Recommend
33 
 Thumb up
 Hide
519 Posts
[1]  Prev «  16 , 17 , 18 , 19 , 20  Next »  [21] | 

BoardGameGeek» Forums » Everything Else » Complaint Department

Subject: Why I rarely post to BGG forums anymore rss

Your Tags: Add tags
Popular Tags: [View All]
Ian S
United Kingdom
flag msg tools
Avatar
corkysru wrote:
I am offended every time someone cannot actually explain why they are offended. If you can't explain it why are you?

Hi Patrick
What if it's something that is so emotional that they really don't want to engage about it on the internet, or they see the person asking for an explanation as argumentative or aggressive, such that it's likely to cause them distress in replying?

As long as you are sympathetic to them, then they'll be more likely to engage. If you approach it as a debate or argument, then some will not engage with you, and be upset at your behaviour. As I said above, if I've caused offence, it really is up to me to build the bridges to a shared understanding. If instead I quiz them in a confrontational manner, then I trust people reading this would think me a jerk.

It's often much more about the 'how' (the discussion) rather than the 'what' (the subject that has caused upset).

Regards
Ian
6 
 Thumb up
 tip
 Hide
  • [+] Dice rolls
Grant
United States
Cuyahoga Falls
Ohio
flag msg tools
One of the best gaming weekends in Ohio since 2010. Search facebook for "BOGA Weekend Retreat" for more info!
badge
Avatar
mbmbmbmbmb
corkysru wrote:
Laissez K wrote:
corkysru wrote:
spanna wrote:
Thanks for that Patrick and we've all said things we've regretted, and lamentably sometimes to those we love the most, but that's a different topic.

I suppose I draw a very subtle distinction between hurt and offence. If someone is hurt then I'll be unhappy I have done that, even if I don't understand why. I see hurt as personal and has very much upset then. If someone is offended, then I'd also be upset, but would want to know if I've done something inadvertent, or they've misinterpreted what I said, or whether we genuinely see things as polar opposites. Either way, dialogue to discover why is better than us jumping into the trenches and starting to fire at anything that moves (aka 'the internet').

Such dialogues can be very educational, and I saw a perfect example about a month ago here. A post that was inflammatory, (it turned out that was quite unintended), and the protagonists over the course of a very few posts gave each other the necessary space and sorted it out with good grace. I can't find the thread now, but the resolution ended up with the protaganists gaining respect rather than losing it.

Taking a different approach, my partner has a wonderful turn of phrase when she thinks someone has said something offensive: "What exactly do you mean by that?" (sometimes the 'exactly' being delivered as if bolded, underlined and highlighted in blood red wow ). It's her way of saying they've got a (single) chance to think about it / back down / clarify. If it's an honest misunderstanding, or they realise they've overstepped the mark and retract, then all is fine, but if they persist, then due warning has been given. Most have enough common sense to avoid the consequences of persisting.

So we handle such situations differently, but in each way, there is an opportunity to diffuse and that does help.

Regards
Ian
I echo your feelings on understanding.

I always like to understand why I offended or hurt someone. In fact I always like to understand why people feel the way they do about anything. Even if I agree completely or vehemently disagree. Knowledge is power.

Unfortunately I have found that a good amount of easily offended people can't carry on a dialogue about why. Either because they have never actually bothered to think about (just echoing what they were taught or told) or they are just fanatical about it and they "know" they are right and anyone disagreeing with them can't possibly make a valid point about things.
Another possibility is that, unlike first-time offenders, offendees have already been offended, pointed out the offense, and explained why it was offensive too many times for them to want to repeat the experience. It has reached the point where asking why people are offended can be seen as a common derailment tactic.
I am offended every time someone cannot actually explain why they are offended. If you can't explain it why are you?
Because people are strange, complicated creatures. Just because YOU don’t understand them, and they can’t or won’t find the words to articulate their feelings to YOUR satisfaction, doesn’t invalidate their reaction.

YOU don’t get to set the bar for requirements allowing people to feel offended. Sorry.
18 
 Thumb up
1.00
 tip
 Hide
  • [+] Dice rolls
Железный комиссар
United States
Indiana
flag msg tools
badge
Avatar
mbmbmbmbmb
corkysru wrote:
I am offended every time someone cannot actually explain why they are offended. If you can't explain it why are you?

I understand the logic, and I understand why this is the initial position of many people.

But under scrutiny I don't think it's a viable position, and whereas that may not have been as obvious 20 years ago, the internet makes it more obvious every week, every day, every hour.

Basically it's asymmetrical warfare. If 100 people demand an explanation for their "first-time" offense (i.e. "this is all new to me I don't know why you're offended"), but 1 individual has to go through life, every day explaining to a new (& entitled) person very basic tenets of respect and consideration for others, at some point any reasonable person asks why the 1 individual is responsible for "educating" the 100.

