Here's a question for the Let's Get Rid of 1.0a to Save the Children Diehards:
In 2000, the ACLU deployed lawyers to defend the apparent right of on organization to provide its members with an instruction manual in the hows of doing something I will not even type here: Curley v. [insert name of that organization].
Am I to believe that you are filled with more anger and disgust over yet-to-be-made imaginary game products than you are a nonprofit organization you most likely support making the argument that printed matter normalizing the most heinous of crimes should be protected under law?
Um what? I feel like this is missing like half the post. What organization? And why does it matter to this discussion?
It makes perfect sense as is. The name of the organization is beside the point. Look it up if you must. Google 2020, ACLU, Curley. You can do your homework yourself.
It matters to this discussion because many of you—you included—keep trying to make moral as well as legal judgements on this matter and just expect everyone else to trust you're perfectly qualified to do so.
Tenuous connection there.
The case involved a wrongful death suit. The legal positions there were in regards to standing and organizational structure.
This feels inflammatory to me. Yet, you and I are probably closer in opinion than all that. Unilateral usage of this thing with zero recourse is my problem with 6f. The vagueness is necessary, and we all know this. Message boards have been vague for decades.
That's exactly what we'd be fine with, because leaving something entirely in the hands of the community with decentralisation is exactly what makes D&D so great. If WotC makes something different and it turns out to be better, good for them, people will naturally flock to said license. But no, it's not up to them to decide or deauthorise such things - leave that solely to the community's hands. That's the POINT of the open game license.
Alos your tone is so shitty it's hilarious and pathetic.
No one is even arguing that the OGL cannot be updated and made clearer, hell, the OSR community has been begging Wizards of the Coast to update the OGL for years because of some of the ambiguity in the wording.
so..to ignore the rest as it wasnt directed at me, there are very actively a number of threads on this forum literally stating they want the ogl 1.0a, to be left as is, no changes, that they need to not do any further update it and wotc is gonna be in trouble unless they actively do that from lawsuits otherwise have a nice night yall!
No that is not the argument, I have been following the discussions.
And I know what you are thinking. They own D&D, they can do whatever they want.. No.. they do not own D&D.. WE, the community, own D&D, they are simply the proprietors of official content, everything else belongs to the community because we created it, which is most of it.
1. There are literally accounts out there literally saying "give me ogl 1.0a unchanged as its irrevocable or die" im not saying there being a constructive part of the conversation, or helping it, but you literally said they do not exist, and for several days they took over the forum, so was just pointing out that no, they do exist, they just arent a part of the constructive conversation
2. please do not put words into my mouth, I understand the situation going on, but im no longer arguing or debating about it, nor do I need more people trying to speak for me and say what I believe
My question for 1.0a die-hards is what about it they even like so much. Completely disregarding the issues with the proposed new versions, if there exists a hypothetical new and objectively better license, why should anyone care about deprecating 1.0a?
I'd counter that with another question:
If the new license is objectively better, why would you need to deprecate the previous one? Folks can just and are likely to choose the new one because it's better, not because you're telling them 'you have to'. (there is no requirement for them to 'deprecate' a previous version of the license in order to make a new one in the same respect that CC3.0-BY-NC getting updated to CC3.1-BY-NC doesn't 'require you to deprecate' CC3.0-NC. They're different licenses; you can just choose between them.)
e: Also I'll point out a lot of this is historical context. 1.0a was created so that the 'WE WILL SUE YOU' legacy of TSR could be dust-binned so that third party publishers would be willing to make content for WotC's D&D system and there's no way they would 'buy that they've turned over a new leaf' without something like the OGL being put up. By same respect, overturning that same license sends the very strong message of 'WE WILL SUE YOU --- AGAIN!'
This is an easy question: Because 1.0 gives racists and other bigots a shield.
1.2 is objectively better in every significant regard - it doesn’t look like it was written by a high school student pretending to be a lawyer, it clearly spells out what the terms mean, and it gives folks the ability to use one of Wizards’ very valuable trademarks to signify the content works with D&D.
But all the things that make it better legally make it worse if you want to take Wizards’ intellectual property and twist their property into something bigoted - all that ambiguity, all that amateur writing of 1.0 becomes your friend and could be enough to confuse the issue if you went before a Court.
Which is why Wizards doesn’t want it out there for anyone to accept and use moving forward - you don’t let people à la carte choose if they want “the bad option that makes things worse for everyone” instead of the current version.
Let's put aside putting aside the fact that having the OGL written briefly and plainly (so that everyone understands rather than being so "clear" most people have needed actual lawyers to accurately interpret it), is actually one of it's core strengths.
