scare quotes and "industry"

[Mike Holmes]

Lesse. What Andrew, Rob, and MJ said.

That said, I don't think that the blow up that happened was at all over the use of quotes. It had been done a lot prior to that with no problem. The context in which "industry" was used was far more telling than the quotes were.

Mike

[Mike Holmes]

Lesse. What Andrew, Rob, and MJ said.

That said, I don't think that the blow up that happened was at all over the use of quotes. It had been done a lot prior to that with no problem. The context in which "industry" was used was far more telling than the quotes were.

Mike

[Ron Edwards]

Hello,

John, you wrote,

the question is, what are we going to do about this in the future? i.e. If someone like Pramas takes exception and says something equally critical about the Forge, how are we going to deal with it?

My answer is, nothing. Or rather, no one as an individual is obliged to do anything. Speaking for myself, I simply don't see a problem.

That's because there is no "someone like Pramas." There's Chris Pramas. There is no "someone like Peter, someone like Simon, someone like Greg, someone like Rebecca." There are only people with backgrounds in publishing RPGs, who happen to participate or not to participate at the Forge. And they have no status, position, reputation, or anything else that pertains to how they should treat others or be treated here.

A given person may or may not be interested in learning what others mean and say here, and in helping them understand and improve their positions. It is profoundly important that everyone is equal in this regard, at this site. If he or she has this interest, then spiff. If not, then (eventually) ceasing to post/attend is always an option. Any participation in role-playing publishing, to any degree at all, is irrelevant to these preceding sentences. It's an important bank of information that can help others, yes, but nothing more.

When such a background becomes a source of status ("I am so-and-so, I am to be catered to") and/or an excuse to subvert the dialogues ("Any disagreement with me indicates your stupidity or dishonesty"), then wham - it's just another way to break etiquette here.

In other words, people with extensive backgrounds in publishing RPGs are not marked for special consideration, in terms of what "we" have to be careful to say or explain around them. Instead, due to that background, they are possibly at higher risk for not being able to participate constructively. I do not consider this a problem in any way - it's just another feature of all the multifarious outcomes of arriving here.

Now, if anyone considers this callous or non-constructive on my part, and instead decides that it serves some purpose to say or explain various things to people who've been involved in publishing RPGs, please feel free to do so. That's what I mean by no one being obliged to "do anything." You wanna? Go ahead.

Best,
Ron

[GMSkarka]

Instead, due to that background, they are possibly at higher risk for not being able to participate constructively.

Wow.

Just...

Wow.

If you people can't see the arrogance and hostility inherent in that, then this place has gotten worse than I had previously suspected.

[xiombarg]

If you people can't see the arrogance and hostility inherent in that, then this place has gotten worse than I had previously suspected.

Hmmm, that seems to presume a monolithic "people" with a single opinion, which I think all these threads have shown isn't the case. Whether someone "sees" arrogance and hostility is all over the map, with a variety of nuances, which sort of puts the lie to the "cult of Ron".

I'd like to see you point back to the post that's from, though, as my Forge search-fu is failing me, here. It looks quite ominous out of context but I'd have to go back and read the original post in context to be sure what's going on there.

I think a lot of this comes down to the fact that if one has a problem with Ron's attitude, one needs to take it up directly with Ron.

[Sean]

I think there's some bad communications disconnect going on, GMS, because I know lots of people react to that kind of sentence in the same way you just did. On the other hand, I don't at all: I see exactly what Ron means, and I think he's right. I don't see it as 'arrogant' or 'hostile' to say that everyone's got equal status as a poster here, regardless of history, and that having a certain history which may lead you to expect a certain kind of treatment, which no-one reliably receives here, may make you more at risk for violating local standards of discourse.

[GMSkarka]

There's no "communications disconnect".    The problem (and its one that has been stated by more than one person, so it's a little hard to write it off, and yet folks at the Forge seem to all the time) is that a lot of proclaimations about the industry (right down to the insulting cuteness of putting it in quotes) are flat-out wrong.

People who work in that industry, who are therefore in a position to point out that these broad pronoucements ARE wrong, are those that are claimed by Ron to be "at higher risk for not being able to participate constructively."

It seems as though "being able to participate constructively" means "swallowing Ron's positions and statements about the industry, even when you know him to be mistaken."

[Mike Holmes]

you people

I love the subtext, Gareth.

I'm not sure about inherent, but I can see how people might interpret this as hostile. On the other hand, it seems a tad ironic. If this were a site dedicated to, say, promoting Indie records, and someone from the recording industry came on the site, I rather think that the reaction would be far more extreme.

That is, the "risk" that Ron is talking about is in terms of cultural clash, I think, and is "our fault," if one has to lay blame. That is, the whole idea of indie is a rejection of the norms - even if irrational.

Take away the norms to which we can object, Gareth, and we'd be...what? Creator owned game design? Heck, I think the fact that we're discussing this as rationally as we are means that likely there's nothing Indie left about the place anymore. Not that I'm all that invested in "indie."  