And the internet has taught us all that it's much worse than that. Some indeterminate number of the 100 are not sincere, not asking in good faith. They essentially enjoy two power-trips at the same time: deceiving their un-witting accomplices ("hey, we're just ordinary people, we're not out to get anyone!") and while marginalizing others out of the conversation and as far out of existence as possible.

So, this may genuinely throw you for a loop. But my belief is that you don't always deserve an explanation. The person being s*** on constantly is not responsible for the moral education of those who give no consideration in advance of their actions, but demand an ironclad treatise in the aftermath.
19 
 Thumb up
 tip
 Hide
  • [+] Dice rolls
Rich Keiser
United States
Waunakee
Wisconsin
flag msg tools
badge
Avatar
mbmbmbmbmb
corkysru wrote:
Laissez K wrote:
corkysru wrote:
spanna wrote:
Thanks for that Patrick and we've all said things we've regretted, and lamentably sometimes to those we love the most, but that's a different topic.

I suppose I draw a very subtle distinction between hurt and offence. If someone is hurt then I'll be unhappy I have done that, even if I don't understand why. I see hurt as personal and has very much upset then. If someone is offended, then I'd also be upset, but would want to know if I've done something inadvertent, or they've misinterpreted what I said, or whether we genuinely see things as polar opposites. Either way, dialogue to discover why is better than us jumping into the trenches and starting to fire at anything that moves (aka 'the internet').

Such dialogues can be very educational, and I saw a perfect example about a month ago here. A post that was inflammatory, (it turned out that was quite unintended), and the protagonists over the course of a very few posts gave each other the necessary space and sorted it out with good grace. I can't find the thread now, but the resolution ended up with the protaganists gaining respect rather than losing it.

Taking a different approach, my partner has a wonderful turn of phrase when she thinks someone has said something offensive: "What exactly do you mean by that?" (sometimes the 'exactly' being delivered as if bolded, underlined and highlighted in blood red wow ). It's her way of saying they've got a (single) chance to think about it / back down / clarify. If it's an honest misunderstanding, or they realise they've overstepped the mark and retract, then all is fine, but if they persist, then due warning has been given. Most have enough common sense to avoid the consequences of persisting.

So we handle such situations differently, but in each way, there is an opportunity to diffuse and that does help.

Regards
Ian
I echo your feelings on understanding.

I always like to understand why I offended or hurt someone. In fact I always like to understand why people feel the way they do about anything. Even if I agree completely or vehemently disagree. Knowledge is power.

Unfortunately I have found that a good amount of easily offended people can't carry on a dialogue about why. Either because they have never actually bothered to think about (just echoing what they were taught or told) or they are just fanatical about it and they "know" they are right and anyone disagreeing with them can't possibly make a valid point about things.
Another possibility is that, unlike first-time offenders, offendees have already been offended, pointed out the offense, and explained why it was offensive too many times for them to want to repeat the experience. It has reached the point where asking why people are offended can be seen as a common derailment tactic.
I am offended every time someone cannot actually explain why they are offended. If you can't explain it why are you?

Who owes you what?

1 
 Thumb up
 tip
 Hide
  • [+] Dice rolls
Patrick G.
United States
Glenshaw
Pennsylvania
flag msg tools
Does your religion have lightsabers? Nope? Didn't think so.
badge
"A person is smart. People are dumb, panicky dangerous animals." Agent K. Oh my what he would think of people had he known about what the internet would become.....
Avatar
mbmbmbmbmb
spanna wrote:
corkysru wrote:
I am offended every time someone cannot actually explain why they are offended. If you can't explain it why are you?

Hi Patrick
What if it's something that is so emotional that they really don't want to engage about it on the internet, or they see the person asking for an explanation as argumentative or aggressive, such that it's likely to cause them distress in replying?

As long as you are sympathetic to them, then they'll be more likely to engage. If you approach it as a debate or argument, then some will not engage with you, and be upset at your behaviour. As I said above, if I've caused offence, it really is up to me to build the bridges to a shared understanding. If instead I quiz them in a confrontational manner, then I trust people reading this would think me a jerk.

It's often much more about the 'how' (the discussion) rather than the 'what' (the subject that has caused upset).

Regards
Ian
Ian,
I think the how you caused offense is important to determine who's responsible for building a bridge. Both sides need to work on it. It's nigh impossible to build a bridge over a large gap from just one side. People can get offended by just about anything these days..and sometimes it's difficult to understand.



Железный комиссар:
I can't argue with your thoughts.. but that doesn't excuse things. If I find myself explaining something too often I write a wiki or an about page or something like that. Maybe people need to start doing that to log why certain things are offensive.

Rules are made because someone did something somebody didn't like.... Did you know it was once legal to steal parts of an American owned transport ship from the ship? It's wasn't illegal until someone did it. Then it was made illegal.

