This is Wizards of the Coast's and Hasbro's official response, quoted below.
D&D Website wrote:
Let's just say my vote was already decided. But there's pretty much no way I'm changing my mind now thanks to that little stunt.
Good job on WOTC in the response. I think that it should get out into the press press if it's not already.
Do you know what Mike does for the McCain campaign? He blogs for them! In fact, this very message he posted was on John McCain's blog. Way to shoot yourself in the foot there, Tex.
You know if it was about homosexuality or Native Americans, it would be all over the news!
You guys up there ready with that boulder for the new landscaping of Mr Goldfarb's yard?
I'm not surprised by the view in Mccain's camp. I would guess there are people in the Obama camp who feel DnD players are nerds living in there basement. They just aren't so uncouthe as to mention it in public.
You know if it was about homosexuality or Native Americans, it would be all over the news!
1) You know how little the news still thinks about DnD players that way.
2) Ironically, that 'insult' actually refers more to the demographic they WANT to vote for them.
Repulicans are conservative, right? conservatives don't want change, right?
Who wants change less than the 45 year old guy in his mother's basement?
People in glass houses should not throw stones.
....
And if you can't throw blows, then brother don't throw blows - Peter Tosh
One of my favorite reggae songs.
Soo..,
wait (edit) I get it now.
I noticed it in the political blogs but there was never a link to the source and the quoted text seemed very tongue in cheek and not authentic.
He already apologized.
That's not the point. It's the fact he said it at all. You and I both know how damning that can be. Regardless of apology. They should have thought for two seconds before saying something like that. Especially since allegedly it's going to be a close election. It's just another indicator in my eyes how far removed from reality politicians in general can be.
He already apologized.
I think I saw it, but it seemed to be the worsed apology Ive ever seen. Other than the fox news reporter who apoligized for making Obama look like a terrorist.
Link for the apology?
[indent]If my comments caused any harm or hurt to the hard working Americans who play Dungeons & Dragons, I apologize. This campaign is committed to increasing the strength, constitution, dexterity, intelligence, wisdom, and charisma scores of every American.[/indent]
Link
Although this isn't Goldfarb's blog, Goldfarb inserted a link to it from the blog that contained the insult, which is I guess how we can tell the apology came from him (probably emailed to the blogger he links).
I think the apology is fairly witty, and indicates that, as some suspect, he plays D&D. I mean, look at him!
He's totally a self-hating closet gamer!
Link for the apology?
I noticed it in the political blogs but there was never a link to the source and the quoted text seemed very tongue in cheek and not authentic.
That's because politicians are incapable of any other sort of comment. Nothing they say is authentic insofar as it's said only to get people to pay attention, not because they actually mean it. He's no more sorry about it than anything, because you can bet that letter didn't change his opinion a bit.
That was a nice letter though by WotC. Good job guys for putting that sleaze in his place. It does need to be widely publicized, but the fact that Hasbro took notice and sent a letter at all is a good start.
I do agree that we shouldn't let something like this influence our votes, though as a hardcore republican, I was actually planning on voting for Obama anyway.
Edit: What a condescending turd! That apology will do more damage than the original comment for sure. Dude doesn't even know what he's talking about. What's new I suppose, but still... Sheesh!
That would be kinda funny if the new White House scandal turned out to be Goldfarb playing DnD after he made all those disparaging comments. Kinda like the dude in Idaho that was so down on homosexuality and then...
Just another example of a politician quacking out the other side of his beak.
He already apologized.
I am not big on accepting apologies. Half-***ed ones that couch further insult even less so.
He already apologized.
"All through the kitchen past the bedroom to the hallway, your friend apologized, said he could see it my way. He let the contents of the bottle do the thinking. Can't shake the devils hand then say your only kidding."
He already apologized.
What do I care if a bunch of thieves, liars, & criminals - or thier lackies - either insult me or apologize for it?
Unconcerned
"I'm really really sorry I go called out for that."
More like "I'm really sorry you are a bunch of losers"
Feh.
"I'm really really sorry I got called out for that."
I see it more as "I'm reading this statement written by our staff writers and ordered by my superiors in an attempt to convince you that I may, in fact, be sorry...and here's a little joke we paid Jimmy the 17-year-old intern to come up with so we'd seem relevant and humorous."
I've never known an instance where any political figure has used the phrase "hard-working Americans" without it being a blatant attempt to pander for your vote.
I find that so-called apology just as condescending and disparaging as the original jab, if not more so.
But fear not: Goldfarb, in fact, has pre-emptively apologized
That's what irks me. "Hey guys, I know you aren't horrible people but I'm going to use you to demonize my oppenents anyway" Sure. Thanks.
He already apologized.
Personally, I am not convinced that the apology was from Mr. Goldfarb. The site that seems to be the original host of the alleged apology and that everyone else is linking too is a blog site that appears to be made up entirely of satirical musings on various issues.
here: http://ace.new.mu.nu/apology_from_mccains_campaign_blogger
If this was an apology to the NY Times editorial staff it does not appear anywhere on the NYT site that I can find.
I am very proud of my senior management for sticking up for our customers.
Wait, did the Dems insult someone now? *Zing*Couldn't resist....
both of you should know better than to throw political hyperbole around on these boards. Posters get in trouble for it. Let's just stick to the single person (Goldfarb), and his incredibly ignorant, elitist statements.
Leave the politics at home.
On a side note, while sitting around at my kitchen table playing 4e, we decided that the McCain and the Republican Party are LN and the Obama is NG. Even funnier the people who supported Obama at the table always played good characters, while McCain people have always said good was to limiting. One of the McCain supporters always plays a war loving LN dwarf but I am not going there.
I cut and paste alignment descriptions, the underlined bullets are what we made our descion on
Neutral Good
These characters believe that a balance of forces is important, but that the concerns of law and chaos do not moderate the need for good. Since the universe is vast and contains many creatures striving for different goals, a determined pursuit of good will not upset the balance; it may even maintain it. If fostering good means supporting organized society, then that is what must be done. If good can only come about through the overthrow of existing social order, so be it. Social structure itself has no innate value to them. A baron who violates the orders of his king to destroy something he sees as evil is a good example of a neutral good character.
Always keeps his word.
Is VERY unlikely to lie, except perhaps to an evil person.
Never attacks or kills an unarmed foe.
Never harms an innocent.
Never tortures for any reason. Is very unlikely to allow torture for any reason.
Never kills for pleasure.
Always tries to help others.
Works well in groups.
Never takes dirty money or items.
Never betrays a friend.
Lawful Neutral
Order and organization are of paramount importance to characters of this alignment. They believe in a strong, well-ordered government, whether that government is a tyranny or benevolent democracy. The benefits of organization and regimentation outweigh any moral questions raised by their actions. An inquisitor determined to ferret out traitors at any cost or a soldier who never questions his orders are good examples of lawful neutral behavior.
________________________________________
Keeps his word of honor.
Lies and cheats only if very necessary.
Never attacks or harms an unarmed foe.
Never harms an innocent.
Does not use torture unless ABSOLUTELY necessary. (Never for pleasure)
Never kills for pleasure.
Usually helps those in need.
Works in groups well, especially if it suits his needs.
Will quite possibly take dirty money.
Never betrays a friend.
Has a high regard for life and personal freedom.
Goldfarb says, "Gamers are total losers."
Gamers, WotC & Hasbro all demand an apology.
Goldfarb comes back with, "I'm sorry that gamers are total losers."
I wanna add: How nice of the McCain camp to apologize only to the hard-working Americans out there, while leaving out everyone else worldwide that plays D&D. If this "apology" isn't just a thinly-veiled attempt to pander to the voters they may have offended, I'm Donald Duck. Besides, like a few others, I'm also unconvinced that he even wrote that apology in the first place, since the stereotype he was trying to perpetuate about gamers would probably also stipulate that most of us were unemployed, not "hard-working."
All of this just makes me that much happier that I'm Canadian, actually. Up here, someone would probably just throw a pie in Goldfarb's face at his next public appearance - or better yet, a Crown Royal bag full of dice.
Frankly I tire of the "you are 'good' or 'a real American' if you are 'x' or do 'y', and if you're not 'x' or 'y' then you are 'bad' or 'suspect'. That polarized thinking is really bad for the country, and it especially bad when pundits are digging deeper into our society to find new "villians" to scapegoat.
both of you should know better than to throw political hyperbole around on these boards. Posters get in trouble for it. Let's just stick to the single person (Goldfarb), and his incredibly ignorant, elitist statements.
Leave the politics at home.
You're right, thank you. I've retracted my statements, as they had no place on this thread, at the least.
It’s the politics of marginalization; “those guys who support Obama” are like the weird guys in basements on the fringe of society. When you can’t win on the issues you marginalize people.
On a side note, while sitting around at my kitchen table playing 4e, we decided that the McCain and the Republican Party are LN and the Obama is NG. Even funnier the people who supported Obama at the table always played good characters, while McCain people have always said good was to limiting. One of the McCain supporters always plays a war loving LN dwarf but I am not going there.
I cut and paste alignment descriptions, the underlined bullets are what we made our descion on
Neutral Good
These characters believe that a balance of forces is important, but that the concerns of law and chaos do not moderate the need for good. Since the universe is vast and contains many creatures striving for different goals, a determined pursuit of good will not upset the balance; it may even maintain it. If fostering good means supporting organized society, then that is what must be done. If good can only come about through the overthrow of existing social order, so be it. Social structure itself has no innate value to them. A baron who violates the orders of his king to destroy something he sees as evil is a good example of a neutral good character.
Always keeps his word.
Is VERY unlikely to lie, except perhaps to an evil person.
Never attacks or kills an unarmed foe.
Never harms an innocent.
Never tortures for any reason. Is very unlikely to allow torture for any reason.
Never kills for pleasure.
Always tries to help others.
Works well in groups.
Never takes dirty money or items.
Never betrays a friend.
Lawful Neutral
Order and organization are of paramount importance to characters of this alignment. They believe in a strong, well-ordered government, whether that government is a tyranny or benevolent democracy. The benefits of organization and regimentation outweigh any moral questions raised by their actions. An inquisitor determined to ferret out traitors at any cost or a soldier who never questions his orders are good examples of lawful neutral behavior.
________________________________________
Keeps his word of honor.
Lies and cheats only if very necessary.
Never attacks or harms an unarmed foe.
Never harms an innocent.
Does not use torture unless ABSOLUTELY necessary. (Never for pleasure)
Never kills for pleasure.
Usually helps those in need.
Works in groups well, especially if it suits his needs.
Will quite possibly take dirty money.
Never betrays a friend.
Has a high regard for life and personal freedom.
Interesting...where'd you pull the full descriptor from? The PHB, or another site? I'm curious about Lawful Good. (Not Lawful Stupid)
With the equally insulting & condescending stat joke tossed in, that's gotta be one of the most half-assed apologies I've ever seen. Here's how it looks to me:
Goldfarb says, "Gamers are total losers."
Gamers, WotC & Hasbro all demand an apology.
Goldfarb comes back with, "I'm sorry that gamers are total losers."
I wanna add: How nice of the McCain camp to apologize only to the hard-working Americans out there, while leaving out everyone else worldwide that plays D&D. If this "apology" isn't just a thinly-veiled attempt to pander to the voters they may have offended, I'm Donald Duck. Besides, like a few others, I'm also unconvinced that he even wrote that apology in the first place, since the stereotype he was trying to perpetuate about gamers would probably also stipulate that most of us were unemployed, not "hard-working."
