It seems that you're using an outdated browser. Some things may not work as they should (or don't work at all).
We suggest you upgrade newer and better browser like: Chrome, Firefox, Internet Explorer or Opera

×
low rated
avatar
LootHunter: Well, MY perspective is that most people don't care about race, gender, sexuality, etc. Yes, there are straight people who don't like, or even outright hate gays. But there are also people among gays, who hate straights. I personally saw how on one forum a gay guy said that one of the main problem today is overpopulation and it's straight people's fault.
avatar
flurrycream: There is a lot of hostility at gay people actually even in the places that are supposed to be accepting, (though things in western societies are a lot better due to invidualism). Or just generally those who don't conform to society. If your gay and you hold hands in public if you arent careful you could face a lot of abuse, not just verbal but physical in some cases. Or if your lesbian then some guys will go and say things like I can make you "heterosexual" in a threatening sense.
And if you are straight guy with a girl, some guys can go and say that you are not good enough and punch you in the face, and then approach the girl in agressive way.

Gay people are not the only ones who can become victims.
low rated
avatar
Hal900x: I'm seeing threads around the interverse claiming games are being rejected based on the politics of their devs/authors. I've had my differences with Cleve, but rejecting Grimoire: Heralds of the Winged Exemplar is nothing short of retarded. If there is a game in existence that fits GoG, it's this game. Regardless of your political ideology (and if you have one, you are ignorant), we should agree that art can be independent from it's creator. If you have to agree with every creator then you are losing a universe of incredible works. That, and the practical fact that you lose half your customers when you choose a "side" (and again, if you have a "side" you suffer from ignorance). Can you imagine if I had to agree with Dali? The guy was an utter scumbag, but modern surrealism is awesome.
I remember the recent Michael Jackson doc and all the sh*t that stirred......people dropped his music from some stores/sites and the simpsons dropped his one episode from their dvds/etc....all because of accusations. Imo one should be able to separate the creator from his/her creation...especially if the works are good on their own merits.

avatar
CymTyr: I lost several IQ points reading a "strong implication" that GOG is any form of a SJW hotbed.

Think before you go accusing GOG of crap they're not guilty of. Every time one of you posts something stupid and ideological in a bad way, you're costing GOG money.
1. It is(the forums anyways) if simply saying anything anti-sjw gets you low rated on sight.

2. How is it costing them money? If anything it'd balance out as some would be driven off by said talk and others would agree with it and be drawn in.

avatar
Darvond: I mean -what if-, and hear me out, [reads thread]

…GOG just really doesn't want to be involved with an author who is a known drama llama?

I mean let's face it, the community of Steam is galactic space where the noise to signal radio is often vast, even on the individual community hubs.

On GOG, the simple fact is, it's a small community, and any thread posted tends to be dead on in terms of signal. The actual content may be noise, but (especially if you set the number of threads viewable to the maximum), they'll often stick around a while. Imagine if Cleve went on some unhinged diatribe. Short of an administrative lock, nothing would stop that thread.
I would think the PR from such would draw some people's attention and actually end up selling MORE units from all the controversy.
Post edited May 25, 2019 by GameRager
low rated
avatar
kai2: I think it's interesting (and sad) that I espouse a middle philosophy that respects all sides (although shows they each bear some responsibility for the currentstate of political discourse) and I'm rated negatively. Therein lies the problem. Instead of a thoughtful reply, just vote it down. Sad.
This...post 13 was well written/thought out and civil/centerist and yet people downrated it.....likely because it criticized the current mainstream stance/position.

avatar
Darvond: Note: this would not be applicable if GOG had proper dividing lines between the major topics of discussion. Say akin to Reddit or Neogaf.
I don't think it'd be a good idea to further segregate conversations to even more sub-forums/subtopics ala reddit and their gated communities.
Post edited May 25, 2019 by GameRager
I don't get why people wanna "discuss" identity politics each and every week. It's always the same platitudes, same sides throwing the same crap against the ideological brick-wall the other side hides behind. Calling it a pointless exercise would be an understatement.
Post edited May 25, 2019 by DadJoke007
low rated
avatar
LootHunter: BS. No one complained about The Longest Journey, Immortals, or Dune. Heck, everyone was Ok with Doctor Who, until they started to push agenda last (well, actually previous to last) season.
avatar
flurrycream: Dr who has had like themes that for a while now.
I dont wanna call it sjw though there is nothing wrong at least with minorities included just to make it more relatable or diverse for interest although the way they try to make a political statement with said stories is eh.
But coupled with bad writing and the lack of subtly in such themes taking over the whole show I think yeah doctor who has gone down hill.
Plus the fact the show isnt even about the monsters anymore but the people. It was meant to be fun entertainment but now idk what it is meant to be. The actors are alright mostly suffering the terrible scripting. But they cannot get the focus right having too many characters, and they dont even focus on the doctor very much anymore, the doctor is almost like a side character.
Inclusion of certain groups in media is good if done for the right reasons and not done to push a belief or virtue signal and gain good PR for doing so.

