Am I the only one that thinks it's strange that they removed the comment section from the Pride Month post? I know there was some discourse, but the last time I checked, which would have been towards the end of page 2 or page 3 of the comments, but there wasn't anything offensive. Even so, why not just remove that one comment instead of the whole comment section? It seems weird especially when they end the article with the following statement:
My immediate reaction was that it was wrong to turn off comments. Feels counter intuitive to a topic that I'd hope that people would want to show support for. After all, what's the point of it if you can't share support, opinion and reflect on this form of progression?
I didn't read any of the comments before they were removed. It's just saddening that people can't discuss a topic, or be allowed to discuss it. I wouldn't mind as much if they'd posted this as a 'design approach editorial' or such as that wouldn't necessarily merit a discussion, it's information. But the article is badged so as to invite engagement and views.
It's only by talking about equality and diversity that we can move forward. If WoTC don't trust public/open forum then don't post an article in this way - they've miss-played this. And it's resulted in more controversy than simply approaching it in a different way to begin with.
This is one of the things that should be addressed in a session zero with new players, mostly. But I do like the article in that it hopefully gives others some inspiration of thinking outside the box for a DM creating an NPC or a PC just being themself or wanting to explore. I just don't think DDB needed it but closing off the comments makes it better I feel.
Rollback Post to RevisionRollBack
To post a comment, please login or register a new account.
Am I the only one that thinks it's strange that they removed the comment section from the Pride Month post? I know there was some discourse, but the last time I checked, which would have been towards the end of page 2 or page 3 of the comments, but there wasn't anything offensive. Even so, why not just remove that one comment instead of the whole comment section? It seems weird especially when they end the article with the following statement:
Published Subclasses
My immediate reaction was that it was wrong to turn off comments. Feels counter intuitive to a topic that I'd hope that people would want to show support for. After all, what's the point of it if you can't share support, opinion and reflect on this form of progression?
I didn't read any of the comments before they were removed. It's just saddening that people can't discuss a topic, or be allowed to discuss it. I wouldn't mind as much if they'd posted this as a 'design approach editorial' or such as that wouldn't necessarily merit a discussion, it's information. But the article is badged so as to invite engagement and views.
It's only by talking about equality and diversity that we can move forward. If WoTC don't trust public/open forum then don't post an article in this way - they've miss-played this. And it's resulted in more controversy than simply approaching it in a different way to begin with.
This is one of the things that should be addressed in a session zero with new players, mostly. But I do like the article in that it hopefully gives others some inspiration of thinking outside the box for a DM creating an NPC or a PC just being themself or wanting to explore. I just don't think DDB needed it but closing off the comments makes it better I feel.