All of this just makes me that much happier that I'm Canadian, actually. Up here, someone would probably just throw a pie in Goldfarb's face at his next public appearance - or better yet, a Crown Royal bag full of dice.
man, i just hope someone chucks a CR bag full 'o dice... it's worth the black eye for that sweet thing.
It's been blown way out of proportion and there are definitely more important issues at stake in this election.
He already apologized.
I do find the apology to be a bit insulting myself. He may mean in tongue in cheek or not, hard to tell. That's a problem with blogging, you can't hear the inflections in a person's voice.
Either way, I really hate how the media just forgives someone for almost anything they do when they say, "Oh, I'm sorry. I didn't mean to offend anyone." An apology is always a good thing, yes, but it doesn't erase what was said to begin with.
BTW McCain just lost my vote...I sent the quote around to the other people in my group, I will bet that they will be just as pleased as I was...
Ian
"All through the kitchen past the bedroom to the hallway, your friend apologized, said he could see it my way. He let the contents of the bottle do the thinking. Can't shake the devils hand then say your only kidding."
Thanks. Now I have that song caught in my head.
*shuffles through bag for ipod*
http://www.geocities.com/vacred_dotal/lawgood.htm
The other part of the discussion was that Liberals (Ralph Nader) are likely LG (by this site definition) although I like “crusader” like definition myself, which would be more like the Christian Right.
There used to be a “rule” that most people in a society would be within one step. I got tickle thinking about how that would define the parties.
Republicans would be LG, LN, N, LE
Examples:
LG: Christian Right (laws used to mandate goodness)
LN: Fiscal Conservatives
N: Libertarians types (gray world view)
LE: Carl Rove, Dick Chaney Types (Neo Cons)
The Democrats would be LG, NG, CG, N
LG: Liberals (laws used to mandate goodness)
NG: Obama and other Democrats who work cross party
CG: Clintons
N: Not really sure
Further, my company benefited from gaming care packages both times I was in Afghanistan. Sadly, I could not allow soldiers any room for bringing items gaming related. If it did not relate to METL, it did not go. I was thrilled to be able to pass around a few decks of M:TG cards, minis and a few rule books to the soldiers in my company that the USO brought with them.
So, thank you, gentlemen.
Interesting...where'd you pull the full descriptor from? The PHB, or another site? I'm curious about Lawful Good. (Not Lawful Stupid)
At least part of it comes from Palladium games alignment system. This part is for Principled:
Always keeps his word.
Is VERY unlikely to lie, except perhaps to an evil person.
Never attacks or kills an unarmed foe.
Never harms an innocent.
Never tortures for any reason. Is very unlikely to allow torture for any reason.
Never kills for pleasure.
Always tries to help others.
Works well in groups.
Never takes dirty money or items.
Never betrays a friend.
And this part is for Unprincipled:
Keeps his word of honor.
Lies and cheats only if very necessary.
Never attacks or harms an unarmed foe.
Never harms an innocent.
Does not use torture unless ABSOLUTELY necessary. (Never for pleasure)
Never kills for pleasure.
Usually helps those in need.
Works in groups well, especially if it suits his needs.
Will quite possibly take dirty money.
Never betrays a friend.
Has a high regard for life and personal freedom.
I appreciate Mr. Charness and Mr. Leeds sticking up for their product, and more importantly for us, the D&D gaming public.
Further, my company benefited from gaming care packages both times I was in Afghanistan. Sadly, I could not allow soldiers any room for bringing items gaming related. If it did not relate to METL, it did not go. I was thrilled to be able to pass around a few decks of M:TG cards, minis and a few rule books to the soldiers in my company that the USO brought with them.
So, thank you, gentlemen.
Yup those were well written emails. Heres an idea send them via email earmarked for Carl Rove, soak them in holy water first and see if he actually burns. (kidding)
In all seriousness Mccain's campaign should apoligize for that statement, or just sack the guy who made it.
[indent]If my comments caused any harm or hurt to the hard working Americans who play Dungeons & Dragons, I apologize. This campaign is committed to increasing the strength, constitution, dexterity, intelligence, wisdom, and charisma scores of every American.[/indent]
Link
While this part of the response was clever, is was plagiarized nearly directly from the introduction from the "Pro-Obama Dungeons & Dragons Crowd" facebook group.
http://www.facebook.com/group.php?gid=44418256336
I find this response from the McCain camp to be deeply insulting. Besides being intellectually dishonest, it demonstrates to me that they simply don't get it and didn't even bother to try.
While this part of the response was clever, is was plagiarized nearly directly from the introduction from the "Pro-Obama Dungeons & Dragons Crowd" facebook group.
I'm pretty sure that group was created in reaction to the insult, and after the apology. If there is plagiarism, it's going the other direction. (Though I think it's just that two groups made similar jokes.)
Edit: I wonder how much confirmation bias there is going on. I'm voting for Obama (as of right now), but I think the apology was humorous and I think the commotion over the comment itself is overwrought.
Are there other Obama-supporters who feel the same way? McCain voters who think the apology was insufficient?
Do you think we could find some dates for both the McCain camp's response and the Facebook Group's creation? It would be nice to find out which way this went.
edit: It does look like the response from around Aug. 1st where the Facebook page's posts go back to around Aug. 25. Good call, Wrecan. I will give credit where it is due and say this response was a clever one.
I'm pretty sure that group was created in reaction to the insult, and after the apology. If there is plagiarism, it's going the other direction. (Though I think it's just that two groups made similar jokes.)
Edit: I wonder how much confirmation bias there is going on. I'm voting for Obama (as of right now), but I think the apology was humorous and I think the commotion over the comment itself is overwrought.
Are there other Obama-supporters who feel the same way? McCain voters who think the apology was insufficient?
Heres my opinion MCcain=Busch clone.
I've never known an instance where any political figure has used the phrase "hard-working Americans" without it being a blatant attempt to pander for your vote.
No, no, not at all. I think he included it in order to specifically exclude any apology to those D&D players on unemployment benefit, single parent benefits, sickness, non-working students, pensioners, and foreigners.
I certainly agree that American politicians should not consider apologising to riff raff like foreigners and those who can't or won't work.
-vk
I've never known an instance where any political figure has opened his mouth without it being a blatant attempt to pander for your vote.
I corrected it for you.
(My vote is useless, since it's going to whatever conservative is on the ballot during elections. Since McCain isn't a conservative...)
I'm pretty sure that group was created in reaction to the insult, and after the apology. If there is plagiarism, it's going the other direction. (Though I think it's just that two groups made similar jokes.)
Here's the timeline
August 1, 2008: Goldfarb uses D&D to demonize his opponents. Outrage is limited, but existant.
August 1, 2008: Goldfarm apologizes in a email to those who complained. (Date taken from post of site that recieved the apology.) Same day delivery it seems which is probably why it wasn't mentioned much.
August 18, 2008: Goldfarb does it again. And in the blog links one of his friends who quotes his apology from last time. This is the one WotC is responding to.
August 20, 2008(??): Pro-Obama Dungeons and Dragons group is founded. (Still checking the date on that.)
Which is why I don't consider that much of an apology. It's like someone claiming he doesn't have to apologize for throwing a brick through your window because he apologized when he threw the brick in last week.
Heres my opinion MCcain=Busch clone.
This statement is only responsive if you weren't offended by the hoopla about Goldfarb's D&D comments/apology. You neglected to mention whether you were or not.
I'm inclined to think the community reaction is confirmation bias.
Republican = criminal. Case closed.
I had no idea I was a criminal. Hmm. Maybe I should alert the authorities.
On topic, I always thought the "insult" was silly. Not because I happen to have some Republican leanings, but because I'm old enough to understand that you can't get offended by every little thing some moron says. And, to be honest, I've heard worse in my time. ;) Overreacting to this "insult" simply makes it true, IMO. Not that the retort by WotC was an overreaction. Who said fanservice was dead?
You know if it was about homosexuality or Native Americans, it would be all over the news!
I never was denied a job because I play Dungeons and Dragons.
I also never had people on horses tell me I could only play D&D in this designated plot of land after I was happy playing in my mom's basement (or dining room, or my own bedroom).
Absolutely no offense is meant, but you hit a pet peeve of mine. You cannot compare the inconveniences of an individual of a hobby they choose, to actual society life struggles of people.
This was not all over the internet because no enough people care nor should they. Nascar fans have been belittled by left wing politicians in the past. It received no more news coverage than this and generates a lot more money.
This might possibly effect my vote for MCCain, but I still won't be voting for Obama. looks like I have to go third party AGAIN.
I consider the Goldfarb jab at D&D players to be much like the jabs at Paris Hilton and Brittany Spears -- totally unnecessary and inconsiderate.
Yes not make jabs at rich bored people that want to ho around on drugs.
They are dregs of life. Put on some underwear for crying out loud and learn to close your legs! In cars and other places!
Let's look at some important issues:
- The war(s)
- The housing market
- Unemployment
- The drooping dollar
- Illegal alien rights
- Soaring oil costs (as the weather turns colder, no less)
- D&D
Now, which one of these doesn't belong? ;)
I'm just trying to say "keep it in perspective".
Still, it's stupid to let it go. It leaves more for the anti-McCain crowd to harp on. And that's what people do come election time. Take the small stuff to heart and use it to springboard further attack. Maybe we'll see a real response since WotC did have something to say about it. It will be interesting to follow.
"I am sorry that you took offence"
He isn't actually admitting fault. He is just sorry that we felt slighted. Its all our fault!
If you are really that bothered by someone insinuating that your hobby is primarily for nerds, it may be because you are one of those nerds in question.
Lets face it: if you go to any DnD table on the planet there is a pretty solid chance that 3/4 of the table is taken up by hardcore nerds.
Thanks. Now I have that song caught in my head.
*shuffles through bag for ipod*
Hey if I can help one person build a little bird house in their soul through my post, then it was worth every keystroke.
Heres my opinion MCcain=Busch clone.
1) I'm a Canadian, so my opinion will have no effect on the American election. Just like anybody who votes in Florida.
2) John McCain is one of the few Republican figures I respect (just after Colin Powell), but I am a) disheartened that it's taken this long for McCain to get the presidental nod from the GOP (essentially waiting until the word Republican equals mud, then tosses Johnny to the wolves), & b) that McCain is IMO letting his staff and warroom run his campaign, doing the very same things the Bush Election teams did. At least with Obama you can see he is leading his team, rather than the other way around.
And for what it's worth, I'd wager George Bush Jr. doesn't believe (or understand) half the things he reads off his teleprompter, so I've always given him the benefit of the doubt.
With the equally insulting & condescending stat joke tossed in, that's gotta be one of the most half-assed apologies I've ever seen. Here's how it looks to me:
Goldfarb says, "Gamers are total losers."
Gamers, WotC & Hasbro all demand an apology.
Goldfarb comes back with, "I'm sorry that gamers are total losers."
