Obsidian devs after the Limerick controversy..

[Luckmann]

That the Limerick was a issue at all is part my problem. But creating  outrage to shout at Obsidian for caving to outrage is kind of nuts, its throwing gasoline to stop the fire. Fanatism for any cause is a mind and reason killer.

 

      I just belive this anything is potentialy offensive because its perception judgement based on cultural and personal values. If none can put out  potentially offensive content no one can create any content at all.

 

     And you cant preach tolerance while enforcing the opposite of it. Check what you are really  doing before throwing stones at someone else.

 

What if I'm a fanatic for reason?

[osea101]

I for one will NOT kickstart another Obsidian project. This is in protest of political correctness. 

[PrimeJunta]

Every fanatic is a fanatic for a reason.

[Luckmann]

Every fanatic is a fanatic for a reason.

 

I didn't mean for a reason, I said for reason.

[sparklecat]

 

Can we turn this into a "fun with physicians" thread? You can't get the medicine you need because they don't believe your pain is as bad as you say, and I'm getting constantly increased dosages of prescription drugs that have no effect. 288mg (36*8 ) of Concerta/Methylphenidatehydrochloride per day? And another 40mg (4*10)of Ritalin/Methylphenidatehydrochloride on top of that? Sure, can I have a Pez dispenser with it? I prefer Cherry and Lemon, Strawberry is scrub tier.

 

 

Move to the UK.  It took me two years to even get evaluated for ADHD, my first psychiatrist decided I was a drug-seeker because I was a student at the time, and even my current one won't consider anything that's not slow-acting, which leaves me screwed if I want to do anything productive for longer than 8 hours a day.

 

[DarthPanda]

I didn't even know about the controversy until recently, dug up the old limerick to see what it's all about and found something that pokes fun at insecure womanizers.

 

No matter how much I logically understand there will be a gulf between how the people being depicted and the people doing the depiction of stereotypes, I'm still completely flabbergasted by the reactions.

Edited April 10, 2015 by DarthPanda

[Longknife]

Off-topic but how do they even expect to evaluate pain anyways?

Like I'm allergic to morphine and I can DEFINITELY say my pain tolerance jumps after every surgery. I had nerve pains in my leg at a time and despite these (which are the worst kind of pain as far as I'm concerned) I could last a good 4 hours+ with that kind of pain....not by choice, "friends" and family just didn't give a **** about me. Not saying by any means that I could tolerate it, I would visibly shake and sweat and spent a semester studying purely at home from books because these prevented me from concentrating on my lectures, but I withstood it.

 

Later my mom developed nerve pains in her hip, she couldn't stand them for half an hour and would demand we go home so she can lay down....I knew better than to point out the hypocrisy.

 

Point is different people rate different thresholds of pain as different numbers on a scale.

[MLMII]

Actually it will be interesting to see whether there is a noticeable difference in future kickstarter funding ... I personally suspect that there won't be a major difference but I am curious. ... But then again I'm also curious what the reaction would have been had the poem's removal been included in the patch notes.

[Luckmann]

 

Can we turn this into a "fun with physicians" thread? You can't get the medicine you need because they don't believe your pain is as bad as you say, and I'm getting constantly increased dosages of prescription drugs that have no effect. 288mg (36*8 ) of Concerta/Methylphenidatehydrochloride per day? And another 40mg (4*10)of Ritalin/Methylphenidatehydrochloride on top of that? Sure, can I have a Pez dispenser with it? I prefer Cherry and Lemon, Strawberry is scrub tier.

 

Move to the UK.  It took me two years to even get evaluated for ADHD, my first psychiatrist decided I was a drug-seeker because I was a student at the time, and even my current one won't consider anything that's not slow-acting, which leaves me screwed if I want to do anything productive for longer than 8 hours a day.

