Okay, I'm not trying to start something here, and forgive me if my temper flares, I'm going to make every effort not to be juvenile about this...
Is this really neccessary? Especially in light of the deletion of the only other subforum to be topiced in a similar manner because it was decided that a dedicated forum was not needed and individual topics could be placed in their respective forums. What this debacle basically says is that the thread "Divine Homosexuality" can go in Dieties and the Planes, but that there's a special forum for a thread along the lines of "Divine Feminism" or "Female Dieties". I'm perfectly fine with this subforum existing but where do we draw the line? If this subforum exists, a case can be made for "Elminster's Parlour" for old men and gaming, "Shiuta's Parlour" for homosexuality and gaming, and "Asmodeus' Parlour" for vile gaming. So, seriously, where do we draw the line, and should we draw the line? I'm honestly in favour of this forum and the mature forum, and going any further borders on absurdity, although a forum for homosexuality and gaming might not be a bad idea... I just think it's rediculous to create this forum when the mature forum has gotten the kaibosh...
Especially in light of the deletion of the only other subforum to be topiced in a similar manner ...
There's a "family gaming" section over in the RPG area of the Gleemax forums. So your comment about the mature forums being the "only other" isn't correct.
Well, now you know. And knowing, of course, is half the battle. ;)
Go Joe!
That said, given that people want to talk on Astrid's Parlor (as proven by its regular traffic), then I think they should be allowed to unless there is an overriding reason otherwise. That you wanted a mature forum and they took that away doesn't mean that you should lobby to take everyone else's preferred forums away.
If there is enough interest in a men's issues forum, then I think they should make that too. I would post there, but I suspect that overall it might well lack traffic.
That said, given that people want to talk on Astrid's Parlor (as proven by its regular traffic), then I think they should be allowed to unless there is an overriding reason otherwise. That you wanted a mature forum and they took that away doesn't mean that you should lobby to take everyone else's preferred forums away.
Well, the mature forums got regular traffic, but away they went.
And actually, yes, I do believe it is something you should lobby over, since its clearly a case of favoritism. One active forum thats been here for YEARS that nobody ever really worried about if it was needed or not gets axed, and the one forum that everybody constantly goes "Why the hell do we have this?" gets to stay.
IMO, it should be treated the same as when the school says you can't celebrate Halloween on the grounds. Fine, then I want Christmas banned as well. If they're going to kill one forum because its "redundant" and you could talk about the same topics on the general boards, then you damned well better believe that exact same argument can be used for Astrid's.
The real reason clearly doesn't apply to the Mature Boards... otherwise they'd still be around.
IMO, it should be treated the same as when the school says you can't celebrate Halloween on the grounds. Fine, then I want Christmas banned as well. If they're going to kill one forum because its "redundant" and you could talk about the same topics on the general boards, then you damned well better believe that exact same argument can be used for Astrid's.
It sounds like what you really want is the mature board back, and you agree with me that if people have interest in a board that it should exist. If so, I'm with you on this -- but you're arguing for something you don't actually want.
It's not like the Astrid's posters were sucking up to WotC and/or lobbying for the Mature forums to be closed. (Like, say, fundamentalist Christian parents who are opposed to Halloween but in favor of Christmas.) As far as I know, no one was lobbying for the Mature forums to be closed -- it was a decision from on high.
At the same time, I think it's pretty obvious to me what the favoritism is about. Wizards wants to project the image of the game being female-friendly and kid-friendly. It sucks, but that's what this is about.
Wizards wants to project the image of the game being female-friendly and kid-friendly. It sucks, but that's what this is about.
How does promoting the image of the game being female-friendly and kid-friendly suck?
- Last time I checked, the game has *always* been kid-friendly. Even if the Boards were not.
- If you've ever been to a convention, you must readily admit that the attendees sure as hell hope more women would view the game as female-friendly, even if the players are not.