I wanna add: How nice of the McCain camp to apologize only to the hard-working Americans out there, while leaving out everyone else worldwide that plays D&D. If this "apology" isn't just a thinly-veiled attempt to pander to the voters they may have offended, I'm Donald Duck. Besides, like a few others, I'm also unconvinced that he even wrote that apology in the first place, since the stereotype he was trying to perpetuate about gamers would probably also stipulate that most of us were unemployed, not "hard-working."
All of this just makes me that much happier that I'm Canadian, actually. Up here, someone would probably just throw a pie in Goldfarb's face at his next public appearance - or better yet, a Crown Royal bag full of dice.
I think its probably part of a new political stratagy, have a staffer say something that some may find offensive then wait and see what happens. If there's no outcry they the candidate unofficially endorses the statement and life moves on if there is an outcry then the candidate,or someone in the party, offers an apology and 'disciplines' the staffer.
Once is a mistake,twice is a coincidence, three times is a strategy.
Thanks. Now I have that song caught in my head.
I see your They Might Be Giants and raise you one Deaf Pedestrians!
I think its probably part of a new political stratagy, have a staffer say something that some may find offensive then wait and see what happens. If there's no outcry they the candidate unofficially endorses the statement and life moves on if there is an outcry then the candidate,or someone in the party, offers an apology and 'disciplines' the staffer.
Once is a mistake,twice is a coincidence, three times is a strategy.
What, like the whole fiasco around McCain's wife plagiarizing recipes?
I never was denied a job because I play Dungeons and Dragons.
I lost my last two jobs in part because I played D&D.
The first was as an Administrative Assistant at a church. No surprise there I guess.
The second was as a Network Assistant at a college university. That was a little bit more surprising to me.
Apparently, reading your D&D books on your lunch break in the breakroom is as insulting to other coworkers as bringing your bible to work.
I think its ironic that I live in my mother's basement, not because I play D&D, but because of the sterotyped prejudice that I have been continually subjected to.
I lost my last two jobs in part because I played D&D.
Sheer thick-headedness is not limited to racism, or homophobia. If someone is inclined towards prejudice, they can make any excuse availible.
Sheer thick-headedness is not limited to racism, or homophobia. If someone is inclined towards prejudice, they can make any excuse availible.
What sucks is that if you bash another race or a religion you can be punished for it. People are rarely punished for picking on us, the roleplayers, as we are a minority among minorities.
I never was denied a job because I play Dungeons and Dragons.
I also never had people on horses tell me I could only play D&D in this designated plot of land after I was happy playing in my mom's basement (or dining room, or my own bedroom).
Absolutely no offense is meant, but you hit a pet peeve of mine. You cannot compare the inconveniences of an individual of a hobby they choose, to actual society life struggles of people.
You've hit a pet peeve of mine now. Just because you haven't experienced problems due to your hobby doesn't mean that they don't exist and are fueled by the ignorance that the offender cultivated.
Just because you have never lost a job or been physically attacked because you play D&D doesn't mean that it doesn't happen. This is why stereotyping any group, be it based on race, religion, gender, hobby, or anything else is wrong through and through. Letting it go unchecked only creates a system for it to thrive.
This might possibly effect my vote for MCCain, but I still won't be voting for Obama. looks like I have to go third party AGAIN.
QFT. I'm so tired of voting for the candidate that ticks me off the least between the two, election after election... currently not for McCain, but against Obama...
When I found myself rooting Hillary Clinton on, I KNEW the world was getting screwy.
What, like the whole fiasco around McCain's wife plagiarizing recipes?
Possibly, I didn't hear that one but I was very specific in my post of not mentioning or excluding either candidate or party. For all I know this could be a strategy for both parties its just the Republicans are a little more obvious about it at the current time give it time though and the Democrats will probably catch up :D .
Possibly, I didn't hear that one but I was very specific in my post of not mentioning or excluding either candidate or party. For all I know this could be a strategy for both parties its just the Republicans are a little more obvious about it at the current time give it time though and the Democrats will probably catch up :D .
The Democrats prefer the traditional technique of letting people 'unaffiliated' with the campaign do your slander and saying they have nothing to do with it when called on the matter. You'd think that would be the better plan but the last 8 years have shown otherwise. Apparently focused slander is more benificial then people associating it with your campaign. Possibly because the media doesn't even try to research anything anymore. (On any side.)
[indent]If my comments caused any harm or hurt to the hard working Americans who play Dungeons & Dragons, I apologize. This campaign is committed to increasing the strength, constitution, dexterity, intelligence, wisdom, and charisma scores of every American.[/indent]
Link
Although this isn't Goldfarb's blog, Goldfarb inserted a link to it from the blog that contained the insult, which is I guess how we can tell the apology came from him (probably emailed to the blogger he links).
I think the apology is fairly witty, and indicates that, as some suspect, he plays D&D. I mean, look at him!
He's totally a self-hating closet gamer!
Unfortunately, the apology comes after the FIRST time he has hurled this insult (in the NYT). Then there was the second time on his blog AFTER the apology. So, the apology is a "not really."
Join the "Pro-Obama Dungeons & Dragons Crowd" on either facebook or barackobama.com
NEVER!
Why?
Because you're swinging politics at me and I'm here to enjoy my hobby. Go ruin things with politics somewhere else!
Bullies.
*Curls up with Dungeon Master Guide and cries himself to sleep*
-Unmaker
:->
Jeeze Louise, lay off us Mr. Goldfarb! We D&D players haven't worshiped the devil since the late '80s! And Obama is hardly even Satanic! Hardly at all! Oh, oh and mom says I can live in the basement - which is in no way comfortable, by the way - for as long as I want. I mean, gee whiz buddy. Cut us pasty-faced unamerican noodle-armed coward geek Obama supporters some slack, huh? What's a middle-aged virgin have to do to earn some respect from the Republican party?
Bullies.
*Curls up with Dungeon Master Guide and cries himself to sleep*
-Unmaker
:->
heh... cute
Also a note to everyone, while the issue at hand is closely related to politics there is no need to turn this into a political discussion thread. The topic is the letter to a single person who wrote something, not about McCain himself nor Obama himself. Let's try and keep it on topic before we get modded.
I admit, I smiled at the apology.
As did I. But this is the internet, so if he does anything other than whip his back until he bleeds while begging for forgiveness his apology is condescending and insulting.
NEVER!
Why?
Because you're swinging politics at me and I'm here to enjoy my hobby. Go ruin things with politics somewhere else!
I wonder how much damage swinging politics at someone does?
2d6 psychic?
J/k
I'm actually quite interested in politics.
Wrecan: you ask if this is confirmation bias. Let me answer thusly: yes and no. First off, I think it's stupid to vote or not vote for a certain candidate based on something like this. There is too much at stake for a vote to be decided by petty politics.
Now, what I DO think is that while Goldfarb's statement is idiotic and, in general, not really worth the ruckus.
it betrays [a] traditional strategy: branding of the opposition.
The term is 'Mudslinging'.
Does Goldfarb play 4e? Were the stats just ripped out of the 4e PHB? Was it a complete coincidence? Am I the only one who cares?
Does Goldfarb play 4e? Were the stats just ripped out of the 4e PHB? Was it a complete coincidence? Am I the only one who cares?
Doubtful. Possibly. Possibly. And Probably not, but who knows. In that order of coarse.
;)
I just noticed something. In Mr. Goldfarb's apology, the stats are listed in the 4e order (strength, constitution, dexterity, intelligence, wisdom, charisma), rather than 3.5's order (strength, dexterity, constitution, intelligence, wisdom, charisma). I wonder if that's in any way significant?
Does Goldfarb play 4e? Were the stats just ripped out of the 4e PHB? Was it a complete coincidence? Am I the only one who cares?
http://www.rampantgames.com/blog/2008/08/man-first-goldfarb-makes-crack-about-d.html
It's a fake picture, but :O!?
Politician says something Politically incorrect. Politician draws fire. Politician apologizies. Don't take it personally - that's what they do.
Unconcerned
Couldn't have said it better myself, but for some reason, I'm about to...
WOTC prez, Greg Leeds, wrote: "Many players have written us about recent disparaging D&D references by a John McCain staffer, Michael Goldfarb. I want you to know that everyone at Wizards is offended and baffled by the ignorance."
Baffled? No you're not. Nobody's baffled by that. It's a pop culture stereotype -like William Shatner on SNL kidding about Trekkies who've never kissed a girl.
Greg, there's no such thing as bad publicity. Good job responding, and everything, but we all know no one's "baffled" by Goldfarb's D&D reference.
[indent]If my comments caused any harm or hurt to the hard working Americans who play Dungeons & Dragons, I apologize. This campaign is committed to increasing the strength, constitution, dexterity, intelligence, wisdom, and charisma scores of every American.
*Looks around at his country and the shape it is today*
Well, maybe not intelligence or wisdom...
And charisma... look at the current president.
I just noticed something. In Mr. Goldfarb's apology, the stats are listed in the 4e order (strength, constitution, dexterity, intelligence, wisdom, charisma), rather than 3.5's order (strength, dexterity, constitution, intelligence, wisdom, charisma). I wonder if that's in any way significant?
Does Goldfarb play 4e? Were the stats just ripped out of the 4e PHB? Was it a complete coincidence? Am I the only one who cares?
Maybe. Most likely. Doubtful. And definitely not.
It's a fake picture, but :O!?
For those who don't feel like clicking on a link to see the pic:
And yes,it's photoshopped (see the vanishing thumb)
As both a long-time DnD player and a voting citizen of the US, I implore my fellow gamers to have thick enough skin to not let some offhanded comment by a campaign blogger direct which way they cast their votes. The US has many very serious challenges for the next president to attempt to correct. Whether some campaign blogger buys into old stereotypes of DnD gamers is by no means a serious challenge for our nation, and hopefully would play no role in how anybody casts their vote.
Absolutely. If any of you caucasians aren't offended by Obama's "typical white person" jabs or his assumtion that us small-towners "cling to our guns and bibles", then this should (hopefully) just bounce right off. Obama's a candidate. This yahoo is a staffer. Politicians slip up all the time. Get over yourselves, people.
This attempt by Wizards/Hasbro to politicize my hobby is as hilarious as it is transparent. I've got a letter of my own...
Dear Hasbro,
Politicize Dungeons and Dragons again and I will no longer purchase your products (no D&D, no Magic, no Star Wars), nor will I continue running your games. I'm my group's sole DM and therefore, if I stop running, they stop playing, and thus stop purchasing. Would you have criticized Mr. Goldfarb had he been an Obama staffer? Of course not.
Clearly, in the grand scheme of things, this will hardly make a dent but at least my conscience will be clear. I can't support a company that offers blatant support to a political candidate and this is as blantant as it gets.
Thanks and I wish you continued success,
- Craig
...and if you do live in your parents' basement, are over the age of 21, and are not paying rent and/or going to college, neither candidate can help you. This is America...nobody rides for free. Democrat tax-payers understand that every bit as much as Republican tax-payers. Obama's not going to show up at your door with a briefcase of money and some dice, sit down at your gaming table, and volunteer to play the cleric because nobody else wants to.
He probably thinks you're a nerd too.
Dear Hasbro,
Politicize Dungeons and Dragons again and I will no longer purchase your products (no D&D, no Magic, no Star Wars), nor will I continue running your games. I'm my group's sole DM and therefore, if I stop running, they stop playing, and thus stop purchasing.