Maybe we should start treating being offended the same way? Knowledge is power and if someone doesn't know and isn't told they can't learn. If someone just runs away crying every time someone says something they can never learn what they did to offend them. Generic responses used on this site's moderation aren't helpful. Why is my post dismissive when it asks the same level of validity(to me) questions someone's else post does?



Grant:
And why do they get to set the bar for being offended? Shouldn't it be a group effort?
 
 Thumb up
 tip
 Hide
  • [+] Dice rolls
Steve
United States
West
Minnesota
flag msg tools
Avatar
mbmbmbmbmb
corkysru wrote:
spanna wrote:
corkysru wrote:
I am offended every time someone cannot actually explain why they are offended. If you can't explain it why are you?

Hi Patrick
What if it's something that is so emotional that they really don't want to engage about it on the internet, or they see the person asking for an explanation as argumentative or aggressive, such that it's likely to cause them distress in replying?

As long as you are sympathetic to them, then they'll be more likely to engage. If you approach it as a debate or argument, then some will not engage with you, and be upset at your behaviour. As I said above, if I've caused offence, it really is up to me to build the bridges to a shared understanding. If instead I quiz them in a confrontational manner, then I trust people reading this would think me a jerk.

It's often much more about the 'how' (the discussion) rather than the 'what' (the subject that has caused upset).

Regards
Ian
Ian,
I think the how you caused offense is important to determine who's responsible for building a bridge. Both sides need to work on it. It's nigh impossible to build a bridge over a large gap from just one side. People can get offended by just about anything these days..and sometimes it's difficult to understand.



Железный комиссар:
I can't argue with your thoughts.. but that doesn't excuse things. If I find myself explaining something too often I write a wiki or an about page or something like that. Maybe people need to start doing that to log why certain things are offensive.

Rules are made because someone did something somebody didn't like.... Did you know it was once legal to steal parts of an American owned transport ship from the ship? It's wasn't illegal until someone did it. Then it was made illegal.

Maybe we should start treating being offended the same way? Knowledge is power and if someone doesn't know and isn't told they can't learn. If someone just runs away crying every time someone says something they can never learn what they did to offend them. Generic responses used on this site's moderation aren't helpful. Why is my post dismissive when it asks the same level of validity(to me) questions someone's else post does?



Grant:
And why do they get to set the bar for being offended? Shouldn't it be a group effort?
In a vacuum or a courtroom, I think your viewpoint is valid. However, not when it comes to emotions and personalities.

For example, if hearing Beethoven makes me feel sad, then it is not a group effort to "prove" why I should or should not feel sad. I simply feel sad, and there is nothing you can do about it.

If I get tired of explaining this to every single classical music expert (or internet expert), I am not going to write a wiki page or a blog, I'm simply going to stop talking about it and stop even attempting to join in those discussions, or even stop going to those sites/forums.

Is this fair to me, that others and their curiosity are pushing me out of public or semi-public places that I would otherwise enjoy?

Is it okay to say "Well, Steve, you just can't be sad here, the rest of us enjoy this place and we outnumber you, so get lost until you fix yourself." ? No, it isn't okay, because there is nothing objectively wrong with me being sad when I hear Beethoven, and there is something objectively wrong with folks that tell me I need fixing or that I need to explain in objective facts why I feel sad before I can feel sad around them.
1 
 Thumb up
 tip
 Hide
  • [+] Dice rolls
Ian S
United Kingdom
flag msg tools
Avatar
corkysru wrote:

Ian,
I think the how you caused offense is important to determine who's responsible for building a bridge. Both sides need to work on it. It's nigh impossible to build a bridge over a large gap from just one side. People can get offended by just about anything these days..and sometimes it's difficult to understand.
Hi Patrick
We will disagree on this. If I have offended someone, I would not expect them to make the first move towards reconciliation.

If it turns out they had misunderstood, I've seen plenty of instances where they've apologised for jumping to the wrong conclusion, but I can't recall a single instance that didn't involve the other person reaching out to them first.

Regards
Ian
1 
 Thumb up
 tip
 Hide
  • [+] Dice rolls
Martijn Broeren
Netherlands
Nijmegen
Gelderland
flag msg tools
Avatar
mbmbmbmbmb
I like to quote the late Mr. Hitchens on the whole 'that's offensive!' debate: "Those who are determined to be ‘offended’ will discover a provocation somewhere. We cannot possibly adjust enough to please the fanatics*, and it is degrading to make the attempt."

*it's from a religious debate but you can substitute the word 'fanatic' for anything.






4 
 Thumb up
5.00
 tip
 Hide
  • [+] Dice rolls
David Fair
United States
Damascus
MD
flag msg tools
designer
badge
Avatar
mbmbmbmbmb
Marthian80 wrote:
I like to quote the late Mr. Hitchens on the whole 'that's offensive!' debate: "Those who are determined to be ‘offended’ will discover a provocation somewhere. We cannot possibly adjust enough to please the fanatics*, and it is degrading to make the attempt."