It sounds like what you really want is the mature board back, and you agree with me that if people have interest in a board that it should exist. If so, I'm with you on this -- but you're arguing for something you don't actually want.
I do not agree with what you have to say, but I'll defend to the death your right to say it.
-Voltaire
While I may be glad the mature forums are gone, that doesn't mean I necessarily like the way it was done. The board was cut out without warning, and not because it didn't serve its purpose, not because it wasn't seeing any traffic, but because the boards and D&D in general is taking a market swing towards a younger target audience.
I may not have liked that board, or even thought it was necessary, but the whole way it was handled, and the reason for it being cut in the first place, are just completely unacceptable.
Last time I checked, the game has *always* been kid-friendly.
Um, Seeker, are we looking at the same game?
Least the game I've been playing actively promotes violence, theft, racial hatred, and objectification of sentient beings not only as valid career choices, but as legitimate and authoritarian endorsed routes to success. That is, unless you've never played a game that involved fighting a dragon for it's horde? Yeah, lets see, premeditated murder of a sentient being for the express purpose of robbing them, check. Breaking into their home to do so, check. Justification of "Well, its a red dragon, it must be evil!" being an acceptable defense, check. Dismembering the corpse of said sentient being and trying to sell off the parts on the black market, check. Being rewarded by the king for all of the above? Check.
Lets face it, while its not graphic, D&D is generally not for small children. If it were a television show, it would be TV-14.
How does promoting the image of the game being female-friendly and kid-friendly suck?
It can be great to make a nice, kid-friendly, and female-friendly game.
The potential problem would be promoting a deceptive image of such friendliness by blocking postings or deleting popular boards. The D&D community is what it is.
WHy not just accept the decision without anger? WOTC allow mature topics around, as long as well, mature and not graphic. So...
And D&D always 'pandered' to boys - perhaps it's time to stop the bits of sexism that exist?
Lets face it, while its not graphic, D&D is generally not for small children. If it were a television show, it would be TV-14.
It is not for small children.
It is for children ages 10 and older.
TV-14 is probably a valid rating: If your child is under the age of 14, we recommend you be aware of its content before letting them have at it. If your kids are 14 or older, we're confident you will be comfortable with the nature and tone of the game. Individual gaming groups, however, may vary.
The core rules are very child-safe. No more morally-gray violence than your average animated Disney movie. The BoVD (a book I wish WotC had never produced) is the only text that explicitly contradicts this, and was "labeled" as such.
The game is kid friendly.
How many choose to play it does not change that.
I’ve removed content from this thread because flaming, harassment and vulgarity are a violation of the Code of Conduct. You can review the Code of Conduct here: http://forums.gleemax.com/community_coc.php
WizO_Unicorn
Well that depends on the purpose of the forum, which at the moment is rather unclear.
If the purpose is to give preferential treatment of girls in the hope of keeping them on the boards then no. It's poorly named and any one who actually visits these boards is already hooked.
If the purpose is for the WotC marketing department to get an idea, base on actual user experience, about how to bring more girls into the game (thus creating a bigger market) then it might actually have a justification for being.
While I would hate changes to the game with the only justification being that it will attract more girls, bringing more girls to the tables is over all a good thing. A larger marked would allow for more niche products and a larger player pool would make it easier for people to form groups.
So if it's all about getting a better understanding of the elusive gaming girls I keep hearing all kind of urban myths about then let it stay. In fact all of you should head over there and aid the project as much as possible so that some day we might actually meet these strange creatures ;)
So if it's all about getting a better understanding of the elusive gaming girls I keep hearing all kind of urban myths about then let it stay. In fact all of you should head over there and aid the project as much as possible so that some day we might actually meet these strange creatures ;)
I've actually met several and most of them tend to be trouble in one way or another... fun until you get to that point, though...
Astrid's Parlor is a double standard at best, and reverse sexism/discrimination at worst.
Not reverse sexism. It would just be sexism.
Not reverse sexism. It would just be sexism.
Fair enough.