Wow! That's impressive. You're like some kind of angry God. You give up D&D and suddenly all your minio- er, friends are compelled to give up D&D also! Either that or you live on some remote island where you're the only person who owns a Dungeon Master Guide.
Clearly, in the grand scheme of things, this will hardly make a dent but at least my conscience will be clear. I can't support a company that offers blatant support to a political candidate and this is as blantant as it gets.
Yes, you're right, it WAS blatant Obama support. You can TELL because they didn't even mention Obama. That's how you know that WotC is just a bunch of a dirty liberal Obama supporters... because they didn't even MENTION his name! And they think they're SO clever, huh?
Thanks and I wish you continued success,
- Craig
*Waves goodbye*
B'bye Craig. You've done your work here. Now go *elsewhere* and spread your version of the truth!
-Unmaker
Would you have criticized Mr. Goldfarb had he been an Obama staffer?
Yes they would. Because any sizable company worthy of staying in buisness fires off a letter condemning BS being spouted about thier product as soon as they hear about it. Just like politicians can hire bad staffers and say things that can be misqoted out of context, WotC can have a publicity team with half a brain that sends out letter to people who publicly proclaim everyone who plays their game to be losers.
Please keep your posts polite, respectful, and on-topic, and refrain from making personal attacks.
He already apologized.
To clarify(as was already mentioned):
He did not
After an initial disparaging comment, he did make a joke about D&D players (that he labelled as an apology)... and then days later made another disparaging comment.
That leaves little room for interpretation. At best, the 'apology' is a joke at your expense. At worst, it was actually intended to deceive you.
Would you have criticized Mr. Goldfarb had he been an Obama staffer? Of course not.
You know this...how?
Would you have criticized Mr. Goldfarb had he been an Obama staffer?
I'm certain many would take umbrage if an Obama staffer used the term "pro-McCain Dungeons & Dragons crowd"
Dear Hasbro,
Politicize Dungeons and Dragons again and I will no longer purchase your products (no D&D, no Magic, no Star Wars), nor will I continue running your games. I'm my group's sole DM and therefore, if I stop running, they stop playing, and thus stop purchasing. Would you have criticized Mr. Goldfarb had he been an Obama staffer? Of course not.
Clearly, in the grand scheme of things, this will hardly make a dent but at least my conscience will be clear. I can't support a company that offers blatant support to a political candidate and this is as blantant as it gets.
Thanks and I wish you continued success,
- Craig
Wizards of the Coast wrote a letter to someone who used dungeons and dragons as an attack against a political opponent. In that letter they told him that he was being ignorant and let him know that they send packages of gaming supplies to the troops. It was in an attempt to keep the person from using their name as an attack again.
In no place did they say anything about the political campaigns or what was happening, so your post has no basis in reality. I only hope that you did not post this in order to bait people, which is against the CoC.
Dear Hasbro,
Politicize Dungeons and Dragons again and I will no longer purchase your products (no D&D, no Magic, no Star Wars), nor will I continue running your games. I'm my group's sole DM and therefore, if I stop running, they stop playing, and thus stop purchasing. Would you have criticized Mr. Goldfarb had he been an Obama staffer? Of course not.
Clearly, in the grand scheme of things, this will hardly make a dent but at least my conscience will be clear. I can't support a company that offers blatant support to a political candidate and this is as blantant as it gets.
Thanks and I wish you continued success,
- Craig
I'm pretty sure I haven't read anything this misguided and just plain WRONG in a great number of years. Congratulations, sir...you have once again made me realize that people are, in fact, NOT getting smarter as time goes on.
Does the statement bother me? Not really... an ignorant little statement by an ignorant little man means ignorantly little. What bothers me is the fact that people seem to justify it as the norm, when it shouldn't be.
Was Mr. Goldfarb wrong? Nah, probably not. I can see myself writing the same thing, and I'm an avid D&D player and forum-visitor. As with many other "nerd"/"geek" communities, D&D players frankly lean liberal. It doesn't take much look at just these very forums -- hell, just this thread -- to see that. As a libertarian, I've had to bite my tongue many times watching random comments about conservatives / Republicans / whatever from random posters that were significantly more offensive than anything this blogger tossed on the Internet as a tongue-in-cheek comment (including about half a dozen in this thread). And don't even get me started on the crap I've put up with in the forum I'm a Lead of.
All this bedwetting is enough to retroactively justify Goldfarb's comments.
We have enough asinine political correctness in this world without adding fear of offending D&D geeks to the list.
Vomit in the mouth.
As a libertarian, I've had to bite my tongue many times watching random comments about conservatives / Republicans / whatever from random posters that were significantly more offensive than anything this blogger tossed on the Internet as a tongue-in-cheek comment (including about half a dozen in this thread). And don't even get me started on the crap I've put up with in the forum I'm a Lead of.
And I assure you there are those of us on the left who do the same on a frequent basis. This thread has proved many things, but none of them have anything to do with the political makeup of D&D players.
Really, why is everyone so upset? If this is the sort of thing that bothers you, well, you've got harder lessons to learn in life.
And, I'm a bit miffed that Wizards decides to interject itself into this. Why would they do so? To protect their gamers? No, of course not. It's to help boost sales, I'd be willing to bet. It's free PR for them; I can't say that I blame them. but I don't agree with them.
Sheesh. People acting all indignant all of a sudden. Sounds to me like someone touched a nerve.
All this bedwetting is enough to retroactively justify Goldfarb's comments.
In truth, I was hoping the statements would've been addressed via humor... similar to how the Paris Hilton comments were.
Considering how many gamers tend to be tech (and u-tube) savvy, I was hoping a few of them would make a reply video similar to hers.
Unfortunately, WotC decided to handle it with maturity and decorum. I don't go to the internet for that sort of stuff.
Huh. Maybe that's the reason he did it: to deflect comments against his plagarizing boss. It's easier to take on the D&D community than the 'Nam Veterans Group: we don't have RL experience with combat. :P
we don't have RL experience with combat. :P
Per the letter - many of us do
Per the letter - many of us do
I meant the group of people who are D&D players, but not Military Personnel; as opposed to the D&D players who are Military Personnel; and also different from the Military Personnel who don't play D&D.
Don't make me pull out a Venn Diagram! I'll do it!
All this bedwetting is enough to retroactively justify Goldfarb's comments.
We have enough asinine political correctness in this world without adding fear of offending D&D geeks to the list.
Vomit in the mouth.
It's not a question of anyone offending anyone else. This isn't an issue of PC vs. non-PC. It's more a question of mischaracterizing a sub-culture for political gain. Never mind me and my geekdom; I couldn't care less if someone wants to call me names. What I take issue with is this political practice of "building a narrative."
I, as a gamer, as a voter, will not allow my sub-culture to be maligned for political ends. I take pride in my community, in my friends, and in the contribution that we collectively make to the country. I am not ashamed of playing D&D and I'm happy to risk ridicule to stand up for my hobby and the people who play it.
This isn't a matter of hurt feelings; it's more a matter of principle.
-Unmaker
Oh good grief. This thread makes me a bit sad to be a gamer.
Was Mr. Goldfarb wrong? Nah, probably not. I can see myself writing the same thing, and I'm an avid D&D player and forum-visitor. As with many other "nerd"/"geek" communities, D&D players frankly lean liberal. It doesn't take much look at just these very forums -- hell, just this thread -- to see that. As a libertarian, I've had to bite my tongue many times watching random comments about conservatives / Republicans / whatever from random posters that were significantly more offensive than anything this blogger tossed on the Internet as a tongue-in-cheek comment (including about half a dozen in this thread). And don't even get me started on the crap I've put up with in the forum I'm a Lead of.
All this bedwetting is enough to retroactively justify Goldfarb's comments.
We have enough asinine political correctness in this world without adding fear of offending D&D geeks to the list.
Vomit in the mouth.
Okay you have hit a pet peeve of mine. To wit, the overuse and misuse of the term "Political correctness". Avoiding the excesses of PC-ness is not the same thing as absolute license to act like a jerk and abuse everyone around you, though for some reason many people (especially those who wish to act like jerks and abuse everyone aroiund them) hoose to define it this way.
Doing things like avoiing the use of the word "*****rdly" because of its coincidental resemblance to another word is "Political Correctness". Saying that kids shoudn't receive grades in school because it will make the kids who get bad grades feel bad is PC. Saying that people shouldn't go out of their way to intentionally to intentionally insult people who have done nothing to them isn't a matter of PC-ness, its a matter of basic manners.
ETA: Heh, the forum edited my word that resembles a certain other word. Far more PC than simply saying "Hey, this jerk shouldn't go around spewing insults. And if anyone can't guess what the word in question is, the one I used means "Very Stingy" and the word it resembles rhymes with "Bigger"
D&D players frankly lean liberal.
Where's your evidence of this?
'Frankly', I don't see how that makes sense.
D&D is a fantasy game, set in the 'past'. It's a game where a small number of people either have power, or can move from farmer's son to near-god power. It's a game about a small group changing the world through their own talents.
It is also a game where combat is important (not all of the game, but it's still important). That's why I catch many Military members playing D&D as well. A game of conflict and tactics is a fascination for people who are willing to put their lives on the line to ensure the survival of others.
Of course, when you say liberal, I think you mean people who think the government needs to regulate every aspect of their lives. My intended opposite is what I would call conservative, meaning people who think you are responsible for your own destiny.
I know that military statistically votes republican, and due to the conflict-oriented nature of D&D, I would assume the same. That makes the comment by Mr. Goldfarb idiotic to say the least. Research!
ETA: Heh, the forum edited my word that resembles a certain other word. Far more PC than simply saying "Hey, this jerk shouldn't go around spewing insults. And if anyone can't guess what the word in question is, the one I used means "Very Stingy" and the word it resembles rhymes with "Bigger"
I thought the word was Dastard until I saw this.
Okay you have hit a pet peeve of mine. To wit, the overuse and misuse of the term "Political correctness".
Mine as well. This quote expresses my opinion:
We have now reached the point where every goon with a grievance, every bitter bigot, merely has to place the prefix, 'I know this is not politically correct, but...' in front of the usual string of insults in order to be not just safe from criticism, but actually a card, a lad, even a hero.... Anti-PC has become the latest cover for creeps. It is a godsend for every curmudgeon and crank, from fascists to the merely smug.
A related peeve of mine is the habit many people have of dismissing an ideology or point of view just by calling it its name, without even the most basic understanding of it.
Which by extension leads to stuff like people accusing Obama of being a Marxist. I mean, Lords of Hades! I don't care who you're planning to vote for; that's just ignorant.
Doing things like avoiing the use of the word "*****rdly" because of its coincidental resemblance to another word is "Political Correctness".
What does it say about me that I guessed this correctly first try? I hope just that I have a large vocabulary...
You've hit a pet peeve of mine now. Just because you haven't experienced problems due to your hobby doesn't mean that they don't exist and are fueled by the ignorance that the offender cultivated.
Just because you have never lost a job or been physically attacked because you play D&D doesn't mean that it doesn't happen. This is why stereotyping any group, be it based on race, religion, gender, hobby, or anything else is wrong through and through. Letting it go unchecked only creates a system for it to thrive.
Maybe I just have a thick enough skin it does not bother me.
You can lose your job for anything someone does not like. They will find a reason. I know people who lost their job due to roleplaying... it was because they could not stop reading novels and source books at their stations.