Let's also put aside the fact that WotC doesn't actually own the game itself, that it's intellectual property amounts to exactly the trademarks of DnD, the copyrighted characters, settings, stories, and the particular expression of the rules they have published (like the SRD). (And please, the illusion that corporations own their brands is the same illusion wherein people think they own their own reputations. These things are entirely comprised of what others *think*. You may try to control it, but you never own it.)
What should make anyone think for a single second that granting Wizards of the Coast the power to control (i.e. censorship over) the stories, opinions, and behaviours of 3rd party creators is any kind of solution to bigotry and racism? Or rather, why would censorship work now, at this moment and in this arena, as opposed to every other instance it has been used, and has invariably failed at best, and at worst devolved into outright authoritarianism?
Censors themselves always treat people like they are children that never grow up. That is in fact the core assumption of censorship. \When this assumption takes hold, it robs people of their agency by popularizing the illusion that words (ideas, images, etc.) are more powerful than the human mind and will that is exposed to them, and that the only way to control people's behaviour is to then control what they see, hear, and think.
OGL 1.0 does not shield "racists and other bigots". Their shield is also our shield - the unwritten assumption that when exposed to influences, as adults we always retain control over our resulting choices and actions. To take away "their" shield is to take away everyone's.power, everyone's agency. Seriously, **** that.
I'm so sorry to pop this idealistic bubble, but following that path has never once in history lead to a world of love, respect and kindness (quite the opposite). Left unchecked, it is always a matter of time before that kind of authority comes to believe itself morally absolute. This is exact the path which Wizards will take us down, wittingly or unwittingly. This is precisely what someone applauds when they say "oh please censor us, for good the good of everyone".
Why would anyone want that for the DnD community? Perhaps they personally can't (i.e. won't) take responsibility for their own actions and reactions, and in doing so claim everyone must be just as powerless? Or do they honestly just not know this is what happens when systems are set up to control free expression? Whatever it is, please stop now.
Rollback Post to RevisionRollBack
“With the first link, the chain is forged. The first speech censured, the first thought forbidden, the first freedom denied, chains us all irrevocably." - Starfleet Admiral Aaron Satie
Let's put aside putting aside the fact that having the OGL written briefly and plainly (so that everyone understands rather than being so "clear" most people have needed actual lawyers to accurately interpret it), is actually one of it's core strengths.
Let's also put aside the fact that WotC doesn't actually own the game itself, that it's intellectual property amounts to exactly the trademarks of DnD, the copyrighted characters, settings, stories, and the particular expression of the rules they have published (like the SRD). (And please, the illusion that corporations own their brands is the same illusion wherein people think they own their own reputations. These things are entirely comprised of what others *think*. You may try to control it, but you never own it.)
What should make anyone think for a single second that granting Wizards of the Coast the power to control (i.e. censorship over) the stories, opinions, and behaviours of 3rd party creators is any kind of solution to bigotry and racism? Or rather, why would censorship work now, at this moment and in this arena, as opposed to every other instance it has been used, and has invariably failed at best, and at worst devolved into outright authoritarianism?
Censors themselves always treat people like they are children that never grow up. That is in fact the core assumption of censorship. \When this assumption takes hold, it robs people of their agency by popularizing the illusion that words (ideas, images, etc.) are more powerful than the human mind and will that is exposed to them, and that the only way to control people's behaviour is to then control what they see, hear, and think.
OGL 1.0 does not shield "racists and other bigots". Their shield is also our shield - the unwritten assumption that when exposed to influences, as adults we always retain control over our resulting choices and actions. To take away "their" shield is to take away everyone's.power, everyone's agency. Seriously, **** that.
I'm so sorry to pop this idealistic bubble, but following that path has never once in history lead to a world of love, respect and kindness (quite the opposite). Left unchecked, it is always a matter of time before that kind of authority comes to believe itself morally absolute. This is exact the path which Wizards will take us down, wittingly or unwittingly. This is precisely what someone applauds when they say "oh please censor us, for good the good of everyone".
Why would anyone want that for the DnD community? Perhaps they personally can't (i.e. won't) take responsibility for their own actions and reactions, and in doing so claim everyone must be just as powerless? Or do they honestly just not know this is what happens when systems are set up to control free expression? Whatever it is, please stop now.
If trying to take one step in the right direction doesn't immediately fix all of these complicated issues, then why even bother? /s
Rollback Post to RevisionRollBack
I know what you're thinking: "In that flurry of blows, did he use all his ki points, or save one?" Well, are ya feeling lucky, punk?