 

 

You know how long it took me? About a year. But then, when we did it, boom, over in an afternoon and evening. Apparently I deal with problems by laughing at them and have an IQ above the norm, but still scored poorly on attention/memory tests in relation to what I should've scored. Badabing badaboom, been trying drugs for well over a year now. Slow-acting, fast-acting, doesn't matter, I can eat them like pez and all I feel is a blood welling into my brain at times. God forbid that I'd get a professional that'd try to give me the good stuff, nah, let's just keep trying metylphenidatehydrochloride until your kindeys burst and the liver explodes. Otherwise they'd have to write a letter and apply for a permit to write me a prescription.

 

This latest batch I got is even signed as "4 in the afternoon", bitch do you know what happens when I take these after 12:00? Nothing. Except insomnia. Not even the fun kind of insomnia where you can still do stuff, like when consuming too much caffeine, but the disturbing kind of insomnia where everything still says "Sleep, you tool!" but your head keeps saying no.

 

At least in the US they seem to throw Adderall after you when you turn a corner. Here it doesn't even exist.

 

Edit: The general "you", not you you, obviously, you're British.

 

Off-topic but how do they even expect to evaluate pain anyways?

 

Like I'm allergic to morphine and I can DEFINITELY say my pain tolerance jumps after every surgery. I had nerve pains in my leg at a time and despite these (which are the worst kind of pain as far as I'm concerned) I could last a good 4 hours+ with that kind of pain....not by choice, "friends" and family just didn't give a **** about me. Not saying by any means that I could tolerate it, I would visibly shake and sweat and spent a semester studying purely at home from books because these prevented me from concentrating on my lectures, but I withstood it.

 

Later my mom developed nerve pains in her hip, she couldn't stand them for half an hour and would demand we go home so she can lay down....I knew better than to point out the hypocrisy.

 

Point is different people rate different thresholds of pain as different numbers on a scale.

The worst part really is when you're a person that actually tends to shrug pain off, and just because you're not rolling around on the floor, you're clearly not in so much pain.

 

It's like some people think that if you're in serious pain, you should be having something like a 5-year-old temper tantrum and act like a tool, otherwise the pain isn't bad enough or real enough. **** those people. Just because I'm in horrifying pain doesn't mean that I'm going to be a little bitch about it, but that doesn't mean that I'm functionally able to do anything right now other than to clench my teeth and give you the thousand-yard-stare of death.

Edited April 10, 2015 by Luckmann

[Mungri]

This one time I pooped in a hedge,

And another time off the top of a ledge.

The poop flew down,

Hit you hard on the crown,

And that is why you are now dead.

[Gaunt]

 

That the Limerick was a issue at all is part my problem. But creating  outrage to shout at Obsidian for caving to outrage is kind of nuts, its throwing gasoline to stop the fire. Fanatism for any cause is a mind and reason killer.

 

      I just belive this anything is potentialy offensive because its perception judgement based on cultural and personal values. If none can put out  potentially offensive content no one can create any content at all.

 

     And you cant preach tolerance while enforcing the opposite of it. Check what you are really  doing before throwing stones at someone else.

 

What if I'm a fanatic for reason?

 

 

 Anything that makes you blind for other possible interpretation and lines of reasoning. Fanatism leads to the belief that you and those who share that same belief  are always correct and should makes everyone else a beliver or punish them for their wrongness.

Edited April 10, 2015 by Gaunt

[Mamoulian War]

 

 

I always wear this kind of thing to international press conferences, personally. Except with more dongs.

 

I can sympathize with both sides of the debate in this case but you really think such an intelligent man doing such a significant interview would have known better or at least had someone tell him how inappropriate that shirt was 

 

 

Bruce and any other people getting crazy about this T-Shirt... You probably should watch what a real woman has to say about this...

 

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=bFdsq96Aa98

 

EDIT: if for any reason, you can't see youtube videos, as I am unable to see them for any strange reason, here is the link...

Edited April 10, 2015 by Mamoulian War

[evensong]

Serves me right for only listening to fake women, I guess.