ROleplayers do not need to be defended. There is a difference between civil rights struggles, and the 'struggles' of ROleplayers. I HAVE been in a fight over D&D. It was when I was 12. I don't feel like roleplayers are discriminated against. That is ridiculous.
A native american or a homosexual has a lot more to struggle with than a role player. Especially since most of the roleplayer's problems could be solved by growing a thicker skin.
Also roleplaying is a CHOICE. Like any other hobby.
A homosexual has a lot more to struggle with than a role player. Roleplaying is a CHOICE.
I would just prefer not to be insulted either way, and would not want people who chuck random insults at unrelated parties to be running a world power.
From the quote above.
I am anti-PC and certainly do not consider myself a creep. PC is wrecking the US education system for one thing.
I will never start a statement with "I know this is not politically correct..." I will just say it. It might help that i am in the COLLEGE classroom, but I never speak politically correct.
This does not mean that I use any form of racial slang. I just use neutral terms. If someone is offended, I am sure they will get over it.
I would just prefer not to be insulted either way, and would not want people who chuck random insults at unrelated parties to be running a world power.
I am not defending Goldfarb so don't get the wrong idea. I am just not one that is quick to be offended, or to offend.
I also distinctly remember during the 200 campaign when McCain compared himself to Luke Skywalker flying in the trench of the Death Star.
I do not think McCain had anything to do with the comment.
Still since there is no good third party candidate I can see, McCain will most likely get my vote.
I would just prefer not to be insulted either way,
Same. And I'm NOT insulted by being called a geek, nerd, dork, dweeb, or any of the like. But the following,
It may be typical of the pro-Obama Dungeons & Dragons crowd to disparage a fellow countryman's memory of war from the comfort of mom's basement, but most Americans have the humility and gratitude to respect and learn from the memories of men who suffered on behalf of others.
says that I associate with people who mock the duty of the military. It implies that I am an exception among Americans because I am prideful, ungrateful, and disrespectful. It gives the impression that D&D folks engage in mock battles, and use those games to 'know better' than the people who have truly served their country.
That's what I take offense to. Especially since myself and three of my DMs ARE military members.
A native american or a homosexual has a lot more to struggle with than a role player. Especially since most of the roleplayer's problems could be solved by growing a thicker skin.
Also roleplaying is a CHOICE. Like any other hobby.
I get that being a native American isn't really something one can help, being born that way, but.. Uh, why did you lump Homosexuality in there with the poor boy?
That is a choice.
Same. And I'm NOT insulted by being called a geek, nerd, dork, dweeb, or any of the like. But the following,
says that I associate with people who mock the duty of the military. It implies that I am an exception among Americans because I am prideful, ungrateful, and disrespectful. It gives the impression that D&D folks engage in mock battles, and use those games to 'know better' than the people who have truly served their country.
That's what I take offense to. Especially since myself and three of my DMs ARE military members.
That's exactly my problem. And despite what Mournblade says, I'm not holding this against McCain. This wasn't his stupid remark at all. However, I don't think that "I'm not the politician" should be a valid defense for a blatantly ignorant remark, which is exactly what seems to be the justification for Goldfarb's actions here.
I am anti-PC and certainly do not consider myself a creep.
Well, I wasn't calling you one, or anyone one. I don't like PC, either, though I don't feel it is as quite as bad as you do.
I just don't like words being politicized into secular idols that then become a measure of someone's virtue/sanity and then finally lose all definition except what's convenient for the ruling party.
Show
Your hostile use of the word "political correctness" to criticize a criticism of a blatantly offensive remark is unacceptable hyperbole. Furthermore, your later statement that you were not defending Mr. Goldfarb is contradicted by your statement that "Was Mr. Goldfarb wrong? Nah, probably not. I can see myself writing the same thing" and that it was "a tongue-in-cheek comment."
You agree with him, think it was a tongue-in-cheek comment, and could see yourself saying it, yet you're not defending him? Odd at the least.
You agree with him, think it was a tongue-in-cheek comment, and could see yourself saying it, yet you're not defending him? Odd at the least.
I get that being a native American isn't really something one can help, being born that way, but.. Uh, why did you lump Homosexuality in there with the poor boy?
That is a choice.
I don't think we should go here.
'I know this is not politically correct, but...' in front of the usual string of insults in order to be not just safe from criticism, but actually a card, a lad, even a hero.... Anti-PC has become the latest cover for creeps.'
From the quote above.
I am anti-PC and certainly do not consider myself a creep. PC is wrecking the US education system for one thing.
I will never start a statement with "I know this is not politically correct..." I will just say it. It might help that i am in the COLLEGE classroom, but I never speak politically correct.
This does not mean that I use any form of racial slang. I just use neutral terms. If someone is offended, I am sure they will get over it.
There is a difference between avoiding the words "retarded" or "black guy" because they aren't politically correct, and openly mocking a subculture of people because it's the hip thing to do. The latter isn't abhorrent because of political correctness... it's abhorrent because this douchebag took it upon himself to insult a group of people and imply that every single one of them oppose the military. Stereotyping isn't some form of rage against political correctness, it's stupidity at its finest.
I think it's about time for baked goods. Who agrees?
But then we'd just argue over how flaky the pastries should be...
When participating in our games and services you will encounter thousands of other members who come from different backgrounds and have many different experiences. Certain languages, information and images may not be offensive to you, but may have an effect on someone else. Please avoid posting in a manner that would offend anyone. We appreciate your cooperation.
I get that being a native American isn't really something one can help, being born that way, but.. Uh, why did you lump Homosexuality in there with the poor boy?
That is a choice.
True that this is debatable. Studying in my field (molecular Biology), and what I have come across (not vigourously researching by the way) leads me to beleive that homosexuality is NOT a choice. I think there are strong biological urges occuring. A homosexual can no more help themselves from being attracted to a member of the same sex, as I can help myself being attracted to girls.
I do not think anyone can control who they are attracted too. I understand it is debatable, but everytime I do debate it I cite some strong scientific evidence to show that it is genetic. I am not going to debate it here, so if you insist that it is not a choice you can have the win.
If homosexuality WAS a choice, given all the societal detriments... WHY would one CHOOSE to be homosexual?
Well, I wasn't calling you one, or anyone one. I don't like PC, either, though I don't feel it is as quite as bad as you do.
I just don't like words being politicized into secular idols that then become a measure of someone's virtue/sanity and then finally lose all definition except what's convenient for the ruling party.
Your hostile use of the word "political correctness" to criticize a criticism of a blatantly offensive remark is unacceptable hyperbole. Furthermore, your later statement that you were not defending Mr. Goldfarb is contradicted by your statement that "Was Mr. Goldfarb wrong? Nah, probably not. I can see myself writing the same thing" and that it was "a tongue-in-cheek comment."
You agree with him, think it was a tongue-in-cheek comment, and could see yourself saying it, yet you're not defending him? Odd at the least.
Was this criticism aimed at me? Because I do not remember writing anything of this sort. I certainly did not say that Goldfarb was not wrong.
Please check and make sure it was mournblade94 that made those remarks.
Ok I just checked...
Never said I agree with him, and I did say it could sway my vote away from McCain (though the magnitude of the situation is minimal, so I will probably stay with it). All I discussed in this thread was equating it with civil rights.
I do beleive you misquoted. Please fix so people do not get the wrong idea.
Many thanks.
There is a difference between avoiding the words "retarded" or "black guy" because they aren't politically correct, and openly mocking a subculture of people because it's the hip thing to do. The latter isn't abhorrent because of political correctness... it's abhorrent because this douchebag took it upon himself to insult a group of people and imply that every single one of them oppose the military. Stereotyping isn't some form of rage against political correctness, it's stupidity at its finest.
I am in agreement here. I am more apt to use words like you illustrate in the first sentence.
This isn't an issue of PC vs. non-PC. It's more a question of mischaracterizing a sub-culture for political gain.
Really? You seriously think there was any political gain to be had from the use of D&D in that line? It was used for narrative effect and little more.
Okay you have hit a pet peeve of mine. To wit, the overuse and misuse of the term "Political correctness". Avoiding the excesses of PC-ness is not the same thing as absolute license to act like a jerk and abuse everyone around you, though for some reason many people (especially those who wish to act like jerks and abuse everyone aroiund them) hoose to define it this way.
"Abuse"? Really? I recommend checking out the term "hyperbole."
I contend that this is gross overreaction to what was ultimately a very miniscule and harmless side-comment, and demands for apologies and threats to change votes over this sort of nonsense are the epitome of political correctness gone mad.
If the guy had launched a paragraph rant talking about how stupid D&D players were, okay, you might have a bit of a point. But that's not what we're talking about here. Let's maintain at least a little perspective.
Where's your evidence of this?
In the absense of statistics, all we can go with are observations and guesswork. Which I freely admit may well be flawed, are not fact, and cannot be used to prove that I'm right in any way, form, or fashion.
'Frankly', I don't see how that makes sense.
Eh, most nerd/geek groups IMX lean left. Computer geeks, roleplaying geeks, what have you.
Your hostile use of the word "political correctness" to criticize a criticism of a blatantly offensive remark is unacceptable hyperbole. Furthermore, your later statement that you were not defending Mr. Goldfarb is contradicted by your statement that "Was Mr. Goldfarb wrong? Nah, probably not. I can see myself writing the same thing" and that it was "a tongue-in-cheek comment."
You agree with him, think it was a tongue-in-cheek comment, and could see yourself saying it, yet you're not defending him? Odd at the least.
yarvin, you are confusing the content of my posts with that of Mournblade's.
True that this is debatable. Studying in my field (molecular Biology), and what I have come across (not vigourously researching by the way) leads me to beleive that homosexuality is NOT a choice. I think there are strong biological urges occuring. A homosexual can no more help themselves from being attracted to a member of the same sex, as I can help myself being attracted to girls.
I do not think anyone can control who they are attracted too. I understand it is debatable, but everytime I do debate it I cite some strong scientific evidence to show that it is genetic. I am not going to debate it here, so if you insist that it is not a choice you can have the win.
If homosexuality WAS a choice, given all the societal detriments... WHY would one CHOOSE to be homosexual?
Really not sure. The current fad is complicated by shoddy research by college thesis that are run in about the same way as the Global Warming thesis, knowing the results before conducting the research. It is also mired by Psychological theories that have radically changed the way Psychologists dispense their helpful/hurtful advice.
Whatever, I just think the lumping Homosexuality with being a certain race was not the best way to express the poster's point. Perhaps Chocolate cravers don't have a choice on why they crave the chocolate.
Was this criticism aimed at me? Because I do not remember writing anything of this sort. I certainly did not say that Goldfarb was not wrong.
Please check and make sure it was mournblade94 that made those remarks.
Ok I just checked...
Never said I agree with him, and I did say it could sway my vote away from McCain (though the magnitude of the situation is minimal, so I will probably stay with it). All I discussed in this thread was equating it with civil rights.
I do beleive you misquoted. Please fix so people do not get the wrong idea.
Many thanks.
Holy cow. I confused you with Salik. What I get for not reading closely enough. Fixed.
My most sincere apologies for that.
Holy cow. I confused you with Salik. What I get for not reading closely enough. Fixed.
My most sincere apologies for that.