As for various media doing it bad(imo)...take the New Twilight Zone, for example: The stories are laced with trump/republicans/white people/rich people bad narratives more and more lately(Like the one episode which was about aliens immigrating to the earth from another dimension which was an obvious dig at the current immigration policies).

avatar
flurrycream: There is a lot of hostility at gay people actually even in the places that are supposed to be accepting, (though things in western societies are a lot better due to invidualism). Or just generally those who don't conform to society. If your gay and you hold hands in public if you arent careful you could face a lot of abuse, not just verbal but physical in some cases. Or if your lesbian then some guys will go and say things like I can make you "heterosexual" in a threatening sense.
It's just less noticeable to those who don't face it. Like sexism for women or discrimination against minority races. The difference being is that sexuality is something you can hide and therefore many people choose to do that, everyone assumes you are heterosexual until you say you are not. You only notice things like sexuality, race or gender when they affect you. I also think there are still a lot of people who do not like certain minorities whether it is based on stereotypes or bad experiences.

Tbh while that argument of it being straight peoples fault that overpopulation is not true nor a great thing to say, it is only the reverse of what often is said about gay people not having children being different from the natural order etc. So I can see where that view comes from or used in defense. I don't think hate is good for anyone however.
At least in the first/western world we have laws against many of those behaviors & incentive to hire/uplift cvertain peoples....which is more than said groups had even a short time in the past.

I also agree that hate is bad, though.
Post edited May 25, 2019 by GameRager
Wasn't the fiasco involving Grimore talked about already sometime ago? I don't believe GOG is either "SJW" or "Right-wing". What is visible, is that GOG has several finicky levels of curation criteria that they base on to accept games, and I would need to find out what that is before making a judgement on their stances.
low rated
avatar
DadJoke007: I don't get why people wanna "discuss" identity politics each and every week. It's always the same platitudes, same sides throwing the same crap against the ideological brick-wall the other side hides behind. Calling it a pointless exercise would be an understatement.
One could argue the same for any sort of debate with two or more sides with the more stubborn adherents on either side.
avatar
DadJoke007: I don't get why people wanna "discuss" identity politics each and every week. It's always the same platitudes, same sides throwing the same crap against the ideological brick-wall the other side hides behind. Calling it a pointless exercise would be an understatement.
avatar
GameRager: One could argue the same for any sort of debate with two or more sides with the more stubborn adherents on either side.
Sure, but identity politics is immune from logic and facts by nature. It all comes down to personal values and yelling those values out the loudest while hoping to force those values upon the opposition with some help from the law, that's almost always the end goal.
low rated
avatar
GameRager: One could argue the same for any sort of debate with two or more sides with the more stubborn adherents on either side.
avatar
DadJoke007: Sure, but identity politics is immune from logic and facts by nature. It all comes down to personal values and yelling those values out the loudest while hoping to force those values upon the opposition with some help from the law, that's almost always the end goal.
As long as one doesn't try to force said ideas down other's throats(through the law/etc) I have no problem with such if it stays civil/mostly civil. It helps some air out their frustrations sometimes, among other good uses.
low rated
avatar
GameRager: At least in the first/western world we have laws against many of those behaviors & incentive to hire/uplift cvertain peoples....which is more than said groups had even a short time in the past.

I also agree that hate is bad, though.
Yep things have changed a lot for the better (or worse at least for other things), though one thing, something like hate crime laws may exist but they are often not applied as much as they should or police do not take them seriously on issues such as sexuality, perhaps even compared to things like religion (?) which are considered more of an offence to discriminate someone against so things are not even. Though I guess it all depends on which country you are in, I am thinking mostly of the UK, suppose different countries value things differently. On the other hand of course I don't want to argue for cutting on peoples freedom of speech without there being a good reason at least, there are many things people get wrong or are better spoken about and discussed. I am more considering direct obvious bullying.
Post edited May 25, 2019 by flurrycream
low rated
avatar
GameRager: At least in the first/western world we have laws against many of those behaviors & incentive to hire/uplift cvertain peoples....which is more than said groups had even a short time in the past.