[evensong]

There once was a woman who spake:

"Misogynist shirts, I can't take!"

But her words went unheard

As it turned out this nerd

was an optic illusion, a fake!

[Prime-Mover]

 

That the Limerick was a issue at all is part my problem. But creating  outrage to shout at Obsidian for caving to outrage is kind of nuts, its throwing gasoline to stop the fire. Fanatism for any cause is a mind and reason killer.

 

      I just belive this anything is potentialy offensive because its perception judgement based on cultural and personal values. If none can put out  potentially offensive content no one can create any content at all.

 

     And you cant preach tolerance while enforcing the opposite of it. Check what you are really  doing before throwing stones at someone else.

 

What if I'm a fanatic for reason?

 

A contradiction in terms it seems.

[evensong]

A contradiction in terms it seems.

 

I don't think so, not necessarily. That would be a useful trait for a scientist.

 

It's also incredibly easy to claim, however, and incredibly pointless - you'll have a hard time finding anyone who doesn't think their own political opinions are based on reason. It's about as useful a concept to claim for your opinions as "common sense".

[BruceVC]

 

 

 

I always wear this kind of thing to international press conferences, personally. Except with more dongs.

 

I can sympathize with both sides of the debate in this case but you really think such an intelligent man doing such a significant interview would have known better or at least had someone tell him how inappropriate that shirt was 

 

 

Bruce and any other people getting crazy about this T-Shirt... You probably should watch what a real woman has to say about this...

 

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=bFdsq96Aa98

 

EDIT: if for any reason, you can't see youtube videos, as I am unable to see them for any strange reason, here is the link...

 

The thing is I do understand both sides about this argument ...my best friend was furious about this incident and all the criticism the guy received, to quote him in the verbatim he said to me when we discussed it " one of the greatest events in science and people are more concerned about his f****g shirt ....f***k these SJW " ....which was amusing because I support many SJ initiatives ...

 

But that shirt....come on...that shirt...

 

Anyway I will watch that video

[Katarack21]

 

Some might read my last post and wonder wtf is with the effort I put into re-defining it. Why am I not happy with "sexism" in regards to that one study and prefer "prejudice and stereotypes based on common personality traits encountered amongst genders?" Because sexism has a hateful, divisive tone to it, in my opinion. As Zwiebelchen states, yes of course he'd support equal pay for women. I'd be willing to place a bet there's not a single person on these forums who doesn't think women deserve equal pay.

 

But when you afford these issues the title of "sexism" then it carries a tone of women being oppressed and men are the oppressors. 

 

The problem is women are being oppressed, structurally. 

 

Equal rights and opportunities is great - almost everyone wants that, I agree (in the West). But equal rights and opportunities aren't the same thing as the law stating that you are equal. If they were, this problem would have been solved decades ago.

 

Men are, effectively, the oppressors, but you have to not take it personally, if you actually want to understand, and not just to sit around feeling hurt and bitter. It's not like most men go around intentionally being sexists (plenty do, of course, but probably a minority in the West). However, even if all men didn't, there'd still be problem because of structure of society, the structure of our laws, and so on. Many aspects of our society, taken for granted, benefit men far more than women. Inheritance is one example. In theory, in most Western societies, men and women inherit equally, but in practice, they don't, not just because men earn more and importantly, earned more in the past, but also because of the way inheritance is taxed, the fact that people are allowed to disinherit women (and have systematically been doing so since time immemorial) merely for being women (indeed, you can do more or less whatever you like with your will), and so on.

 

It's a very complex issue. People love to try to reduce it to equal rights. Equal rights and opportunities, in a REAL sense, is the ultimate goal of feminism as a movement, but that movement acknowledges and understands that the very structure of society and the law can prevent that, even when the law says people are equal. If you ignore that...

 

As an aside, harrassment in STEM is a huge issue. My wife is a developer, and honestly, the **** she's had to deal with is hair-raising, and most of it's from people who think it's fine, think they aren't doing anything wrong, just don't get it...