No worries
Really not sure. The current fad is complicated by shoddy research by college thesis that are run in about the same way as the Global Warming thesis, knowing the results before conducting the research. It is also mired by Psychological theories that have radically changed the way Psychologists dispense their helpful/hurtful advice.
Whatever, I just think the lumping Homosexuality with being a certain race was not the best way to express the poster's point. Perhaps Chocolate cravers don't have a choice on why they crave the chocolate.
Well I am not going to debate that here.
The Global Warming phenomenon however is not run like creationism. The Global Warming thesis has many different components. The scientists that study global warming are quite rigourous with their execution of the scientific method. The problem with Global Warming is it has been politicized, so now left or right camp will try to grab whatever research is available and exploit it.
The science is there however.
Global warming IS occuring. The question is if it is anthropogenic or not.
Over the past 5 years, the Earth is slightly cooler.
Over the past 10 years, the Earth is slightly warmer.
Over the past 50 years, the Earth is slightly cooler.
Over the past 200 years, the Earth is slighty warmer.
Over the past 500 years, the Earth is slightly cooler.
Over the past 1000 years, the Earth is significantly cooler.
"Global Warming" is nothing more than political alarmism for those who demand greats amount of power to solve the 'most devastating crisis in our time'. Look at what the alarmists want to control in everyone's everyday life for proof of that.
(Note, I'm not saying that we SHOULDN'T 'go-green' all around, where it's feasible - I remember the 1970s, I don't want them back - but those who back the 'Global Warming Crisis' have yet to show any real concern about the environment themselves. It's a power-grab, pure and simple.)
I get that being a native American isn't really something one can help, being born that way, but.. Uh, why did you lump Homosexuality in there with the poor boy?
That is a choice.
If you believe that, (and most evidence point to the fact that you are wrong) then I must ask, is not your religion also a choice? So are you saying that we should no longer allow people to practice their religion with impunity? Are you saying that religious bias and hatred carries less weight because it is a choice?
Somehow I doubt it. Be careful with the logic you use to justify your prejudices.
Global warming IS happening? Compared to WHEN?
Over the past 5 years, the Earth is slightly cooler.
Over the past 10 years, the Earth is slightly warmer.
Over the past 50 years, the Earth is slightly cooler.
Over the past 200 years, the Earth is slighty warmer.
Over the past 500 years, the Earth is slightly cooler.
Over the past 1000 years, the Earth is significantly cooler.
"Global Warming" is nothing more than political alarmism for those who demand greats amount of power to solve the 'most devastating crisis in our time'. Look at what the alarmists want to control in everyone's everyday life for proof of that.
(Note, I'm not saying that we SHOULDN'T 'go-green' all around, where it's feasible - I remember the 1970s, I don't want them back - but those who back the 'Global Warming Crisis' have yet to show any real concern about the environment themselves. It's a power-grab, pure and simple.)
When scientists speak of global warming they are generally speaking of the time since the industrial revolution, and specifically the last 100 years.
For those of us in the science field it is not political alarmism, it is simply a phenomenon. When people brush the science off as alarmism is where the problem lies. When people amplify it to more than it means is where the problem lies.
My problem is with the left, and the right. The left is embracing it and exagerating its effects. The right is denying it to preserve industry. Measures must be taken to safeguard our current status quo. Note this does not mean everyone rides bikes. It means we use our resources smartly. Whether you are left or right there is no harm in building SUV's with efficient engines. There is no harm in researching alternate energy.
Your figures above are not for the entire earth. If you try to estimate a comparative temperature from that time you must analyze historical records, which do not record temperature, they record planting seasons and such. Medieval European records indicate Europe was warmer 1000 years ago. However, records from other areas such as the middle east, suggest it was cooler, there is no official temperature for the earth of that time. There were however palm trees in england.
There was a small period of ice age lasting from the 13th century to approximately the industrial revolution.
Global warming does not suggest that this is the warmest the earth has ever been. It is the warmest it has been since our modern conveniences (1851 is the offical date I beleive), which could pose problems on our way of life.
Where it is foolish to be an alarmist, it is also foolish to sit by and TRY to do nothing. THe malaria belt is already increasing since we started keeping records on epidemiology.
When scientists speak of global warming they are generally speaking of the time since the industrial revolution, and specifically the last 100 years.
But, even then, there's not enough science to back up the 'conclusions'. Remember that all these guys got their weather predictions wrong, and have been consistantly wrong for two decades now. (Remember the 'pollution ice-age' of the 1970s, or the 'acid-rain deforestation' of the 1980s?)
As I said, I don't want to return to the smog-filled 1970s, and I support green efforts. I just don't think that those who push the 'Global Warming' agenda really care about the issue except for how much power they can grab by declaring a 'world crisis' that only they can magically solve.
In the end, the theory cannot be proven (cyclical or man-made, or cyclical and man-affected), until the end result is in play. The only complaint I have about the issue is the alarmism many 'left' (is that right?) create with it. 'Green' efforts are fine, hypocrisy is a pain.
If you believe that, (and most evidence point to the fact that you are wrong) then I must ask, is not your religion also a choice? So are you saying that we should no longer allow people to practice their religion with impunity? Are you saying that religious bias and hatred carries less weight because it is a choice?
Somehow I doubt it. Be careful with the logic you use to justify your prejudices.
I don't begrudge those that want to live outside the society norm. Live as you see fit, with whom you love and be happy. To equate the belief of being homosexual as a racial effect with worship of a religion being oppressed is somehow crossed.
The evidence is not there. It is "likely" that some thing in a microscopic speck has "something" to do with a particular development that "might" have some sort of effect on a DNA string that "could" direct brain development to effect behavior toward what might be considered homosexual urges, or maybe just make a young child hate dolls.
Social studies have refuted some of the shoddy research done at the collage level.
My point was that being an Native Indian and being a homosexual is not the same and shouldn't have been used together as the example that the poster was trying to use to make his point.
That is all we need to know, and it is something that a lot of political pundits don't want to acknowledge or even talk as a possibility.
My point was that being an Native Indian and being a homosexual is not the same...
Unless, of course, you ARE a homosexual Native Indian.. which, by the way, would be a gay person from India?
Global Warming, in whatever form it comes in and is talked about, is not man made.
That is all we need to know, and it is something that a lot of political pundits don't want to acknowledge or even talk as a possibility.
That is simply a bald assertion. I or anyone else can dismiss it as easily as you can accept it.
Another issue with the Global Warming theory is that the tools we use to measure temperature has changed, as well as where we make the samples.
In the end, the theory cannot be proven (cyclical or man-made, or cyclical and man-affected), until the end result is in play. The only complaint I have about the issue is the alarmism many 'left' (is that right?) create with it. 'Green' efforts are fine, hypocrisy is a pain.
I agree: the politicization of the issue is just painful to watch. Me, I think like a gambler about it, and I'm in favor of taking measures against it because I think the cost of doing so is probably lower and certainly more easily reversible.
Look, I believe that the temperature climate has changed in the last 20 years, the jet stream that goes through the US has veered radically giving us some mild winters and scorching summers, but the overall Global difference is just a few degrees, and it was cooler this year than it has been in decades.
What I don't see is what man, or more specifically, our overall influence on this change to be a certainty, or even possible. This is stuff of bad movies, like the Avengers (English, with Robert Connery, not the Marvel Animated) having the bad guy control the weather.
Just as easily as I can discount the theory that it is man made.
Correct,there is no conclusive scientific evidence to support that man is affecting global warming.
For more info on the debate :
http://www.pbs.org/wgbh/warming/debate/
Best quote from Dr. S. Fred Singer
Well, when you start talking about the question of scientific consensus, I think one should be very careful to say, first of all, that science is not decided by vote. I don't take a poll and then determine what is the correct answer. Science is decided by observations that either confirm or deny a theory, a hypothesis. And if they confirm the theory, you go on to the next set of observations and see whether it still holds. And if it works against the hypothesis, you try to develop a new hypothesis.
That's how science makes progress.
And, in fact, historically, every bit of scientific progress has come about because the observations or the experimental facts did not support the current theory. And, usually, these new experiments were done by a small group, or the new theory was proposed by a single individual, even. Take Albert Einstein, as an example, against the great opposition of the large scientific community. But science is a wonderful subject. It works itself out. The truth eventually emerges. So, this is my preface.
In the climate business, the situation is more complicated because there are also political factors involved, and frankly, there's also money involved. This is an unusual situation. There's no politics attached to the theory of relativity, for example. But there is to climate science. There are no large sums of money attached to relativity, but there are to climate science.
The federal government pumps about $2 billion a year into climate research. Now, this money has to be spent by someone. It supports a lot of jobs. It supports a lot of people. And inevitably, many of these people begin to feel that what they're doing is tremendously important and vital. Otherwise, they couldn't really live with themselves. They've talked themselves into the fact that the work they're doing is somehow helping humanity deal with some kind of a problem.
just skimming the surface :
Average ground station readings do show a mild warming of 0.6 to 0.8C over the last 100 years, which is well within the natural variations recorded in the last millennium. The ground station network suffers from an uneven distribution across the globe; the stations are preferentially located in growing urban and industrial areas ("heat islands"), which show substantially higher readings than adjacent rural areas ("land use effects").
Significant changes in climate have continually occurred throughout geologic time. For instance, the Medieval Warm Period, from around 1000 to1200 AD (when the Vikings farmed on Greenland) was followed by a period known as the Little Ice Age. Since the end of the 17th Century the "average global temperature" has been rising at a low steady rate ; although from 1940 – 1970 temperatures actually dropped, leading to a Global Cooling scare.
there is no proof that CO2 is the main driver of global warming. As measured in ice cores dated over many thousands of years, CO2 levels move up and down AFTER the temperature has done so, and thus are the RESULT OF, NOT THE CAUSE of warming. Geological field work in recent sediments confirms this causal relationship. There is solid evidence that, as temperatures move up and down naturally and cyclically through solar radiation, orbital and galactic influences, the warming surface layers of the earth's oceans expel more CO2 as a result.
My biggest issue with the global warming "theory" is that it discounts the effects of the sun. I think the solar flare activity that's been going on for 30 or so years(and is predicted to last til 2020 or so) has a lot more to do with an increase in temperatures than anything else.
I have nothing against cleaner technology: that would be stupid and ignorant, but the hysteria around this phantom issue is unwarranted to say the least. Pollution and deforestation(which ironically would be more effective at warming the globe than anything else we could devise) is a much bigger problem than carbon dioxide. The CO2 issue is clearly championed because of the $$$'s: research money that wouldn't otherwise be granted, carbon taxes and carbon credit trading, etc.
Eh, I'm not going to argue over a theory I don't understand. My reason for supporting action against GW is pragmatic, not because I'm sure we're causing it.
Meh greener energy only makes sense, besides Im for anything that will let us tell the Saudis to take a hike.
Remember, John McCain thinks all of us are LOSERS!!! And that we support Obama.
So get out there tomorrow and let him know that using our passtime to define us as people who live in our mother's basement is unacceptable!
For more on the candidates, check the link in my sig!
If what one idiot under a banner says is exactly what the banner thinks, then we need to kill Obama, due to what the reverse KKK priest he goes to church to listen to says.
So what should we do to McCain for listening to Bush, Cheney, Karl Rove, and Keating?