*it's from a religious debate but you can substitute the word 'fanatic' for anything.
Just because someone is offended does not mean they fall into the category of "Those who are determined to be ‘offended’..." nor does the word offended need to be put into scare quotes. There may be those like that, but assuming everyone who ever gets offended is that way just sounds like mental justification in order to go around being as deliberately offensive as possible and then claiming everyone else is crying wolf.

Which Hitchens did rather well. It is not a behavior I would strive to emulate, however.
11 
 Thumb up
2.00
 tip
 Hide
  • [+] Dice rolls
Grant
United States
Cuyahoga Falls
Ohio
flag msg tools
One of the best gaming weekends in Ohio since 2010. Search facebook for "BOGA Weekend Retreat" for more info!
badge
Avatar
mbmbmbmbmb
corkysru wrote:
Grant:
And why do they get to set the bar for being offended?
Because... they’re the one... who’s feeling... offended? Is that a serious question? I really can’t believe I’m having to explain this.

Quote:
Shouldn't it be a group effort?
Good god no. Everyone is different. Everyone reacts differently to different things. Why on earth would you think there needs to be some kind of consensus on what is allowed to be considered offensive?
5 
 Thumb up
 tip
 Hide
  • [+] Dice rolls
Железный комиссар
United States
Indiana
flag msg tools
badge
Avatar
mbmbmbmbmb
Marthian80 wrote:
I like to quote the late Mr. Hitchens on the whole 'that's offensive!' debate: "Those who are determined to be ‘offended’ will discover a provocation somewhere. We cannot possibly adjust enough to please the fanatics*, and it is degrading to make the attempt."

*it's from a religious debate but you can substitute the word 'fanatic' for anything.

I don't think this is wrong, but I think it's woefully inadequate.

True, we have probably all met someone who is some combination of unhappy and unwell, and seems to "discover provocation" anywhere and everywhere. But that is sad, and not nearly so common that this sort of thinking can 'restore our innocence,' as it were.

Instead, quotes like these are easily converted into one of the most cherished axioms of the internet troll: "there's just no pleasing those people."

And that attitude is frankly more common and more destructive than the implacable victim whose righteousness feeds on being wronged.
9 
 Thumb up
 tip
 Hide
  • [+] Dice rolls
Patrick G.
United States
Glenshaw
Pennsylvania
flag msg tools
Does your religion have lightsabers? Nope? Didn't think so.
badge
"A person is smart. People are dumb, panicky dangerous animals." Agent K. Oh my what he would think of people had he known about what the internet would become.....
Avatar
mbmbmbmbmb
JohnRayJr wrote:
Marthian80 wrote:
I like to quote the late Mr. Hitchens on the whole 'that's offensive!' debate: "Those who are determined to be ‘offended’ will discover a provocation somewhere. We cannot possibly adjust enough to please the fanatics*, and it is degrading to make the attempt."

*it's from a religious debate but you can substitute the word 'fanatic' for anything.

I don't think this is wrong, but I think it's woefully inadequate.

True, we have probably all met someone who is some combination of unhappy and unwell, and seems to "discover provocation" anywhere and everywhere. But that is sad, and not nearly so common that this sort of thinking can 'restore our innocence,' as it were.

Instead, quotes like these are easily converted into one of the most cherished axioms of the internet troll: "there's just no pleasing those people."

And that attitude is frankly more common and more destructive than the implacable victim whose righteousness feeds on being wronged.
I think the real problem is(like in most cases) the extremes cause issues for everyone.

Are there people who will be offended by anything? Absolutely. Are there as common place as trolls would have us think? Absolutely not. Do people get offended by things that are truly absurd? Absolutely. I'm not saying from my POV. I'd be happy to take any average, intelligent, logical person's POV as a baseline on what is offensive.

4 
 Thumb up
 tip
 Hide
  • [+] Dice rolls
J J
Australia
flag msg tools
corkysru wrote:
JohnRayJr wrote:
Marthian80 wrote:
I like to quote the late Mr. Hitchens on the whole 'that's offensive!' debate: "Those who are determined to be ‘offended’ will discover a provocation somewhere. We cannot possibly adjust enough to please the fanatics*, and it is degrading to make the attempt."

*it's from a religious debate but you can substitute the word 'fanatic' for anything.

I don't think this is wrong, but I think it's woefully inadequate.

True, we have probably all met someone who is some combination of unhappy and unwell, and seems to "discover provocation" anywhere and everywhere. But that is sad, and not nearly so common that this sort of thinking can 'restore our innocence,' as it were.

Instead, quotes like these are easily converted into one of the most cherished axioms of the internet troll: "there's just no pleasing those people."

And that attitude is frankly more common and more destructive than the implacable victim whose righteousness feeds on being wronged.
I think the real problem is(like in most cases) the extremes cause issues for everyone.