 

People are being oppressed, structurally. There's an entire system in place--built and designed by one of the greatest geniuses to ever work in media and population manipulation and using all the theories and practices known to psychiatry and sociology--that has the one and only job of manipulating and contorting the thoughts and ideas of the population. The power structure from the 1920's onward isn't really built to protect and serve men--it's built to protect and serve rich people who are also white males. If you manage to achieve a billion dollar net worth, that system will serve you just as readily regardless of your color or sex. This isn't conspiracy theory; the man who did all this literally wrote a book about what he was doing called "The Engineering of Consent".

 

It's clear how this works if you pay attention. Not every white man benefits from this power structure. It's a narrow field of white males who embrace and practice certain accepted, mainstream ideals of aggressive masculinity and have a certain amount of monetary value behind them. A homeless white guy can't walk into a ****ing McDonalds and expect to be treated like a human being.  I'm schizophrenic; the statistics on the mentally ill are, to be blunt, crazy. I'm quite likely to be killed by a cop at some point in my life.

 

The power structure that is in control only allows you access to these various forms of privilege if you accept and live by the basic tenets of the power structures ideals. If you don't, you get rejected by the larger culture of masculine power. That's why things like gay bashing happen; it's a social threat to their own concept of masculinity that they are reacting to. The man who doesn't stand around and talk about that girls titties with the other men get's suspicion, disdain, and accusations of being gay; he doesn't get let into the special man club. It goes beyond gender, beyond race, to a basic problem with how our society is structured and the ideals of masculinity in our society.

 

Part of the problem is due to feminism, but not in a bad way. Feminism is awesome; I support the idea fully. The problem is that we've worked really hard to alter the ideas of what it means to be female, but when all that society shifting happened we didn't do the same for males. A lot of the traditional concepts of maleness have had to be thrown out the window, and good riddance, but we *didn't put anything in their place*. There's a generation of boys growing up today who are wondering what the **** it even means to be a man in today's society, and all their cues are being taken from the machine designed to generate profits for reach people. Of course masculinity is going to be ****ed for a while; GI Joe isn't any more healthy a role model than Barbie.

[Prime-Mover]

 

A contradiction in terms it seems.

 

I don't think so, not necessarily. That would be a useful trait for a scientist.

 

It's also incredibly easy to claim, however, and incredibly pointless - you'll have a hard time finding anyone who doesn't think their own political opinions are based on reason. It's about as useful a concept to claim for your opinions as "common sense".

 

I'm being pedantic here, obviously. Just fun and games. But whether it's useful or not doesn't really come into it, since I'm disputing that it even makes sense to claim to be "fanatic for reason". It seems more like unintentional poetry, than anything. At least if one by it means to be uncritical in one's persuit of open mindedness, reason, and rationality. If one cares about reason, one should also openminded about one's persuits, which contradicts fanaticism.

 

I imagine what he/she meant was being zealous for reason, which seems much less contradictory.

[Mungri]

I don't dislike his T shirt because of feminism. I dislike it because its simply a terrible t shirt.

[evensong]

I imagine one of the perks of being a huge enough STEM nerd to work at NASA is that you get to wear whatever garish and horrible things you want. Socks+sandals to shoes ratio is probably pretty high in those offices.

 

And more power to them! **** it, wear whatever you want, just maybe not while holding important press conferences.

Edited April 10, 2015 by evensong

[Mamoulian War]

Socks+sandals to shoes ratio is probably pretty high in those offices.

 

 

This statement calls for the Nerd Justice Warrior action!!!

 

Edited April 10, 2015 by Mamoulian War

[evensong]

My voice will ring loud, clear and positively dripping with testosterone, from the mountaintops, unfettered, proclaiming the ideals I stand for: Freedom of speech! Democracy! Your feeble attempt at censorship is just another form of mob rule under the STEMinazis!

