Slashdot Mirror
Blizzard CEO Lays Gay Guild Issue To Rest
Edge Online reports that Blizzard CEO Paul Sams has responded to the GLBT Guild issue that flared up in World of Warcraft a while back. From the article: "... he again characterized the earlier decision to prohibit mention of real-world subjects in recruiting for guilds as an 'unfortunate mistake,' which only came about because the initial comments weren't properly analyzed before sending a warning. 'It is expected and accepted that players will discuss a wide variety of topics, based on both the game world and the real world,' Sams says. 'Players are free to discuss personal characteristics if they wish, to include their sexual orientations and gender identities.'
A Fraps of that would be HOT!!!!
I must say that this was pretty much the only possible acceptible thing that Blizzard could have done to resolve the situation while keeping my respect. Cheers to Mr. Sams and everyone else involved in resolving this so well.
"Blizzard CEO lays Gay Guild"?!? Now that's customer service!
I agree with Blizz's previous statement of not having real world issues present in the game, such as a gay guild. I don't know what server they play on, but the amount of gay bashing and whatnot I see in barrens chats, I can only imagine how much arguing and whatnot would be caused by them boldly proclaiming they're gay in their guild title.
Hold on... Liberals won?! In the United States, in this conservative day and age, with politicans and corporations bending over backwards to appease the religious right, and capitalism trumping everything... ...and you're telling me the liberals won one?!?
WOO-HOO!!!
/sign
It wasn't a gay guild, it was gay-FRIENDLY guild.
In Soviet Russia, I ruled you
*sigh* Care to explain what's so offensive about GLBT chatter on the public airwaves? If it's over-the-line sexual discussion, it should be banned outright regardless of the orientation. Isn't that what you really meant to say?
And for that matter, they should be forbidden to discuss their race or their religion. Everyone should appear in the game as a straight, white Christian male. We need a pure WoW environment! Warcraft uber alles!!
By a scallop's forelocks!
"Stay in your closet, the bigots were here first,"
In less than 10 words you summed up the original problem. Maybe it was easy for you to write, but it expresses EXACTLY what the problem is and what people have spent hours trying to get their brains around.
It's the bigots who are the problem here, and they should not be appeased. Maybe they shouldn't have done to them what I'd personally like to do to them, but they definitely should not be catered to.
Definite agreement here. There must be responsibility on the part of any guild who would do such a thing. Honestly, how would any guild advertise something that goes against many people's societal norms and NOT expect to be targeted for it? I personally don't care as long as they don't pull an "in your face" attitude about their guild; but we all know, whether from experience or reading of others' experiences, that there are people out there who will cause problems anyway. Just being realistic here, folks.
:/
Blizzard did the right thing by backtracking the way they did, but that doesn't mean that guilds should go advertising thier "differences" given this Blizzard reversal. They'll just be trouble magnets for less scrupulous people, particularly those that can now hide behind the anonymity of the Internet. Sadly, I would not be surprised if there are guilds in formation now with the sole purpose of targeting any openly gay guild.
What a wonderful world.
The Overrated mod is for reversing inappropriate, positive mods, not for voicing disagreement with a post.
On the internet, nobody knows you're a dog Unless, of course, you join a dog-friendly guild.
I've abandoned my search for truth; now I'm just looking for some useful delusions.
which only came about because the initial comments weren't properly analyzed before sending a warning
Right... like the GM's in World of Warcraft have everything they state to players reviewed constantly to ensure accuracy. "GM's for GM's?"
This looks to me like another example where the corporation (Blizzard) has screwed up, and rather then accept responsibility for its mistakes has decided to place the blame on the front-end, and thus easily replaceable, customer service team.
If you were referring to discussion about GLBT issues and discussion topics...that would be one thing...but what the hell is wrong with advertising that something is friendly to those people. Its the same as having an advert for any other type of guild. This wasn't "chatter"...it was a fairly succinct advert.
Buy Steampunk Clothing Online!
yay! now my fantasy world is firmly grounded in reality! we can now also have republican guilds fighting democratic guilds, nazi guilds killing jewish guilds (on sight)! Lets not forget the Al-queda horde of saudi players! this will make exciting stuff! how far will blizzard allow this to go? are we going to allow all types of special interest groups? is it limited to sexuality or can we include politics and religion?
I think this is the last straw. No more wow for me. Its not a fantasy wolrd to escape to anymore
The war with islam is a war on the beast
The war on terror is a war for peace
There's a HUGE difference between bringing it up in an appropriate situation and saying "WE'RE HERE! WE'RE QUEER!". If they were a guild with a standard name with members who all happened to be gay, I wouldn't care at ALL. NO ONE would. But if someone made a guild named the Ku Klux Klan and only recruited white supremacists now, would they have the same protection? I'd have to undoubtedly say yes, because if Blizzard is going to say the expression of your real world sexuality is fine, and naming a guild after a real-world advocacy group, then they can't say other groups can't do it as well.
