
[note: this site was never promised to be a bastion of 'free speech' as anyone defines it. the scope and mission of this site is merely polite discussion of deck-building and related mtg topics]
August 22, 2021 5:37 p.m.