I do enjoy how all the responses to this since I came home and checked was "we should be allowed the chance to supported bigoted content however much we like and if you feel like being offended by it you should just stop playing D&D."
Well. "Enjoy."
Jus' sayin', y'all. 1.0a is dead. Wizards wouldn't have pulled this shit if their lawyers hadn't told them they have firm legal ground to stand on. And if you force them to stick to 1.0a, somehow? Then they'll just release SRD 5.2 under 1.2 instead, abandon 5e entirely, and you lot will have pissed away your only chance to do something positive about it by groaning and moaning about 1.0a this and ORC that and WIZARDS MUST DIE the other thing. And all the "D&D belongs to US, not Wizards, we don't need them but they need us!" folks are gonna discover real damn quick that no, actually they kinda do need someone to keep the game going. No bedrock to build on? No third-party products. And no, ******* Pathfinder is not 'bedrock to build on'. That game is a cluster with a few neat ideas bogged down by a mountain of 3.5 buggery that nobody needs anymore, it is never going to be the Gateway to RPGs all the WMD yaybos keep claiming it is.
But hey, why let that stop us, right? We gotta save Horrible Stuff Press and their ability to sell hardback hate crimes, and anyone who thinks all this rioting is overblown and unproductive is a communist! Gotta stop them commies from ruining D&D with their wanting people to play shit, right?
I do enjoy how all the responses to this since I came home and checked was "we should be allowed the chance to supported bigoted content however much we like and if you feel like being offended by it you should just stop playing D&D."
Well. "Enjoy."
Jus' sayin', y'all. 1.0a is dead. Wizards wouldn't have pulled this shit if their lawyers hadn't told them they have firm legal ground to stand on. And if you force them to stick to 1.0a, somehow? Then they'll just release SRD 5.2 under 1.2 instead, abandon 5e entirely, and you lot will have pissed away your only chance to do something positive about it by groaning and moaning about 1.0a this and ORC that and WIZARDS MUST DIE the other thing. And all the "D&D belongs to US, not Wizards, we don't need them but they need us!" folks are gonna discover real damn quick that no, actually they kinda do need someone to keep the game going. No bedrock to build on? No third-party products. And no, ****ing Pathfinder is not 'bedrock to build on'. That game is a cluster with a few neat ideas bogged down by a mountain of 3.5 buggery that nobody needs anymore, it is never going to be the Gateway to RPGs all the WMD yaybos keep claiming it is.
But hey, why let that stop us, right? We gotta save Horrible Stuff Press and their ability to sell hardback hate crimes, and anyone who thinks all this rioting is overblown and unproductive is a communist! Gotta stop them commies from ruining D&D with their wanting people to play shit, right?
Right?
Why hasn't there been books like described before? You really think that no one has actually tried and been turned down by these things? Once again I am more and more convinced you are working for Wizards even at the bottom level.
Yurei, that's exactly what WoTC doesn't want to do. I mean, they don't want to release a new license "call it 1.2 or whatever", put One D&D in there, but leave SRD5.1 in OGL 1.0a
Why? Because they already tried that with 4e and we all know that the result was not as expected.
If they did that, and they abandoned 5e entirely, I can assure you that someone would come out to fill the gap. Just like it happened with Paizo and Pathfinder.
I do enjoy how all the responses to this since I came home and checked was "we should be allowed the chance to supported bigoted content however much we like and if you feel like being offended by it you should just stop playing D&D."
Well. "Enjoy."
Jus' sayin', y'all. 1.0a is dead. Wizards wouldn't have pulled this shit if their lawyers hadn't told them they have firm legal ground to stand on. And if you force them to stick to 1.0a, somehow? Then they'll just release SRD 5.2 under 1.2 instead, abandon 5e entirely, and you lot will have pissed away your only chance to do something positive about it by groaning and moaning about 1.0a this and ORC that and WIZARDS MUST DIE the other thing. And all the "D&D belongs to US, not Wizards, we don't need them but they need us!" folks are gonna discover real damn quick that no, actually they kinda do need someone to keep the game going. No bedrock to build on? No third-party products. And no, ****ing Pathfinder is not 'bedrock to build on'. That game is a cluster with a few neat ideas bogged down by a mountain of 3.5 buggery that nobody needs anymore, it is never going to be the Gateway to RPGs all the WMD yaybos keep claiming it is.
But hey, why let that stop us, right? We gotta save Horrible Stuff Press and their ability to sell hardback hate crimes, and anyone who thinks all this rioting is overblown and unproductive is a communist! Gotta stop them commies from ruining D&D with their wanting people to play shit, right?