Basically you're wrong-- you're either lying, or you didn't read your own link before pasting it-- you're misquoting the harassment policy, and no, this rule does not at all cover the GLBT chat used by the guild.
It's funny how you're basically saying that in order for World of Warcraft to not be "politically correct", in your way of defining things, World of Warcraft would have to purposefully censor speech which you find objectionable. Funny, sounds to me like you are the one demanding the gay people be "politically correct", by conforming their speech to your politics.
If the GBLT guilds wish to advertise on local chat, that's fine with me.
.] but it is[sic] SHOULD NOT BE ALLOWED over the public channels."
"[. .
I would assume you don't mind the occasional spam, so I'm confused about what additional chat would be/would not be allowed over local chat. Discussions about the best gay sex positions? Barrens chat about the hottest gay actors? I don't really think any of the GBLT (sounds like a sandwich) WoW players really want to discuss that stuff with all of The Barrens as audience, anyway.
Hence, I must ask for clarification of what local chat you think the average WoW player's sensibilities might be offended by.
Tell me something...it's still "We, the people"... right?
Found here.
I think this is awesome, even if it is only the result of legal pressure applied from Lambda Legal and probably not done because it was the 'right' thing to do.
Many arguments keep bringing up the idea of keeping 'real world' issues out of the fantasy game. So, what if the character you are playing is gay? If one were to open a gay themed guild, requiring members to stay in character, is that then still a problem? I don't see how a fantasy game precludes any sense of character's sexual identity. It is patently ridiculous to think that all characters in a fantasy game must be straight and any deivation from this means people have slipped into 'real world' identity. How many straight guys play female characters and would jump at he chance to cyber with another female player? Role-playing is about assuming a character. I can see people being upset about players talking about 'real world' things in such a way that it breaks the game's illusion- but in that context you can't pick and choose which 'real-world' topics offend- they ALL should. But, if the character is played as gay wholly within the context of the game world, how is that a problem?
They were bringing up sexual orientation in a public chat channel. By the rules they agreed to when signing up for the game, their account would be suspended for 72 hours. There's nothing wrong with that! It's a FANTASY GAME! GLBT chat is fine in a private guild, but it is SHOULD NOT BE ALLOWED over the public channels.
A common sentiment, but unfortunately it doesn't work in this case whatsoever. It would be nice if you could play a game where no real life chatter goes on, but it's simply not the case. In fact, on the servers I have seen - there is more non-game related chatter than game-related chatter. I'm not exaggerating.
If you're really that offended by people discussing their sexuality or gender identities, you might consider ignoring them. Or maybe search for a game that prohibits all non-game chatter.
The instructions SPECIFICALLY SAID......."DO NOT TAUNT HAPPY FUN BALL"!!!!!!!!!
Your just a nacy boy, the happy fun ball must be taunted.
"Don't mess with him, he taunts the happy fun ball."
mid-easy
That is both a typo and an ironic statement.
The Kruger Dunning explains most post on
No. They said they where gay/lesbian-friendly. Cracking down on that is the same thing as cracking down on a guild being rp-friendly or danish-friendly or whatever. It's so ridiculous it's not even funny.
I actually canceled my wow-subscription over this. To be honest I was looking for a reason to cancel but whatever.
-Eric
SJW: Someone who has run out of real oppression, and has to fake it.
What happened to just having fun? I'd rather belong to a casual group that doesn't specify any ideological belief, but still has a guild chat that is comfortable for all who is in that group. It's more loose. It's just generally not a problem. There's rarely a problem. Things get said, but are taken care of by a case-by-case basis. In any ideology based guild, there's a no-tolerance thing, and it just brings a less friendly atmosphere. Friendly to me isn't an enforcment of feel good stuff, but a place where things can be talked about without fear of being labeled something.
Don't be an idiot. No one's saying "we're here, we're queer" and the guilds in question are still not allowed to discriminate based on those type of criteria. Furthermore, guild names of the type you're proposing violate the terms of use. It's just like character names.
You might actually try to learn something about the issue before you start screaming that the sky is falling. It just makes you look like a fool.
"..guild being rp-friendly "
that is a game references.
beready for the danish-hatefull* guilds advertising.
*alright, no one could hate the danes, but you get my point.
The Kruger Dunning explains most post on
That just means the majority of people are bigots, right? So if bigots are the majority, that makes it OK?
but they were playing the game before, it's just now that they can join a like-minded guild.