I also agree that hate is bad, though.
avatar
flurrycream: Yep things have changed a lot for the better (or worse at least for other things), though one thing, something like hate crime laws may exist but they are often not applied as much as they should or police do not take them seriously on issues such as sexuality, perhaps even compared to things like religion (?) which are considered more of an offence to discriminate someone against so things are not even. Though I guess it all depends on which country you are in, I am thinking mostly of the UK, suppose different countries value things differently. On the other hand of course I don't want to argue for cutting on peoples freedom of speech without there being a good reason at least, there are many things people get wrong or are better spoken about and discussed. I am more considering direct obvious bullying.
Sadly many countries like the UK go full totalitarian and jail those who "hate" others with just words(often spoken online). To me this is not a step in the right direction and just irks/triggers those who dislike others even more.
avatar
flurrycream: Yep things have changed a lot for the better (or worse at least for other things), though one thing, something like hate crime laws may exist but they are often not applied as much as they should or police do not take them seriously on issues such as sexuality, perhaps even compared to things like religion (?) which are considered more of an offence to discriminate someone against so things are not even. Though I guess it all depends on which country you are in, I am thinking mostly of the UK, suppose different countries value things differently. On the other hand of course I don't want to argue for cutting on peoples freedom of speech without there being a good reason at least, there are many things people get wrong or are better spoken about and discussed. I am more considering direct obvious bullying.
avatar
GameRager: Sadly many countries like the UK go full totalitarian and jail those who "hate" others with just words(often spoken online). To me this is not a step in the right direction and just irks/triggers those who dislike others even more.
Yeah it sucks.
I think hate crime laws should only be applied when there is abuse that is borderline physical, very obviously harming someone or targeting someone in a way that is bullying (yet actual important cases are missed).
But just talking about your opinions in public or online that is not abuse, but can be counted as so. If you are handing out leaflets or something, even if it is something like I wouldn't agree with, it shouldn't be banned. I guess even the word hate crime sounds a bit orwellian, speaking out against a group and that, thought crimes, statism and censorship.
avatar
GameRager: Sadly many countries like the UK go full totalitarian and jail those who "hate" others with just words(often spoken online). To me this is not a step in the right direction and just irks/triggers those who dislike others even more.
avatar
flurrycream: Yeah it sucks.
I think hate crime laws should only be applied when there is abuse that is borderline physical, very obviously harming someone or targeting someone in a way that is bullying (yet actual important cases are missed).
But just talking about your opinions in public or online that is not abuse, but can be counted as so. If you are handing out leaflets or something, even if it is something like I wouldn't agree with, it shouldn't be banned. I guess even the word hate crime sounds a bit orwellian, speaking out against a group and that, thought crimes, statism and censorship.
Recently some chaps in the UK running for office have been being "milkshaked" by protestors/opposition and there are those who cheer it yet decry others being treated the same way....it's saddening to say the least.

Also the one dude who covered his face to avoid the new UK face scanner trials got a 90 pound(around 100 dollar) fine because of it and people said he shouldn;t do it if he's got nothing to hide/etc.
avatar
GameRager: This...post 13 was well written/thought out and civil/centerist and yet people downrated it.....likely because it criticized the current mainstream stance/position.

I don't think it'd be a good idea to further segregate conversations to even more sub-forums/subtopics ala reddit and their gated communities.
Maybe not reddit. But I feel there should be some separating factor.
low rated
avatar
GameRager: This...post 13 was well written/thought out and civil/centerist and yet people downrated it.....likely because it criticized the current mainstream stance/position.

I don't think it'd be a good idea to further segregate conversations to even more sub-forums/subtopics ala reddit and their gated communities.
avatar
Darvond: Maybe not reddit. But I feel there should be some separating factor.
People would likely stray offtopic naturally through the act of replying in various threads anyways, though, and separating topics into various subforums would just add more work for the staff.

Some dedicated threads for certain topics might help, though.....if only to keep such contained/out of the way for those that dislike certain topics and allow staff to monitor them more easily.
Post edited May 26, 2019 by GameRager