Are there people who will be offended by anything? Absolutely. Are there as common place as trolls would have us think? Absolutely not. Do people get offended by things that are truly absurd? Absolutely. I'm not saying from my POV. I'd be happy to take any average, intelligent, logical person's POV as a baseline on what is offensive.


What, the man in the street? Common sense?

Absolutely not.

And your required qualifications above are exactly what I've seen trotted out plenty of times as a laundry list used to disqualify people and thus enable offensive behaviour endlessly. Of course they're offended, they're just being emotional instead of logical.

But it isn't surprising to see this from someone who proudly proclaims their intention to post Busen Memo into geeklists as "a joke".
3 
 Thumb up
0.25
 tip
 Hide
  • [+] Dice rolls
Grant
United States
Cuyahoga Falls
Ohio
flag msg tools
One of the best gaming weekends in Ohio since 2010. Search facebook for "BOGA Weekend Retreat" for more info!
badge
Avatar
mbmbmbmbmb
corkysru wrote:
I'd be happy to take any average, intelligent, logical person's POV as a baseline on what is offensive.
You are consistently “missing” the point to a degree that appears quite disingenuous.
1 
 Thumb up
 tip
 Hide
  • [+] Dice rolls
Rich Keiser
United States
Waunakee
Wisconsin
flag msg tools
badge
Avatar
mbmbmbmbmb
corkysru wrote:
JohnRayJr wrote:
Marthian80 wrote:
I like to quote the late Mr. Hitchens on the whole 'that's offensive!' debate: "Those who are determined to be ‘offended’ will discover a provocation somewhere. We cannot possibly adjust enough to please the fanatics*, and it is degrading to make the attempt."

*it's from a religious debate but you can substitute the word 'fanatic' for anything.

I don't think this is wrong, but I think it's woefully inadequate.

True, we have probably all met someone who is some combination of unhappy and unwell, and seems to "discover provocation" anywhere and everywhere. But that is sad, and not nearly so common that this sort of thinking can 'restore our innocence,' as it were.

Instead, quotes like these are easily converted into one of the most cherished axioms of the internet troll: "there's just no pleasing those people."

And that attitude is frankly more common and more destructive than the implacable victim whose righteousness feeds on being wronged.
I think the real problem is(like in most cases) the extremes cause issues for everyone.

Are there people who will be offended by anything? Absolutely. Are there as common place as trolls would have us think? Absolutely not. Do people get offended by things that are truly absurd? Absolutely. I'm not saying from my POV. I'd be happy to take any average, intelligent, logical person's POV as a baseline on what is offensive.


I wouldn't depend on the average man to water my lawn, let alone act as the seer for any complex dynamic or problem.

3 
 Thumb up
0.01
 tip
 Hide
  • [+] Dice rolls
Patrick G.
United States
Glenshaw
Pennsylvania
flag msg tools
Does your religion have lightsabers? Nope? Didn't think so.
badge
"A person is smart. People are dumb, panicky dangerous animals." Agent K. Oh my what he would think of people had he known about what the internet would become.....
Avatar
mbmbmbmbmb
The most amusing part of all three responses is that, not only do you mock the average person but you all misquote me despite the correct text being in your posts. I didn't say the average person. I said an average, INTELLIGENT, LOGICAL person. All one phrase. The point of adding words to a phrase is for clarification. The idea being that the average person is not the same as what I specified. The fact that all three of you mocked my comment and mocked then" average person" is amusing, telling and in itself offensive.
1 
 Thumb up
 tip
 Hide
  • [+] Dice rolls
Grant
United States
Cuyahoga Falls
Ohio
flag msg tools
One of the best gaming weekends in Ohio since 2010. Search facebook for "BOGA Weekend Retreat" for more info!
badge
Avatar
mbmbmbmbmb
corkysru wrote:
The most amusing part of all three responses is that, not only do you mock the average person but you all misquote me despite the correct text being in your posts. I didn't say the average person. I said an average, INTELLIGENT, LOGICAL person. All one phrase. The point of adding words to a phrase is for clarification. The idea being that the average person is not the same as what I specified. The fact that all three of you mocked my comment and mocked then" average person" is amusing, telling and in itself offensive.
Ah yes, it was only a matter of time before you played the “Well ACKTCHUALLY I’M the one who is offended!” card. Well done, Corks. The cycle is complete.
4 
 Thumb up
 tip
 Hide
  • [+] Dice rolls
Ian S
United Kingdom
flag msg tools
Avatar
Let's keep off the petty points scoring please.
 