If you can read this, I forgot to post anonymously.
this is a double edged sword and Blizzard have seen fit to blunt one side of it by saying people cant be offended by GLBT but can be offended by those against GLBT. That is unless they are perfectly fine with anti GLBT sentiments but that opens the flood gates in an entirely different set of arguments.
People shouldn't be offended by the EXISTENCE of other people. Think about a guild that has a lot of black people in it. Your logic would say that it should then be fine to have anti-black guilds also.
8 year old gets recruited to gay guild, recieves inappropirate chat/tells in game, parents take a screenshot and hand over to a lawyer. Blizz gets sued for enabling child molestation. Parents and child walk away with millions.
I'm gonna start a new guild. "WomenBangers". And you just know we're gonna talk about it a LOT.
Hey, Blizzard could have chosen to ban all the real-world stuff and ban all the Christian guilds. That would have been just as acceptable. Sounds like that's what you would have preferred, so why not lobby them?
What was pissing people off was banning some real-world social preferences but not others.
GCHQ Quantum Insert installed. If only our tongues were made of glass, how much more careful we would be when we speak
Blizzard CEO Brings up Gay Guild Issue Again
BTW, I highly doubt the purpose of such a guild is to sit around and talk about how gay they are. I'm sure they focus more on instances and the like. I imagine it's nice to know before hand whether or not a guy's going to be treated like a freak if he comments that his boyfriend is making dinner so it's not a good time to join a raid. And a "mature" guild wouldn't really promise that.
This was never about cutting real life out of a game (after all, most of the characters are controlled by real people). It was about people making targets of themselves, and Blizzard having to deal with the constant harrassment that I'm sure has already started.
You have your facts wrong.
Blizzards online realms, while privately owned, are considered a public accomodation under California law, and they are therefore forbidden from discriminating against any persons defined in state anti-discrimination statutes.
Blizzard's policy was not to forbid GLBT chat. It was to forbid insulting references to sexuality.
The implication that they were going to change their policy to forbid GLBT chat is what started this whole controversy, but in the end, they said that their policy is not changing.
Get that? Nothing's changed.
Finally, anyone who doesn't want to be subjected to certain things and objects so strongly should probably read all of Blizzards terms of use and policies before they click "I Accept" and pay their money.
But what really makes me laugh is that people like those in the thread parent are freaking out over a policy that has always been in place, and has never changed.
Applications are now being accepted for the Brokeback Guild.
I find it funny that Lambda thinks that they can tell Blizzard what it's own terms of service may be. Last time I checked, Blizzard was providing a subscription service. You don't like the terms? Stop paying them and go somewhere else. That's your right and your choice. They can be as discriminatory as they want and while it may piss some people off, that's their perogative.
Does this mean I can create a guild for straights and sympathizer only and advertise it on public chat?
This whole subject is completely ridiculous, and Blizzard is making it even more ridiculous. What's next? A Blacks Only guild? Or should we be PC and say African-Americans Only guild, never minding this would exclude non-American blacks from joining it? Maybe that could be followed by a Whites Only guild too. Or would this one be too un-PC?
The whole problem, actually, is GLBTs using their "GLBTness" as a defining characteristic of their personalities. This is as much absurd as a straight proclaiming his straightness as being the important aspect of himself. Sex is just a like/dislike thing, one among many. It's not worth this central role people, specially GLBTs, see in it.
Conservatism: (n.) love of the existing evils. Liberalism: (n.) desire to substitute new evils for the existing ones.
Too many people are responding to this article in hysterics because Blizzard has changed its policy to revoke a ban on gay chat and overt sexual references in guild names and to allow descriptions of homosexual acts in public chat channels.
9 p
That's not the case now, nor has it ever been. Blizzared never banned gay chat in public channels, only insulting references to sexuality. And descriptions of sexual acts always have been, and continue to be, forbidden. The policy has not changed.
So before you have a freak out, you might want to read the posted policy. It's here:
http://www.blizzard.com/support/wowgm/?id=agm0171
People shouldn't be offended by the EXISTENCE of other people.
You've obviously never been to 0.0 space in Eve...
Seven puppies were harmed during the making of this post.
True Faggot? That's a new one on me. I've seen chaotic good, awful evil, True Neutral... is True Faggot something unique to WoW?
Everyone knows what dark elves are like anyway. Filthy sods. Hell, elves are all a bit morally questionable. I mean, you never see a half-dwarf. Or a half-hobbit. Unless they're called Quarterlings or something.
Real Daleks don't climb stairs - they level the building.