The only thing wrong with 1.0a is that it turns out that it is not as iron clad against WotC's attacks as those who trusted it (and maybe WotC) thought. It is what allows for the richness of 3rd party creators, from 1-person enthusiasts to Critical Role, enriching D&D (and compatible games, but those are a somewhat differnt story). The only real fix would by now, that WotC has proven pretty much maximum bad faith with the insanely bad 1.1, lying about it, lying about aspects of 1.2, putting traps into 1.2, ... be to put a 1.0b, pretty much 1.0a, just made iron clad under a proper external stewardship (that might be hard to find, I am not aware of anything like the FSF for literary works), or put the whole SRD (and not just a cored out skeleton) under creative commons.
WotC destroyed all trust. They would now need to go all the way. As they are probably not willing to even consider that before business is clearly failing I fear splitting the community has been done, and will not be undone until WotC's failure and Cynthia Williams and the rest responsible for the strategy (not sure the digital gaming management demanded their lawyers to make this attack, I could have seen it work without destroying 3rd parties and instead inviting them to a new marketplace) will be replaced, in WotC/Hasbro, or after splitting or selling.
You're allowed to have whatever opinions about censorship that you want. But when you use someone else's platform or property, they get a say in what you do with them. If you don't want to follow those rules, you can either use public property or your own instead.
I do enjoy how all the responses to this since I came home and checked was "we should be allowed the chance to supported bigoted content however much we like and if you feel like being offended by it you should just stop playing D&D."
Well. "Enjoy."
Jus' sayin', y'all. 1.0a is dead. Wizards wouldn't have pulled this shit if their lawyers hadn't told them they have firm legal ground to stand on. And if you force them to stick to 1.0a, somehow? Then they'll just release SRD 5.2 under 1.2 instead, abandon 5e entirely, and you lot will have pissed away your only chance to do something positive about it by groaning and moaning about 1.0a this and ORC that and WIZARDS MUST DIE the other thing. And all the "D&D belongs to US, not Wizards, we don't need them but they need us!" folks are gonna discover real damn quick that no, actually they kinda do need someone to keep the game going. No bedrock to build on? No third-party products. And no, ******* Pathfinder is not 'bedrock to build on'. That game is a cluster with a few neat ideas bogged down by a mountain of 3.5 buggery that nobody needs anymore, it is never going to be the Gateway to RPGs all the WMD yaybos keep claiming it is.
But hey, why let that stop us, right? We gotta save Horrible Stuff Press and their ability to sell hardback hate crimes, and anyone who thinks all this rioting is overblown and unproductive is a communist! Gotta stop them commies from ruining D&D with their wanting people to play shit, right?
Right?
Who is doing that? Any of that.
I am not sure you see the conduct policy in the light of people who are outside the mainstream.
I am not talking about old white guys who want to use the N-word. Those fellas can go jump in a lake. I am talking about sex workers, and swingers. Mall goths (hehe) and pot smokers.
These people are worried.
The LGBTQAI+ communities are also suspicious when morality clauses come out. Ussually they are the targets of such things. Almost certainly not here, but you can understand their trepidation, as they are oft targets of hate.
Also, you know, there is the whole unilateral decision making with no recourse or redress. I think I might be repeating myself now, so I am going to back away slowly and say, I am not defending Bad Actor Press, but I am concerned about Counter Culture Peoples Press and NONCIS Publishing as well as you know, a person who makes a mistake and their whole life is ruined, or one who makes a choice of something to do with their body and someone else disagrees with it, and now their life is turned upside down and they can't afgford life because some Billion Dollar company is worried about bad press hurting their stonk analysis grade.
I've said about five hundred times that I believe and concur with the idea that 6f as written in this draft is overbroad and provides too much leeway to Wizards.
What I don't believe is that we have any chance of keeping 1.0a, or that 1.0a was The Most Perfect Document Ever Written the way people are holding it up as. Wizards will find a way out from under it, because as it stands they are one single spectacularly public bad actor away from the brand sinking entirely in the public consciousness. They're not going to accept that vulnerability anymore, not in an era where dickheads on Twitter (or whatever replaces Twitter) can completely and unrecoverably tank a business in a matter of literally just days for any sign of hatefulness.
I also love how every time anyone says that maybe people shouldn't wildly asnd enthusiastically support thoroughly awful ideas, stances, actions, or people, we get a bunch of yaybos coming out of the woodwork bellowing about cEnSoRsHiP. Because it's censorship to want to be less surrounded by the shitty exclusionary philosophy espoused by people like Ernie G, to whom men are MEN, women are trophies, and anyone but a square-jawed blue-eyed Aryan hero is an NPC to be killed. In the game, of course. Because everybody knows there's nothing wrong with celebrating and exalting slavery, racism, sexism, and genocide so long as it's all just a game.