 Thumb up
 tip
 Hide
  • [+] Dice rolls
Rich Keiser
United States
Waunakee
Wisconsin
flag msg tools
badge
Avatar
mbmbmbmbmb
corkysru wrote:
The most amusing part of all three responses is that, not only do you mock the average person but you all misquote me despite the correct text being in your posts. I didn't say the average person. I said an average, INTELLIGENT, LOGICAL person. All one phrase. The point of adding words to a phrase is for clarification. The idea being that the average person is not the same as what I specified. The fact that all three of you mocked my comment and mocked then" average person" is amusing, telling and in itself offensive.

If I were to search for the Uber-average person you describe, they wouldn't be average.

Will have to wade through a mass of dolts to find the Uni-corn. That is my belief and experience, and yes, telling of my belief and experience.



corkysru wrote:
... and in itself offensive.

PS: Loves me the "I Attract Crazy Women" badge.

Too rich... too rich.

2 
 Thumb up
 tip
 Hide
  • [+] Dice rolls
Grant
United States
Cuyahoga Falls
Ohio
flag msg tools
One of the best gaming weekends in Ohio since 2010. Search facebook for "BOGA Weekend Retreat" for more info!
badge
Avatar
mbmbmbmbmb
spanna wrote:
Let's keep off the petty points scoring please.
Ian, I respect how hard you’ve tried to respectfully engage with corks, but it’s pretty clear he’s not here to debate in good faith. Petty point scoring is really all that’s left.
3 
 Thumb up
 tip
 Hide
  • [+] Dice rolls
Martijn Broeren
Netherlands
Nijmegen
Gelderland
flag msg tools
Avatar
mbmbmbmbmb
BeyondMonopoly wrote:
Marthian80 wrote:
I like to quote the late Mr. Hitchens on the whole 'that's offensive!' debate: "Those who are determined to be ‘offended’ will discover a provocation somewhere. We cannot possibly adjust enough to please the fanatics*, and it is degrading to make the attempt."

*it's from a religious debate but you can substitute the word 'fanatic' for anything.
Just because someone is offended does not mean they fall into the category of "Those who are determined to be ‘offended’..." nor does the word offended need to be put into scare quotes. There may be those like that, but assuming everyone who ever gets offended is that way just sounds like mental justification in order to go around being as deliberately offensive as possible and then claiming everyone else is crying wolf.

Which Hitchens did rather well. It is not a behavior I would strive to emulate, however.

I'm sure that there are people that use this quote as an excuse to be deliberately insulting but that is not what this is about. It is about the never ending story of pandering so that nobody will be offended. And that is an impossible task.

Because what one regards as "deliberately offensive" is just a way of expression for another.

For example, people are offended by the lyrics of metal bands like Rammstein. So should Rammstein stop making controversial songs and just sing about flowers to pander to the offended people? People are offended by strange art that shows naked people, so should artists stop making that? People take offense from Quentin Tarrantino movies, so should he stop making movies the way he wants to?

And I can think of hundreds of examples in the gaming world but to bring up an example that I didn't expect to see: I have seen posts from people that where offended by the cover of the game Agricola because in their opinion it depicts gender inequality. Should we pander to them to?

And this is the reason why I posted that Hitchens quote: people will step on shaky ladders to look into the neighbor's window and try to find something to be offended about. And I agree with Hitchens that it is degrading to make the attempt to pander to the offended. Before you know it, all games will be sold in plain grey boxes until somebody is offended by the color grey.


5 
 Thumb up
 tip
 Hide
  • [+] Dice rolls
Grant
United States
Cuyahoga Falls
Ohio
flag msg tools
One of the best gaming weekends in Ohio since 2010. Search facebook for "BOGA Weekend Retreat" for more info!
badge
Avatar
mbmbmbmbmb
Marthian80 wrote:
BeyondMonopoly wrote:
Marthian80 wrote:
I like to quote the late Mr. Hitchens on the whole 'that's offensive!' debate: "Those who are determined to be ‘offended’ will discover a provocation somewhere. We cannot possibly adjust enough to please the fanatics*, and it is degrading to make the attempt."

*it's from a religious debate but you can substitute the word 'fanatic' for anything.
Just because someone is offended does not mean they fall into the category of "Those who are determined to be ‘offended’..." nor does the word offended need to be put into scare quotes. There may be those like that, but assuming everyone who ever gets offended is that way just sounds like mental justification in order to go around being as deliberately offensive as possible and then claiming everyone else is crying wolf.

Which Hitchens did rather well. It is not a behavior I would strive to emulate, however.

I'm sure that there are people that use this quote as an excuse to be deliberately insulting but that is not what this is about. It is about the never ending story of pandering so that nobody will be offended. And that is an impossible task.

Because what one regards as "deliberately offensive" is just a way of expression for another.

For example, people are offended by the lyrics of metal bands like Rammstein. So should Rammstein stop making controversial songs and just sing about flowers to pander to the offended people? People are offended by strange art that shows naked people, so should artists stop making that? People take offense from Quentin Tarrantino movies, so should he stop making movies the way he wants to?