So what should we do to McCain for listening to Bush, Cheney, Karl Rove, and Keating?
Boil in oil; I'm a stickler for poetic justice and ironic ends :D :D :D
Oh, and then shoot him. 'Accidentally'
[indent]If my comments caused any harm or hurt to the hard working Americans who play Dungeons & Dragons, I apologize. This campaign is committed to increasing the strength, constitution, dexterity, intelligence, wisdom, and charisma scores of every American.[/indent]
so wait ...
- people who are just seriously offended, screw'm
- people who are unimployed, screw'm
- people who aren't american, screw'm
?
oh, and isn't the fastest way to increase stat (beside magical items), increasing level ... by combat?:fight!:
How did this thread avoid the chopping block in the mass purge of political and religious threads?
Point seconded.
I would just prefer not to be insulted either way,
Same. And I'm NOT insulted by being called a geek, nerd, dork, dweeb, or any of the like. But the following,
It may be typical of the pro-Obama Dungeons & Dragons crowd to disparage a fellow countryman's memory of war from the comfort of mom's basement, but most Americans have the humility and gratitude to respect and learn from the memories of men who suffered on behalf of others.
says that I associate with people who mock the duty of the military. It implies that I am an exception among Americans because I am prideful, ungrateful, and disrespectful. It gives the impression that D&D folks engage in mock battles, and use those games to 'know better' than the people who have truly served their country.
That's what I take offense to. Especially since myself and three of my DMs ARE military members.
A native american or a homosexual has a lot more to struggle with than a role player. Especially since most of the roleplayer's problems could be solved by growing a thicker skin.
Also roleplaying is a CHOICE. Like any other hobby.
I get that being a native American isn't really something one can help, being born that way, but.. Uh, why did you lump Homosexuality in there with the poor boy?
That is a choice.
Same. And I'm NOT insulted by being called a geek, nerd, dork, dweeb, or any of the like. But the following,
says that I associate with people who mock the duty of the military. It implies that I am an exception among Americans because I am prideful, ungrateful, and disrespectful. It gives the impression that D&D folks engage in mock battles, and use those games to 'know better' than the people who have truly served their country.
That's what I take offense to. Especially since myself and three of my DMs ARE military members.
That's exactly my problem. And despite what Mournblade says, I'm not holding this against McCain. This wasn't his stupid remark at all. However, I don't think that "I'm not the politician" should be a valid defense for a blatantly ignorant remark, which is exactly what seems to be the justification for Goldfarb's actions here.
I am anti-PC and certainly do not consider myself a creep.
Well, I wasn't calling you one, or anyone one. I don't like PC, either, though I don't feel it is as quite as bad as you do.
I just don't like words being politicized into secular idols that then become a measure of someone's virtue/sanity and then finally lose all definition except what's convenient for the ruling party.
Show
Your hostile use of the word "political correctness" to criticize a criticism of a blatantly offensive remark is unacceptable hyperbole. Furthermore, your later statement that you were not defending Mr. Goldfarb is contradicted by your statement that "Was Mr. Goldfarb wrong? Nah, probably not. I can see myself writing the same thing" and that it was "a tongue-in-cheek comment."
You agree with him, think it was a tongue-in-cheek comment, and could see yourself saying it, yet you're not defending him? Odd at the least.
You agree with him, think it was a tongue-in-cheek comment, and could see yourself saying it, yet you're not defending him? Odd at the least.
I get that being a native American isn't really something one can help, being born that way, but.. Uh, why did you lump Homosexuality in there with the poor boy?
That is a choice.
I don't think we should go here.
'I know this is not politically correct, but...' in front of the usual string of insults in order to be not just safe from criticism, but actually a card, a lad, even a hero.... Anti-PC has become the latest cover for creeps.'
From the quote above.
I am anti-PC and certainly do not consider myself a creep. PC is wrecking the US education system for one thing.
I will never start a statement with "I know this is not politically correct..." I will just say it. It might help that i am in the COLLEGE classroom, but I never speak politically correct.
This does not mean that I use any form of racial slang. I just use neutral terms. If someone is offended, I am sure they will get over it.
There is a difference between avoiding the words "retarded" or "black guy" because they aren't politically correct, and openly mocking a subculture of people because it's the hip thing to do. The latter isn't abhorrent because of political correctness... it's abhorrent because this douchebag took it upon himself to insult a group of people and imply that every single one of them oppose the military. Stereotyping isn't some form of rage against political correctness, it's stupidity at its finest.
I think it's about time for baked goods. Who agrees?
But then we'd just argue over how flaky the pastries should be...
When participating in our games and services you will encounter thousands of other members who come from different backgrounds and have many different experiences. Certain languages, information and images may not be offensive to you, but may have an effect on someone else. Please avoid posting in a manner that would offend anyone. We appreciate your cooperation.
I get that being a native American isn't really something one can help, being born that way, but.. Uh, why did you lump Homosexuality in there with the poor boy?
That is a choice.
True that this is debatable. Studying in my field (molecular Biology), and what I have come across (not vigourously researching by the way) leads me to beleive that homosexuality is NOT a choice. I think there are strong biological urges occuring. A homosexual can no more help themselves from being attracted to a member of the same sex, as I can help myself being attracted to girls.
I do not think anyone can control who they are attracted too. I understand it is debatable, but everytime I do debate it I cite some strong scientific evidence to show that it is genetic. I am not going to debate it here, so if you insist that it is not a choice you can have the win.
If homosexuality WAS a choice, given all the societal detriments... WHY would one CHOOSE to be homosexual?
Well, I wasn't calling you one, or anyone one. I don't like PC, either, though I don't feel it is as quite as bad as you do.
I just don't like words being politicized into secular idols that then become a measure of someone's virtue/sanity and then finally lose all definition except what's convenient for the ruling party.
Your hostile use of the word "political correctness" to criticize a criticism of a blatantly offensive remark is unacceptable hyperbole. Furthermore, your later statement that you were not defending Mr. Goldfarb is contradicted by your statement that "Was Mr. Goldfarb wrong? Nah, probably not. I can see myself writing the same thing" and that it was "a tongue-in-cheek comment."
You agree with him, think it was a tongue-in-cheek comment, and could see yourself saying it, yet you're not defending him? Odd at the least.
Was this criticism aimed at me? Because I do not remember writing anything of this sort. I certainly did not say that Goldfarb was not wrong.
Please check and make sure it was mournblade94 that made those remarks.
Ok I just checked...
Never said I agree with him, and I did say it could sway my vote away from McCain (though the magnitude of the situation is minimal, so I will probably stay with it). All I discussed in this thread was equating it with civil rights.
I do beleive you misquoted. Please fix so people do not get the wrong idea.
Many thanks.
There is a difference between avoiding the words "retarded" or "black guy" because they aren't politically correct, and openly mocking a subculture of people because it's the hip thing to do. The latter isn't abhorrent because of political correctness... it's abhorrent because this douchebag took it upon himself to insult a group of people and imply that every single one of them oppose the military. Stereotyping isn't some form of rage against political correctness, it's stupidity at its finest.
I am in agreement here. I am more apt to use words like you illustrate in the first sentence.
This isn't an issue of PC vs. non-PC. It's more a question of mischaracterizing a sub-culture for political gain.
Really? You seriously think there was any political gain to be had from the use of D&D in that line? It was used for narrative effect and little more.
Okay you have hit a pet peeve of mine. To wit, the overuse and misuse of the term "Political correctness". Avoiding the excesses of PC-ness is not the same thing as absolute license to act like a jerk and abuse everyone around you, though for some reason many people (especially those who wish to act like jerks and abuse everyone aroiund them) hoose to define it this way.
"Abuse"? Really? I recommend checking out the term "hyperbole."
I contend that this is gross overreaction to what was ultimately a very miniscule and harmless side-comment, and demands for apologies and threats to change votes over this sort of nonsense are the epitome of political correctness gone mad.
If the guy had launched a paragraph rant talking about how stupid D&D players were, okay, you might have a bit of a point. But that's not what we're talking about here. Let's maintain at least a little perspective.
Where's your evidence of this?
In the absense of statistics, all we can go with are observations and guesswork. Which I freely admit may well be flawed, are not fact, and cannot be used to prove that I'm right in any way, form, or fashion.
'Frankly', I don't see how that makes sense.
Eh, most nerd/geek groups IMX lean left. Computer geeks, roleplaying geeks, what have you.
Your hostile use of the word "political correctness" to criticize a criticism of a blatantly offensive remark is unacceptable hyperbole. Furthermore, your later statement that you were not defending Mr. Goldfarb is contradicted by your statement that "Was Mr. Goldfarb wrong? Nah, probably not. I can see myself writing the same thing" and that it was "a tongue-in-cheek comment."
You agree with him, think it was a tongue-in-cheek comment, and could see yourself saying it, yet you're not defending him? Odd at the least.
yarvin, you are confusing the content of my posts with that of Mournblade's.
True that this is debatable. Studying in my field (molecular Biology), and what I have come across (not vigourously researching by the way) leads me to beleive that homosexuality is NOT a choice. I think there are strong biological urges occuring. A homosexual can no more help themselves from being attracted to a member of the same sex, as I can help myself being attracted to girls.
I do not think anyone can control who they are attracted too. I understand it is debatable, but everytime I do debate it I cite some strong scientific evidence to show that it is genetic. I am not going to debate it here, so if you insist that it is not a choice you can have the win.
If homosexuality WAS a choice, given all the societal detriments... WHY would one CHOOSE to be homosexual?
Really not sure. The current fad is complicated by shoddy research by college thesis that are run in about the same way as the Global Warming thesis, knowing the results before conducting the research. It is also mired by Psychological theories that have radically changed the way Psychologists dispense their helpful/hurtful advice.
Whatever, I just think the lumping Homosexuality with being a certain race was not the best way to express the poster's point. Perhaps Chocolate cravers don't have a choice on why they crave the chocolate.
Was this criticism aimed at me? Because I do not remember writing anything of this sort. I certainly did not say that Goldfarb was not wrong.
Please check and make sure it was mournblade94 that made those remarks.
Ok I just checked...
Never said I agree with him, and I did say it could sway my vote away from McCain (though the magnitude of the situation is minimal, so I will probably stay with it). All I discussed in this thread was equating it with civil rights.
I do beleive you misquoted. Please fix so people do not get the wrong idea.
Many thanks.
Holy cow. I confused you with Salik. What I get for not reading closely enough. Fixed.
My most sincere apologies for that.
Holy cow. I confused you with Salik. What I get for not reading closely enough. Fixed.
My most sincere apologies for that.
No worries
Really not sure. The current fad is complicated by shoddy research by college thesis that are run in about the same way as the Global Warming thesis, knowing the results before conducting the research. It is also mired by Psychological theories that have radically changed the way Psychologists dispense their helpful/hurtful advice.
Whatever, I just think the lumping Homosexuality with being a certain race was not the best way to express the poster's point. Perhaps Chocolate cravers don't have a choice on why they crave the chocolate.
Well I am not going to debate that here.
The Global Warming phenomenon however is not run like creationism. The Global Warming thesis has many different components. The scientists that study global warming are quite rigourous with their execution of the scientific method. The problem with Global Warming is it has been politicized, so now left or right camp will try to grab whatever research is available and exploit it.
The science is there however.
Global warming IS occuring. The question is if it is anthropogenic or not.