*******...why do I even try with this miserable place...
I've said about five hundred times that I believe and concur with the idea that 6f as written in this draft is overbroad and provides too much leeway to Wizards.
What I don't believe is that we have any chance of keeping 1.0a, or that 1.0a was The Most Perfect Document Ever Written the way people are holding it up as. Wizards will find a way out from under it, because as it stands they are one single spectacularly public bad actor away from the brand sinking entirely in the public consciousness. They're not going to accept that vulnerability anymore, not in an era where dickheads on Twitter (or whatever replaces Twitter) can completely and unrecoverably tank a business in a matter of literally just days for any sign of hatefulness.
I also love how every time anyone says that maybe people shouldn't wildly asnd enthusiastically support thoroughly awful ideas, stances, actions, or people, we get a bunch of yaybos coming out of the woodwork bellowing about cEnSoRsHiP. Because it's censorship to want to be less surrounded by the shitty exclusionary philosophy espoused by people like Ernie G, to whom men are MEN, women are trophies, and anyone but a square-jawed blue-eyed Aryan hero is an NPC to be killed. In the game, of course. Because everybody knows there's nothing wrong with celebrating and exalting slavery, racism, sexism, and genocide so long as it's all just a game.
****ing...why do I even try with this miserable place...
Out of curiosity, who is mad at Wizards about Star Frontiers: Genesis?
Or, is it the case that everyone is mad at the correct party in this case - TSR and Ernie Gygax?
You know, because Wizards took the totally correct position of opposing them.
That's exactly the same situation they'll be in with 1.0a, or 1.2, or whatever - if and when the odd bad actor pops up, they'll go after them however they can - and everyone will know that Wizards is in the right, and whatever bigots are trying to abuse their IP or their association with DnD is in the wrong. The only difference is that without 1.0a around is these hypothetical bad actors would be publishing without bothering to use a license, which may be even harder for WotC to deal with.
People aren't complete idiots. If someone tries to abuse 1.0a and Wizards takes a stand against them, no one is going to tear down Wizards for an agreement they held to for 23 years that people suddenly started trying to exploit after decades of ignoring it.
I do enjoy how all the responses to this since I came home and checked was "we should be allowed the chance to supported bigoted content however much we like and if you feel like being offended by it you should just stop playing D&D."
Well. "Enjoy."
Jus' sayin', y'all. 1.0a is dead. Wizards wouldn't have pulled this shit if their lawyers hadn't told them they have firm legal ground to stand on. And if you force them to stick to 1.0a, somehow? Then they'll just release SRD 5.2 under 1.2 instead, abandon 5e entirely, and you lot will have pissed away your only chance to do something positive about it by groaning and moaning about 1.0a this and ORC that and WIZARDS MUST DIE the other thing. And all the "D&D belongs to US, not Wizards, we don't need them but they need us!" folks are gonna discover real damn quick that no, actually they kinda do need someone to keep the game going. No bedrock to build on? No third-party products. And no, ******* Pathfinder is not 'bedrock to build on'. That game is a cluster with a few neat ideas bogged down by a mountain of 3.5 buggery that nobody needs anymore, it is never going to be the Gateway to RPGs all the WMD yaybos keep claiming it is.
But hey, why let that stop us, right? We gotta save Horrible Stuff Press and their ability to sell hardback hate crimes, and anyone who thinks all this rioting is overblown and unproductive is a communist! Gotta stop them commies from ruining D&D with their wanting people to play shit, right?
Right?
No one said that, they said if you don't like that content, then don't play that content... but seeing as you've gone down the more direct "Your all bigots and I am right." route...
You must meet a lot of people you think are ******** in your life, maybe reflect on that.
Also in legal terms, no 1.0a isn't dead, not till it goes to court, and seeing as both Wizards and a majority of those they would challenge are in Washington, good faith and intent contract precedent and laws (thanks to a lot of Union contract disputes here) are pretty well locked in as Wizards losing here, Full Stop.
... People aren't complete idiots. If someone tries to abuse 1.0a and Wizards takes a stand against them, no one is going to tear down Wizards for an agreement they held to for 23 years that people suddenly started trying to exploit after decades of ignoring it.
Got 'bout eight pages of OGL threads in GD that tells me in no uncertain terms you're dead wrong on this one, and the community would excoriate Wizards for daring to breach 1.0a in an attempt to "censor" a bad actor they're all convinced is just Fighting the Good Fight for Classic and Traditional D&D Everywhere for Everyone.