And I can think of hundreds of examples in the gaming world but to bring up an example that I didn't expect to see: I have seen posts from people that where offended by the cover of the game Agricola because in their opinion it depicts gender inequality. Should we pander to them to?

And this is the reason why I posted that Hitchens quote: people will step on shaky ladders to look into the neighbor's window and try to find something to be offended about. And I agree with Hitchens that it is degrading to make the attempt to pander to the offended. Before you know it, all games will be sold in plain grey boxes until somebody is offended by the color grey.


Uh huh, but you realize, of course, there is absolutely no relationship between agreeing that a thing should be allowed to exist in the world (even if it offends people), and agreeing that any form of offensive posting should be allowed here on BGG (the subject of this thread), yes?
2 
 Thumb up
 tip
 Hide
  • [+] Dice rolls
Bryan Thunkd
United States
Northampton
MA
flag msg tools
badge
Avatar
mbmbmbmbmb
Marthian80 wrote:
BeyondMonopoly wrote:
Marthian80 wrote:
I like to quote the late Mr. Hitchens on the whole 'that's offensive!' debate: "Those who are determined to be ‘offended’ will discover a provocation somewhere. We cannot possibly adjust enough to please the fanatics*, and it is degrading to make the attempt."

*it's from a religious debate but you can substitute the word 'fanatic' for anything.
Just because someone is offended does not mean they fall into the category of "Those who are determined to be ‘offended’..." nor does the word offended need to be put into scare quotes. There may be those like that, but assuming everyone who ever gets offended is that way just sounds like mental justification in order to go around being as deliberately offensive as possible and then claiming everyone else is crying wolf.

Which Hitchens did rather well. It is not a behavior I would strive to emulate, however.

I'm sure that there are people that use this quote as an excuse to be deliberately insulting but that is not what this is about. It is about the never ending story of pandering so that nobody will be offended.
Except that's essentially a strawman argument. I don't ever see anybody arguing that we should avoid offending everyone on every possible topic.

Instead the way these things work is that someone says, "We shouldn't do X because it is offensive." And the guy who objects starts this rant about how people are offended by everything and finds something that offends a vanishingly small group of people and says "See... people are offended by everything! How can we possibly avoid offending everyone!?!?" and the implied conclusion is that it's too much effort to be perfect so we shouldn't even bother trying to be good.

But that's a flawed argument. Yeah, we can't avoid offending any person ever, but that's not what is being asked. Nobody is insisting we be perfect and never offend any person. We're just asking that you curtail the really bad and horribly offensive stuff.

For example, just because some guy walking down the street is going to be offended if I don't smile at him and say "good morning" doesn't mean that it's okay to make racist statements. And any argument that implies we're trying to insure "nobody is offended" is focusing on the trivial examples that'll offend some insignificant portion of the population and trying to make an equivalence between that nothingness and something that offends a very large percentage of people. And that's not valid.

That's like a couple buying a house and the wife wants to try and counter the asking price for one that's twenty thousand less and the husband throws out something like "What's this obsession with saving money?!? People keep trying to insure that 'nobody loses money ever'! The other day you tried to talk me into buying a medium sized popcorn at the movie theater to save a quarter!"

Obviously even if we believe that it's silly to try and avoid losing a quarter, that doesn't invalidate the value of saving twenty thousand dollars when buying a house. Yeah, it may be too much effort to try and avoid losing every penny ever... but that doesn't mean we can't put in effort when the consequences are much larger. And that's the point that you're missing when you argue about insuring "nobody will be offended" ever. You're right that it's too much effort to try and avoid offending every person ever... but that doesn't mean we can't put in effort when the consequences are much larger.

So yeah, I'm not trying to protect every person who ever might be offended. I'm focusing on the things that most people find offensive. And if you can't distinguish between the two, I suspect that it's an intentional blindness rather than a legitimate inability to separate "any person ever" and "most people now".
10 
 Thumb up
 tip
 Hide
  • [+] Dice rolls
Rich Keiser
United States
Waunakee
Wisconsin
flag msg tools
badge
Avatar
mbmbmbmbmb
Marthian80 wrote:
BeyondMonopoly wrote:
Marthian80 wrote:
I like to quote the late Mr. Hitchens on the whole 'that's offensive!' debate: "Those who are determined to be ‘offended’ will discover a provocation somewhere. We cannot possibly adjust enough to please the fanatics*, and it is degrading to make the attempt."

*it's from a religious debate but you can substitute the word 'fanatic' for anything.
Just because someone is offended does not mean they fall into the category of "Those who are determined to be ‘offended’..." nor does the word offended need to be put into scare quotes. There may be those like that, but assuming everyone who ever gets offended is that way just sounds like mental justification in order to go around being as deliberately offensive as possible and then claiming everyone else is crying wolf.

Which Hitchens did rather well. It is not a behavior I would strive to emulate, however.