[Evinshir]

Let's just get something clear here because I don't seem to have seen anything mentioned yet.

 

There was no outcry about the limerick to Obsidian. One person sent one polite text suggesting that Obisidan look into the limerick as it *might* be seen as offensive by someone.

 

Obsidian, in turn, said "ok we'll look into it."

 

Then the GG crowd went on a crusade against censorship, which then got the Anti-GG Crowd arguing with them about how the only ones actually making a big deal out of it were GG and pointing out how it may be seen as offensive by some people.

 

While all that pointless internet noise was raging on, Obsidian contacting the backer and just said "hey some people have said they might find this offensive, would you be willing to change it?" The backer then said "sure."

 

At no point did Obsidian say "We're taking it down." They did what any business would do when someone raises a complaint or concern. They followed up on it, checked with the backer and everything was done willingly and without any pressure being put on Obsidian or the backer.

 

Meanwhile GG was raging away making all kinds of threats to the person who just posted a single tweet to Obsidian that didn't even demand that the limerick be taken down.

 

So why is this *still* an issue when the woman who complained has moved on and publicly said she's happy with how Obsidian handled the issue. Obsidian have moved on and said they're happy with how the issue played out. The backer has moved on because it's not that big a deal to them.

 

At no point was anyone censored. Censorship is when there is no consultation or discussion. The words are just removed and banned. That isn't what happened here.

 

Can we all just move on now?

 

Like most people did with the whole incident of the idiot with the stupid shirt.

[Gaunt]

Let's just get something clear here because I don't seem to have seen anything mentioned yet.

 

There was no outcry about the limerick to Obsidian. One person sent one polite text suggesting that Obisidan look into the limerick as it *might* be seen as offensive by someone.

 

Obsidian, in turn, said "ok we'll look into it."

 

Then the GG crowd went on a crusade against censorship, which then got the Anti-GG Crowd arguing with them about how the only ones actually making a big deal out of it were GG and pointing out how it may be seen as offensive by some people.

 

While all that pointless internet noise was raging on, Obsidian contacting the backer and just said "hey some people have said they might find this offensive, would you be willing to change it?" The backer then said "sure."

 

At no point did Obsidian say "We're taking it down." They did what any business would do when someone raises a complaint or concern. They followed up on it, checked with the backer and everything was done willingly and without any pressure being put on Obsidian or the backer.

 

Meanwhile GG was raging away making all kinds of threats to the person who just posted a single tweet to Obsidian that didn't even demand that the limerick be taken down.

 

So why is this *still* an issue when the woman who complained has moved on and publicly said she's happy with how Obsidian handled the issue. Obsidian have moved on and said they're happy with how the issue played out. The backer has moved on because it's not that big a deal to them.

 

At no point was anyone censored. Censorship is when there is no consultation or discussion. The words are just removed and banned. That isn't what happened here.

 

Can we all just move on now?

 

Like most people did with the whole incident of the idiot with the stupid shirt.

 

I hope you are just uninformed , but I quite doubt it.

 

 

  The one person, the Killallmen often quoter you gallantly came, who started  rallied quite a lot of twitter supporters to her cause and was forwarded to a Obsidian employee by Ian Miles Cheong, a game journalist.  Soon there was a huge twitter pile up of people both for against the limerick remaining as it was. In no time insults, anger, and maybe threats ( I haven't seen one of these and I don't believe pure hearsay or what pretends is journalism) were traded by both sides and a huge PR mess was created. Obsidian tried and mostly succeeded in making the outcry diminished, but there quite a lot of people unhappy on both sides of the issue since the limerick was changed. And some of the original complainers dislike the joke put in its place.

 

 

   But giving in to the eternally outraged, offended crowd of which I'm guessing you are part of  is always a bad precedent since I consider them a starving monster who always more and feel entitled to more of the same and very likely will do so again. And deny as much as you want, but you are defending a very pro censorship group.

Edited April 11, 2015 by Gaunt