Also in legal terms, no 1.0a isn't dead, not till it goes to court, and seeing as both Wizards and a majority of those they would challenge are in Washington, good faith and intent contract precedent and laws (thanks to a lot of Union contract disputes here) are pretty well locked in as Wizards losing here, Full Stop.
If you're so confident about them losing in court, shouldn't you be excited that they're trying to deauthorize 1.0a? The sooner they do that, the sooner they "lose" and then it'll be safe for good, no?
I'm fine with that, it's the fact they tried is the problem. They will lose, it's just legal basics when you look at how lawyers are talking. And if a companies like Piazo are sure of it, then even more so. The fact that they are using real world problems as a shield and weapon to hide behind for their attempts to bully smaller companies, such as what we are seeing in this thread, is the bigger problem.
Too quote, since we have someone here trying and flailing with this argument, here is my take on why Wizards is putting in the Social Justice juice with the OGL 1.x Changes:
My thoughts: It's a barrier and signaling that has been common with big corporate c-suite types to use to mask real motives and hide behind. When you see stuff like this, there is always a catch involving something that is bad for the fans, the property, employees, etc. And if you critique it, the "isms/ist/phobes" follow.
And when it comes to the morality of a table top role playing game, it's should be left up to the table and creatives to decide within the scope of their own game and work, not a corporation who has shown to be neither trustworthy of any power to decide nor people who crusade self righteousness that do it only for the ego imposing on a community as a whole.
This is nothing but an attempt to use real hardships as a barrier and a weapon kill anything they can't control.
You're allowed to have whatever opinions about censorship that you want. But when you use someone else's platform or property, they get a say in what you do with them. If you don't want to follow those rules, you can either use public property or your own instead.
Since the other person continues to ignore me. Perhaps someone with a more level head might actually respond. If we are trying to protect people from bigotry etc etc in books that anyone can publish... why hasn't anyone before? You really think no one has tried before? It is already protected, you can not publish hateful content like they are promising to protect us from.
Rollback Post to RevisionRollBack
To post a comment, please login or register a new account.
Tenuous connection there.
The case involved a wrongful death suit. The legal positions there were in regards to standing and organizational structure.
This feels inflammatory to me. Yet, you and I are probably closer in opinion than all that. Unilateral usage of this thing with zero recourse is my problem with 6f. The vagueness is necessary, and we all know this. Message boards have been vague for decades.
That's exactly what we'd be fine with, because leaving something entirely in the hands of the community with decentralisation is exactly what makes D&D so great. If WotC makes something different and it turns out to be better, good for them, people will naturally flock to said license. But no, it's not up to them to decide or deauthorise such things - leave that solely to the community's hands. That's the POINT of the open game license.
Alos your tone is so shitty it's hilarious and pathetic.
1. There are literally accounts out there literally saying "give me ogl 1.0a unchanged as its irrevocable or die" im not saying there being a constructive part of the conversation, or helping it, but you literally said they do not exist, and for several days they took over the forum, so was just pointing out that no, they do exist, they just arent a part of the constructive conversation
2. please do not put words into my mouth, I understand the situation going on, but im no longer arguing or debating about it, nor do I need more people trying to speak for me and say what I believe
Let's put aside putting aside the fact that having the OGL written briefly and plainly (so that everyone understands rather than being so "clear" most people have needed actual lawyers to accurately interpret it), is actually one of it's core strengths.
Let's also put aside the fact that WotC doesn't actually own the game itself, that it's intellectual property amounts to exactly the trademarks of DnD, the copyrighted characters, settings, stories, and the particular expression of the rules they have published (like the SRD). (And please, the illusion that corporations own their brands is the same illusion wherein people think they own their own reputations. These things are entirely comprised of what others *think*. You may try to control it, but you never own it.)
What should make anyone think for a single second that granting Wizards of the Coast the power to control (i.e. censorship over) the stories, opinions, and behaviours of 3rd party creators is any kind of solution to bigotry and racism? Or rather, why would censorship work now, at this moment and in this arena, as opposed to every other instance it has been used, and has invariably failed at best, and at worst devolved into outright authoritarianism?
Censors themselves always treat people like they are children that never grow up. That is in fact the core assumption of censorship. \When this assumption takes hold, it robs people of their agency by popularizing the illusion that words (ideas, images, etc.) are more powerful than the human mind and will that is exposed to them, and that the only way to control people's behaviour is to then control what they see, hear, and think.
OGL 1.0 does not shield "racists and other bigots". Their shield is also our shield - the unwritten assumption that when exposed to influences, as adults we always retain control over our resulting choices and actions. To take away "their" shield is to take away everyone's.power, everyone's agency. Seriously, **** that.