I'm sure that there are people that use this quote as an excuse to be deliberately insulting but that is not what this is about. It is about the never ending story of pandering so that nobody will be offended. And that is an impossible task.

Because what one regards as "deliberately offensive" is just a way of expression for another.

For example, people are offended by the lyrics of metal bands like Rammstein. So should Rammstein stop making controversial songs and just sing about flowers to pander to the offended people? People are offended by strange art that shows naked people, so should artists stop making that? People take offense from Quentin Tarrantino movies, so should he stop making movies the way he wants to?

And I can think of hundreds of examples in the gaming world but to bring up an example that I didn't expect to see: I have seen posts from people that where offended by the cover of the game Agricola because in their opinion it depicts gender inequality. Should we pander to them to?

And this is the reason why I posted that Hitchens quote: people will step on shaky ladders to look into the neighbor's window and try to find something to be offended about. And I agree with Hitchens that it is degrading to make the attempt to pander to the offended. Before you know it, all games will be sold in plain grey boxes until somebody is offended by the color grey.



If you have to ask yourself if something you said is unacceptable or insulting, it probably is. Furthermore, if you have to follow-up with whatever rolled out of the pie-hole as "just joking", "lighten-up", "don't be so sensitive"... you probably shouldn't have said it.

These things take time to figure out. For those uncomfortable with nuance, growth, and maturity, I can understand how it would be a bit scary and very easy to run back to home to touch base. Everyone knows when they have evolved, because they look back and cringe at the previous shit that rolled out of their pie-hole. That is a good sign that one is moving in the right direction.

Now, getting there is quite hard, because it takes a lot of tools, dedication, will, and insight, which is why most go to their graves pretty much in the same spot they were decades prior.

Life is hard. Change is hard. Most aren't cut out for it.

6 
 Thumb up
0.25
 tip
 Hide
  • [+] Dice rolls
Pete
United States
Northbrook
Illinois
flag msg tools
badge
Avatar
mbmbmbmbmb
darthhugo wrote:
Marthian80 wrote:
BeyondMonopoly wrote:
Marthian80 wrote:
I like to quote the late Mr. Hitchens on the whole 'that's offensive!' debate: "Those who are determined to be ‘offended’ will discover a provocation somewhere. We cannot possibly adjust enough to please the fanatics*, and it is degrading to make the attempt."

*it's from a religious debate but you can substitute the word 'fanatic' for anything.
Just because someone is offended does not mean they fall into the category of "Those who are determined to be ‘offended’..." nor does the word offended need to be put into scare quotes. There may be those like that, but assuming everyone who ever gets offended is that way just sounds like mental justification in order to go around being as deliberately offensive as possible and then claiming everyone else is crying wolf.

Which Hitchens did rather well. It is not a behavior I would strive to emulate, however.

I'm sure that there are people that use this quote as an excuse to be deliberately insulting but that is not what this is about. It is about the never ending story of pandering so that nobody will be offended. And that is an impossible task.

Because what one regards as "deliberately offensive" is just a way of expression for another.

For example, people are offended by the lyrics of metal bands like Rammstein. So should Rammstein stop making controversial songs and just sing about flowers to pander to the offended people? People are offended by strange art that shows naked people, so should artists stop making that? People take offense from Quentin Tarrantino movies, so should he stop making movies the way he wants to?

And I can think of hundreds of examples in the gaming world but to bring up an example that I didn't expect to see: I have seen posts from people that where offended by the cover of the game Agricola because in their opinion it depicts gender inequality. Should we pander to them to?

And this is the reason why I posted that Hitchens quote: people will step on shaky ladders to look into the neighbor's window and try to find something to be offended about. And I agree with Hitchens that it is degrading to make the attempt to pander to the offended. Before you know it, all games will be sold in plain grey boxes until somebody is offended by the color grey.



If you have to ask yourself if something you said is unacceptable or insulting, it probably is. Furthermore, if you have to follow-up with whatever rolled out of the pie-hole as "just joking", "lighten-up", "don't be so sensitive"... you probably shouldn't have said it.

These things take time to figure out. For those uncomfortable with nuance, growth, and maturity, I can understand how it would be a bit scary and very easy to run back to home to touch base. Everyone knows when they have evolved, because they look back and cringe at the previous shit that rolled out of their pie-hole. That is a good sign that one is moving in the right direction.

Now, getting there is quite hard, because it takes a lot of tools, dedication, will, and insight, which is why most go to their graves pretty much in the same spot they were decades prior.

Life is hard. Change is hard. Most aren't cut out for it.

That's actually why I'm wondering if these changes are just going to result in a lot of our older posters getting fed up and leaving the site, even if they were decent people, because their time was different from this time.

Pete (is starting to see that pattern shaping up)
8 
 Thumb up
 tip
 Hide
  • [+] Dice rolls
[1]  Prev «  16 , 17 , 18 , 19 , 20  Next »  [21] |