Over the past 5 years, the Earth is slightly cooler.
Over the past 10 years, the Earth is slightly warmer.
Over the past 50 years, the Earth is slightly cooler.
Over the past 200 years, the Earth is slighty warmer.
Over the past 500 years, the Earth is slightly cooler.
Over the past 1000 years, the Earth is significantly cooler.
"Global Warming" is nothing more than political alarmism for those who demand greats amount of power to solve the 'most devastating crisis in our time'. Look at what the alarmists want to control in everyone's everyday life for proof of that.
(Note, I'm not saying that we SHOULDN'T 'go-green' all around, where it's feasible - I remember the 1970s, I don't want them back - but those who back the 'Global Warming Crisis' have yet to show any real concern about the environment themselves. It's a power-grab, pure and simple.)
I get that being a native American isn't really something one can help, being born that way, but.. Uh, why did you lump Homosexuality in there with the poor boy?
That is a choice.
If you believe that, (and most evidence point to the fact that you are wrong) then I must ask, is not your religion also a choice? So are you saying that we should no longer allow people to practice their religion with impunity? Are you saying that religious bias and hatred carries less weight because it is a choice?
Somehow I doubt it. Be careful with the logic you use to justify your prejudices.
Global warming IS happening? Compared to WHEN?
Over the past 5 years, the Earth is slightly cooler.
Over the past 10 years, the Earth is slightly warmer.
Over the past 50 years, the Earth is slightly cooler.
Over the past 200 years, the Earth is slighty warmer.
Over the past 500 years, the Earth is slightly cooler.
Over the past 1000 years, the Earth is significantly cooler.
"Global Warming" is nothing more than political alarmism for those who demand greats amount of power to solve the 'most devastating crisis in our time'. Look at what the alarmists want to control in everyone's everyday life for proof of that.
(Note, I'm not saying that we SHOULDN'T 'go-green' all around, where it's feasible - I remember the 1970s, I don't want them back - but those who back the 'Global Warming Crisis' have yet to show any real concern about the environment themselves. It's a power-grab, pure and simple.)
When scientists speak of global warming they are generally speaking of the time since the industrial revolution, and specifically the last 100 years.
For those of us in the science field it is not political alarmism, it is simply a phenomenon. When people brush the science off as alarmism is where the problem lies. When people amplify it to more than it means is where the problem lies.
My problem is with the left, and the right. The left is embracing it and exagerating its effects. The right is denying it to preserve industry. Measures must be taken to safeguard our current status quo. Note this does not mean everyone rides bikes. It means we use our resources smartly. Whether you are left or right there is no harm in building SUV's with efficient engines. There is no harm in researching alternate energy.
Your figures above are not for the entire earth. If you try to estimate a comparative temperature from that time you must analyze historical records, which do not record temperature, they record planting seasons and such. Medieval European records indicate Europe was warmer 1000 years ago. However, records from other areas such as the middle east, suggest it was cooler, there is no official temperature for the earth of that time. There were however palm trees in england.
There was a small period of ice age lasting from the 13th century to approximately the industrial revolution.
Global warming does not suggest that this is the warmest the earth has ever been. It is the warmest it has been since our modern conveniences (1851 is the offical date I beleive), which could pose problems on our way of life.
Where it is foolish to be an alarmist, it is also foolish to sit by and TRY to do nothing. THe malaria belt is already increasing since we started keeping records on epidemiology.
When scientists speak of global warming they are generally speaking of the time since the industrial revolution, and specifically the last 100 years.
But, even then, there's not enough science to back up the 'conclusions'. Remember that all these guys got their weather predictions wrong, and have been consistantly wrong for two decades now. (Remember the 'pollution ice-age' of the 1970s, or the 'acid-rain deforestation' of the 1980s?)
As I said, I don't want to return to the smog-filled 1970s, and I support green efforts. I just don't think that those who push the 'Global Warming' agenda really care about the issue except for how much power they can grab by declaring a 'world crisis' that only they can magically solve.
In the end, the theory cannot be proven (cyclical or man-made, or cyclical and man-affected), until the end result is in play. The only complaint I have about the issue is the alarmism many 'left' (is that right?) create with it. 'Green' efforts are fine, hypocrisy is a pain.
If you believe that, (and most evidence point to the fact that you are wrong) then I must ask, is not your religion also a choice? So are you saying that we should no longer allow people to practice their religion with impunity? Are you saying that religious bias and hatred carries less weight because it is a choice?
Somehow I doubt it. Be careful with the logic you use to justify your prejudices.
I don't begrudge those that want to live outside the society norm. Live as you see fit, with whom you love and be happy. To equate the belief of being homosexual as a racial effect with worship of a religion being oppressed is somehow crossed.
The evidence is not there. It is "likely" that some thing in a microscopic speck has "something" to do with a particular development that "might" have some sort of effect on a DNA string that "could" direct brain development to effect behavior toward what might be considered homosexual urges, or maybe just make a young child hate dolls.
Social studies have refuted some of the shoddy research done at the collage level.
My point was that being an Native Indian and being a homosexual is not the same and shouldn't have been used together as the example that the poster was trying to use to make his point.
That is all we need to know, and it is something that a lot of political pundits don't want to acknowledge or even talk as a possibility.
My point was that being an Native Indian and being a homosexual is not the same...
Unless, of course, you ARE a homosexual Native Indian.. which, by the way, would be a gay person from India?
Global Warming, in whatever form it comes in and is talked about, is not man made.
That is all we need to know, and it is something that a lot of political pundits don't want to acknowledge or even talk as a possibility.
That is simply a bald assertion. I or anyone else can dismiss it as easily as you can accept it.
Another issue with the Global Warming theory is that the tools we use to measure temperature has changed, as well as where we make the samples.
In the end, the theory cannot be proven (cyclical or man-made, or cyclical and man-affected), until the end result is in play. The only complaint I have about the issue is the alarmism many 'left' (is that right?) create with it. 'Green' efforts are fine, hypocrisy is a pain.
I agree: the politicization of the issue is just painful to watch. Me, I think like a gambler about it, and I'm in favor of taking measures against it because I think the cost of doing so is probably lower and certainly more easily reversible.
Look, I believe that the temperature climate has changed in the last 20 years, the jet stream that goes through the US has veered radically giving us some mild winters and scorching summers, but the overall Global difference is just a few degrees, and it was cooler this year than it has been in decades.
What I don't see is what man, or more specifically, our overall influence on this change to be a certainty, or even possible. This is stuff of bad movies, like the Avengers (English, with Robert Connery, not the Marvel Animated) having the bad guy control the weather.
Just as easily as I can discount the theory that it is man made.
Correct,there is no conclusive scientific evidence to support that man is affecting global warming.
For more info on the debate :
http://www.pbs.org/wgbh/warming/debate/
Best quote from Dr. S. Fred Singer
Well, when you start talking about the question of scientific consensus, I think one should be very careful to say, first of all, that science is not decided by vote. I don't take a poll and then determine what is the correct answer. Science is decided by observations that either confirm or deny a theory, a hypothesis. And if they confirm the theory, you go on to the next set of observations and see whether it still holds. And if it works against the hypothesis, you try to develop a new hypothesis.
That's how science makes progress.
And, in fact, historically, every bit of scientific progress has come about because the observations or the experimental facts did not support the current theory. And, usually, these new experiments were done by a small group, or the new theory was proposed by a single individual, even. Take Albert Einstein, as an example, against the great opposition of the large scientific community. But science is a wonderful subject. It works itself out. The truth eventually emerges. So, this is my preface.
In the climate business, the situation is more complicated because there are also political factors involved, and frankly, there's also money involved. This is an unusual situation. There's no politics attached to the theory of relativity, for example. But there is to climate science. There are no large sums of money attached to relativity, but there are to climate science.
The federal government pumps about $2 billion a year into climate research. Now, this money has to be spent by someone. It supports a lot of jobs. It supports a lot of people. And inevitably, many of these people begin to feel that what they're doing is tremendously important and vital. Otherwise, they couldn't really live with themselves. They've talked themselves into the fact that the work they're doing is somehow helping humanity deal with some kind of a problem.
just skimming the surface :
Average ground station readings do show a mild warming of 0.6 to 0.8C over the last 100 years, which is well within the natural variations recorded in the last millennium. The ground station network suffers from an uneven distribution across the globe; the stations are preferentially located in growing urban and industrial areas ("heat islands"), which show substantially higher readings than adjacent rural areas ("land use effects").
Significant changes in climate have continually occurred throughout geologic time. For instance, the Medieval Warm Period, from around 1000 to1200 AD (when the Vikings farmed on Greenland) was followed by a period known as the Little Ice Age. Since the end of the 17th Century the "average global temperature" has been rising at a low steady rate ; although from 1940 – 1970 temperatures actually dropped, leading to a Global Cooling scare.
there is no proof that CO2 is the main driver of global warming. As measured in ice cores dated over many thousands of years, CO2 levels move up and down AFTER the temperature has done so, and thus are the RESULT OF, NOT THE CAUSE of warming. Geological field work in recent sediments confirms this causal relationship. There is solid evidence that, as temperatures move up and down naturally and cyclically through solar radiation, orbital and galactic influences, the warming surface layers of the earth's oceans expel more CO2 as a result.
My biggest issue with the global warming "theory" is that it discounts the effects of the sun. I think the solar flare activity that's been going on for 30 or so years(and is predicted to last til 2020 or so) has a lot more to do with an increase in temperatures than anything else.
I have nothing against cleaner technology: that would be stupid and ignorant, but the hysteria around this phantom issue is unwarranted to say the least. Pollution and deforestation(which ironically would be more effective at warming the globe than anything else we could devise) is a much bigger problem than carbon dioxide. The CO2 issue is clearly championed because of the $$$'s: research money that wouldn't otherwise be granted, carbon taxes and carbon credit trading, etc.
Eh, I'm not going to argue over a theory I don't understand. My reason for supporting action against GW is pragmatic, not because I'm sure we're causing it.
Meh greener energy only makes sense, besides Im for anything that will let us tell the Saudis to take a hike.
Remember, John McCain thinks all of us are LOSERS!!! And that we support Obama.
So get out there tomorrow and let him know that using our passtime to define us as people who live in our mother's basement is unacceptable!
For more on the candidates, check the link in my sig!
If what one idiot under a banner says is exactly what the banner thinks, then we need to kill Obama, due to what the reverse KKK priest he goes to church to listen to says.
So what should we do to McCain for listening to Bush, Cheney, Karl Rove, and Keating?
So what should we do to McCain for listening to Bush, Cheney, Karl Rove, and Keating?
Boil in oil; I'm a stickler for poetic justice and ironic ends :D :D :D
Oh, and then shoot him. 'Accidentally'
[indent]If my comments caused any harm or hurt to the hard working Americans who play Dungeons & Dragons, I apologize. This campaign is committed to increasing the strength, constitution, dexterity, intelligence, wisdom, and charisma scores of every American.[/indent]
so wait ...
- people who are just seriously offended, screw'm
- people who are unimployed, screw'm
- people who aren't american, screw'm
?
oh, and isn't the fastest way to increase stat (beside magical items), increasing level ... by combat?:fight!:
How did this thread avoid the chopping block in the mass purge of political and religious threads?
Point seconded.