I'm so sorry to pop this idealistic bubble, but following that path has never once in history lead to a world of love, respect and kindness (quite the opposite). Left unchecked, it is always a matter of time before that kind of authority comes to believe itself morally absolute. This is exact the path which Wizards will take us down, wittingly or unwittingly. This is precisely what someone applauds when they say "oh please censor us, for good the good of everyone".
Why would anyone want that for the DnD community? Perhaps they personally can't (i.e. won't) take responsibility for their own actions and reactions, and in doing so claim everyone must be just as powerless? Or do they honestly just not know this is what happens when systems are set up to control free expression? Whatever it is, please stop now.
“With the first link, the chain is forged. The first speech censured, the first thought forbidden, the first freedom denied, chains us all irrevocably." - Starfleet Admiral Aaron SatieIf trying to take one step in the right direction doesn't immediately fix all of these complicated issues, then why even bother? /s
I know what you're thinking: "In that flurry of blows, did he use all his ki points, or save one?" Well, are ya feeling lucky, punk?
I do enjoy how all the responses to this since I came home and checked was "we should be allowed the chance to supported bigoted content however much we like and if you feel like being offended by it you should just stop playing D&D."
Well. "Enjoy."
Jus' sayin', y'all. 1.0a is dead. Wizards wouldn't have pulled this shit if their lawyers hadn't told them they have firm legal ground to stand on. And if you force them to stick to 1.0a, somehow? Then they'll just release SRD 5.2 under 1.2 instead, abandon 5e entirely, and you lot will have pissed away your only chance to do something positive about it by groaning and moaning about 1.0a this and ORC that and WIZARDS MUST DIE the other thing. And all the "D&D belongs to US, not Wizards, we don't need them but they need us!" folks are gonna discover real damn quick that no, actually they kinda do need someone to keep the game going. No bedrock to build on? No third-party products. And no, ******* Pathfinder is not 'bedrock to build on'. That game is a cluster with a few neat ideas bogged down by a mountain of 3.5 buggery that nobody needs anymore, it is never going to be the Gateway to RPGs all the WMD yaybos keep claiming it is.
But hey, why let that stop us, right? We gotta save Horrible Stuff Press and their ability to sell hardback hate crimes, and anyone who thinks all this rioting is overblown and unproductive is a communist! Gotta stop them commies from ruining D&D with their wanting people to play shit, right?
Right?
Please do not contact or message me.
Why hasn't there been books like described before? You really think that no one has actually tried and been turned down by these things? Once again I am more and more convinced you are working for Wizards even at the bottom level.
Yurei, that's exactly what WoTC doesn't want to do. I mean, they don't want to release a new license "call it 1.2 or whatever", put One D&D in there, but leave SRD5.1 in OGL 1.0a
Why? Because they already tried that with 4e and we all know that the result was not as expected.
If they did that, and they abandoned 5e entirely, I can assure you that someone would come out to fill the gap. Just like it happened with Paizo and Pathfinder.
Censorship is always bad.
The only thing wrong with 1.0a is that it turns out that it is not as iron clad against WotC's attacks as those who trusted it (and maybe WotC) thought. It is what allows for the richness of 3rd party creators, from 1-person enthusiasts to Critical Role, enriching D&D (and compatible games, but those are a somewhat differnt story). The only real fix would by now, that WotC has proven pretty much maximum bad faith with the insanely bad 1.1, lying about it, lying about aspects of 1.2, putting traps into 1.2, ... be to put a 1.0b, pretty much 1.0a, just made iron clad under a proper external stewardship (that might be hard to find, I am not aware of anything like the FSF for literary works), or put the whole SRD (and not just a cored out skeleton) under creative commons.
WotC destroyed all trust. They would now need to go all the way. As they are probably not willing to even consider that before business is clearly failing I fear splitting the community has been done, and will not be undone until WotC's failure and Cynthia Williams and the rest responsible for the strategy (not sure the digital gaming management demanded their lawyers to make this attack, I could have seen it work without destroying 3rd parties and instead inviting them to a new marketplace) will be replaced, in WotC/Hasbro, or after splitting or selling.
You're allowed to have whatever opinions about censorship that you want. But when you use someone else's platform or property, they get a say in what you do with them. If you don't want to follow those rules, you can either use public property or your own instead.
Who is doing that? Any of that.
I am not sure you see the conduct policy in the light of people who are outside the mainstream.
I am not talking about old white guys who want to use the N-word. Those fellas can go jump in a lake. I am talking about sex workers, and swingers. Mall goths (hehe) and pot smokers.
