11–20 of 86 posts
SXSW had the chance to take a stand for diversity here, choosing instead to show just how shallow they truly are. edit: Added clarification of which "side" I'm on
Why wouldn't they continue with the programming, and be ready to press charges against anyone who behaves violently?
SXSW had the chance to take a stand for diversity here, choosing instead to show just how shallow they truly are. edit: Added clarification of which "side" I'm on
What's hilarious about this whole thing is that I have no idea which "side" you are on by your comment. I've seen this exact sentiment expressed about SXSW's decision on both /r/KiA and /r/GamerGhazi.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
What's hilarious about this whole thing is that I have no idea which "side" you are on by your comment. I've seen this exact sentiment expressed about SXSW's decision on both /r/KiA and /r/GamerGhazi.
It's a mistake to think of it as "sides" rather than a small group of people with a persecution complex, and everyone else wishing they'd broaden their perspective a bit.
SXSW had the chance to take a stand for diversity here, choosing instead to show just how shallow they truly are. edit: Added clarification of which "side" I'm on
I don't think that's fair to either side of the discussion, or to SXSW. They reportedly received threats and piles of attention over both panels, and they didn't want to deal with that. They allowed both panels to sign up in the name of neutrality and diversity of ideas. And I guess people from both sides made sure neither could have nice things. (SXSW didn't blame anyone, but that's my guess.)
Ultimately I think this will hurt their bottom line by driving diversity away from their event. Will discussions of racial diversity now be cancelled at the whim of the KKK? These groups operate through threats and intimidation, and I think there is a real risk of other hate groups catching wind of this and using similar tactics to stir up attention for their cause.
Why wouldn't they continue with the programming, and be ready to press charges against anyone who behaves violently?
Austin is located in the American state of Texas, which prides itself on gun ownership. Also, the SXSW conference has already had an instance of violence: a driver ran into a crowd of people and killed a few of them. While not intentional, I'm sure the programmers of this conference are eager to separate their brand from the idea of danger.
That doesn't really follow from the facts as a reason to be concerned about violence. Austin's crime rate is lower than that of most other major American cities, including ones such as Chicago which have heavy gun control. (As per Wikipedia, Chicago's murder rate for 2014 was 15.1, Austin's 3.5.)
#SavePoint on why their panel was cancelled: http://www.theopengamingsociety.org/savepoint-dear-community... LevelUp on why their panel was cancelled: https://twitter.com/randileeharper/status/658780409765994496
I have seen Randi Lee Harper say some very unpleasant things, and some even more unpleasant things said about her. I know nothing about the Open Gaming Society, but reading their website it seems like a relatively sane organization.
And I do not see that as too strong a word, either. Making threats against an event because it's against your ideology is the textbook definition of using fear to shape thought and policy.
These threats are never credible. It's high time to stop treating them as such.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
What's hilarious about this whole thing is that I have no idea which "side" you are on by your comment. I've seen this exact sentiment expressed about SXSW's decision on both /r/KiA and /r/GamerGhazi.
It's a mistake to think of it as "sides" rather than a small group of people with a persecution complex, and everyone else wishing they'd broaden their perspective a bit.
There are people who enjoy playing video games, and laughing at life.
Then there are the SJWs out to shit on every game, and tell you that you're an asshole for laughing at anything.
Very clear lines drawn by the second group. The first group generally couldn't care less... it's just when the second group causes there to be more censorship or causes a game to be delayed because they don't want their little feels hurt that the first group takes offense.
So why not hold the panels in an undisclosed location and webcast them? Preferably for the public, not just conference attendees. Instead of giving the terrorists (for lack of a better word) exactly what they want turn it around and use their threats to garner extra publicity.