Whatever you feel, note that "you people" happen to be a bunch of individuals (despite what it apparently seems to you). Those are Ron's words, take it up with him. He neither expects us to "follow" him, nor do we, despite what "you people" would like to think.

Mike

[Jack Spencer Jr]

I fail to see how the subject of it being an industy or an "industry" has anything to do with roleplaying in play or design, but OK if you want to focus on that.

[Ron Edwards]

Hello,

Gareth, I don't consider you to be posting in good faith in this thread. I think you are trolling and attempting to garner posts, preferably those in which the posters are losing their cool, by combining insults with virtuous hand-wringing. This is a game you play at other websites, and that dog will not hunt here.

For anyone else who's interested, tons of RPG publishers interact here with no trouble whatsoever. Many of them have offered corrections to any number of claims, mine included, with no trouble whatsoever. Some of them have accepted corrections (or new perspectives) in kind.

The passage Gareth quoted refers to the very clear, basic, and understandable principle that a site dedicated to self-publishing of X is often not going to be easily gripped by people who are dedicated to different forms of publishing. That's easily observed in music, comics, book-publishing, and whatever.

And again, as I stated above, my habitual use of quotes around "industry" is a pretty simple and basic thing. However, I'm not interested in explaining it to anyone who presumes, straight up, that it is a form of cutesy mockery; that's an exercise in futility.

Best,
Ron

[greyorm]

If you people can't see the arrogance and hostility inherent in that, then this place has gotten worse than I had previously suspected.

The irony, it is thick -- I mean, how do you defend being arrogant and hostile in a post condemning others for being arrogant and hostile?

Again, as I've brought up before, "Why Gamers Suck?" How dare you say gamers suck, you arrogant bastard! I'm not interested in any of your or your fanboys' apologetics, either; because you're a liar and they're just too blinded to see the truth about your behavior.

For those not with me, Gareth wrote a column on GO a long time back that dealt with the issue of why gamers suck, and he was pretty harshly critical of the traditional habits and consumer trends of most gamers.

As with my my little pseudo-rant against Gareth above, Ron's statements about the industry are all in the context, and how we choose to read (or misread) them.

Gareth chooses to see hositility and arrogance in the fact that certain people may not mesh well here because they expect a different supporting culture than they're expecting. But Ron's statement is no different than my saying most Christians probably won't feel comfortable or be able to participate constructively at Asatru gatherings (which would apparently mean I'm an arrogant, Christian-hating prick now).

Honestly, ball's in your court, Gareth: you can choose to be insulted by no one being insulted, or you can choose not to be and participate constructively (without recourse to stereotyping and insulting the posters here, please).

There's plenty of room for civilized disagreement here. I don't see Peter Adkinson or Ryan Dancey or Mike Mearls, or any of a half-dozen other industry types, running about in hysterics because Ron does or doesn't agree with them on any particular point, or has his own opinion.

[GMSkarka]

Gareth, I don't consider you to be posting in good faith in this thread. I think you are trolling and attempting to garner posts, preferably those in which the posters are losing their cool, by combining insults with virtuous hand-wringing. This is a game you play at other websites, and that dog will not hunt here.

No, I wasn't trolling.  I was genuinely interested in pointing out in clear quotes why some folks hold the opinion of The Forge that they do.  Your own words were dismissive and arrogant, and that, bluntly, is hostile.

Nice attempt to cloud the issue through character assassination, though.

[GMSkarka]

I fail to see how the subject of it being an industy or an "industry" has anything to do with roleplaying in play or design, but OK if you want to focus on that.

It's dismissive and insulting to people who work very hard for a meagre living.    It's the same sort of in-crowd "kewl iconoclast" BS that is present in such gems as "Micro$oft", "T$R" and "Metallicash".

We get it.  You're in the Club, we're not.  We're just the "industry".

[Ron Edwards]

You're character-assassinating me!
No you are!
No you are!

Pooh. This thread just became worthless and is now closed. All inclined to hold it up as evidence for my "inability to stand and fight" may take a number; I'd rather have that happen than see Forge space utilized for dick-swinging for one post longer.

Best,
Ron

[greyorm]

Edited to note my cross-post with Ron. Apologies.

I was genuinely interested in pointing out in clear quotes why some folks hold the opinion of The Forge that they do.

I suggest you might have succeeded better had you not casually insulted everyone who participates at the Forge in the same breath.

So don't give me any innocent surprise or this righteousness crap; you were just as arrogant in your "clearly pointing out" and hence just as hostile.

Nice attempt to cloud the issue through character assassination, though.

Oh, enough dick-waving already. Back to your corners, both of you. The rest of us will continue this discussion civily (and I hope everyone hears that clearly -- if you feel the need, think about the topic of the thread, and wait to post until tomorrow, because we've just entered finger-pointing circle territory).