These people are worried.
The LGBTQAI+ communities are also suspicious when morality clauses come out. Ussually they are the targets of such things. Almost certainly not here, but you can understand their trepidation, as they are oft targets of hate.
Also, you know, there is the whole unilateral decision making with no recourse or redress. I think I might be repeating myself now, so I am going to back away slowly and say, I am not defending Bad Actor Press, but I am concerned about Counter Culture Peoples Press and NONCIS Publishing as well as you know, a person who makes a mistake and their whole life is ruined, or one who makes a choice of something to do with their body and someone else disagrees with it, and now their life is turned upside down and they can't afgford life because some Billion Dollar company is worried about bad press hurting their stonk analysis grade.
Doesn't matter if we would be okay with it. WotC would not be, as this would be 3.5 vs. 4.0.
I've said about five hundred times that I believe and concur with the idea that 6f as written in this draft is overbroad and provides too much leeway to Wizards.
What I don't believe is that we have any chance of keeping 1.0a, or that 1.0a was The Most Perfect Document Ever Written the way people are holding it up as. Wizards will find a way out from under it, because as it stands they are one single spectacularly public bad actor away from the brand sinking entirely in the public consciousness. They're not going to accept that vulnerability anymore, not in an era where dickheads on Twitter (or whatever replaces Twitter) can completely and unrecoverably tank a business in a matter of literally just days for any sign of hatefulness.
I also love how every time anyone says that maybe people shouldn't wildly asnd enthusiastically support thoroughly awful ideas, stances, actions, or people, we get a bunch of yaybos coming out of the woodwork bellowing about cEnSoRsHiP. Because it's censorship to want to be less surrounded by the shitty exclusionary philosophy espoused by people like Ernie G, to whom men are MEN, women are trophies, and anyone but a square-jawed blue-eyed Aryan hero is an NPC to be killed. In the game, of course. Because everybody knows there's nothing wrong with celebrating and exalting slavery, racism, sexism, and genocide so long as it's all just a game.
*******...why do I even try with this miserable place...
Please do not contact or message me.
Out of curiosity, who is mad at Wizards about Star Frontiers: Genesis?
Or, is it the case that everyone is mad at the correct party in this case - TSR and Ernie Gygax?
You know, because Wizards took the totally correct position of opposing them.
That's exactly the same situation they'll be in with 1.0a, or 1.2, or whatever - if and when the odd bad actor pops up, they'll go after them however they can - and everyone will know that Wizards is in the right, and whatever bigots are trying to abuse their IP or their association with DnD is in the wrong. The only difference is that without 1.0a around is these hypothetical bad actors would be publishing without bothering to use a license, which may be even harder for WotC to deal with.
People aren't complete idiots. If someone tries to abuse 1.0a and Wizards takes a stand against them, no one is going to tear down Wizards for an agreement they held to for 23 years that people suddenly started trying to exploit after decades of ignoring it.
No one said that, they said if you don't like that content, then don't play that content... but seeing as you've gone down the more direct "Your all bigots and I am right." route...
You must meet a lot of people you think are ******** in your life, maybe reflect on that.
Also in legal terms, no 1.0a isn't dead, not till it goes to court, and seeing as both Wizards and a majority of those they would challenge are in Washington, good faith and intent contract precedent and laws (thanks to a lot of Union contract disputes here) are pretty well locked in as Wizards losing here, Full Stop.
Got 'bout eight pages of OGL threads in GD that tells me in no uncertain terms you're dead wrong on this one, and the community would excoriate Wizards for daring to breach 1.0a in an attempt to "censor" a bad actor they're all convinced is just Fighting the Good Fight for Classic and Traditional D&D Everywhere for Everyone.
Please do not contact or message me.
If you're so confident about them losing in court, shouldn't you be excited that they're trying to deauthorize 1.0a? The sooner they do that, the sooner they "lose" and then it'll be safe for good, no?
I'm fine with that, it's the fact they tried is the problem. They will lose, it's just legal basics when you look at how lawyers are talking. And if a companies like Piazo are sure of it, then even more so. The fact that they are using real world problems as a shield and weapon to hide behind for their attempts to bully smaller companies, such as what we are seeing in this thread, is the bigger problem.
Too quote, since we have someone here trying and flailing with this argument, here is my take on why Wizards is putting in the Social Justice juice with the OGL 1.x Changes:
Since the other person continues to ignore me. Perhaps someone with a more level head might actually respond. If we are trying to protect people from bigotry etc etc in books that anyone can publish... why hasn't anyone before? You really think no one has tried before? It is already protected, you can not publish hateful content like they are promising to protect us from.