Exactly. On another note, I'm starting a guild for the balding. Not the bald, but the baldING. If you make fun of us in any way, I'm gonna get all huffy.
If they want to do it in the privacy of their guild, that's cool! But it should NOT be allowed in public channels.
Heh, that sounds like the people that complain about gay pride parades. "I dont' care if they're gay, but why do they have to parade it around all the time?!?!?!?"
Heh, I'll tell you why: Because these people have been shunned and ousted from society from so long, and they're sick of it. They're proud of who they are, and they want to be able to express themselves and their way of life freely the same way that the rest of the world does...
Your comment almost sounds like you think that homosexuals should all just stay in the closet...
Place sig here.
It isn't being bigoted, it is FOLLOWING THE RULES. The rules are CLEARLY stated. Gay folk must follow the rules just like us straight shmo's. No one wants to hear about the 20,000 women I've been with either. I'm sure they aren't hetero-phobes, they are just more interested in playing the freakin game.
I'd have to undoubtedly say yes, because if Blizzard is going to say the expression of your real world sexuality is fine, and naming a guild after a real-world advocacy group, then they can't say other groups can't do it as well.
I find it interesting that you draw a link between an advocacy group such as the KKK whom actively goes out and tries to persuade others of their own beliefs and a gay-friendly guild (note that gay-friendly != gay-only) whom actively play a video game; just because a minority group of individuals meets up does not mean they are advocating anything. Where as the KKK is an establish advocacy group who makes no secret of their views and as such, if someone were to start a real KKK guild on WoW, clearly they would be an extension of that advocacy group and thus inappropriate.
Now if the National GLBT Organization were to start a WoW guild, yes, this would be an gay-rights advocacy group, but note how this is not the case with the guild in question. I rather doubt this group goes around shouting pro-gay slogans on public channels; no, they probably talk to each other within their gay-friendly group about life, the universe and everything with little concern for promoting anything beyond civility to each other. No agendas, no secret meetings, its a friggen guild on WoW who's members are not hostile towards gays. If this is advocacy at work, then clearly all real-life related guilds on WoW, ranging from Christian to Muslim to Furries to Koreans are all advocacy groups by their very existence and should be immediately banned under the same rules.
That is the crux of the issue at heart: disparate responses to different real-life groups. The rules that Blizzard applied to this gay-friendly guild also apply to religious guilds but you don't see them banning those. So, if you want to take your position, then be sure whos getting thrown out with the bath water.
That banning all these guilds would be retarded from a business & PR perspective is another story altogether.
"What can a thoughtful man hope for mankind on Earth, given the experience of the past million years? Nothing." -Bokonon
We only tolerate positive statements towards GLBT players, and only actual GLBT players will be allowed to decide what is positive and what is not. Negatvie statements are never to be allowed such freedom because we intend to make you a better person in spite of yourself. So there!
In actual freedom, it's all statements -- or none -- allowed. Sorry if you don't like that.
"It's the height of ridiculousness to say for those 9 lines you get hundreds of millions."
True, dat. You're right. Bigotry is not defined as a preference to not hear about aspects of other people you find distasteful. It is defined by intolerance. I'd say anyone making a fuss about allowing GLBT people to say they're gay in a game is pretty intolerant, I think I'm spot on by calling them bigots.
GLBT - Gay/Lesbian/Bi-sexual/Transgendered.
What society accept, and what is correct, is defined by the majority at any given time.
Of course, individules can effect change which propagates into the majority, and thus redefines the majority.
So to answer your question, yes. it does make it ok.
From my experience, most people are not bigots but that is another issue.
The Kruger Dunning explains most post on
intolerance, another word being beaten by people who think they know what politically correct means.
I don't wantr to here about football scores when playing WoW. That makes me intolerant of football score in that setting. There is nothing wrong with that.
For the record, I don't want to hear about someone sexual preferences, football scores, automobiles, or politics in the game.
However I don't hate homesexuals, football, or automobiles.
The Kruger Dunning explains most post on
I don't think you actually read the rules, did you? You should try it. They're pretty clearly spelled out. Be sure to read the whole thing, or you'll miss the point. http://www.blizzard.com/support/wowgm/?id=agm01719 p
Your comment of "No one wants to hear about the 20,000 women I've been with either." has nothing to do with the matter at hand. They weren't running around saying "HEY I FUCK A LOT OF OTHER MEN IN THE ASS!!!", they were advertising their guild for like-minded people. It was more along the lines of "Stonewall Champions, a GLBT-fiendly guild is looking for new members! PST for info!"... I don't possibly see how that could be construed as offensive to anyone. (And if you are SOOOOOO offended by what gets said in General chat, /leave General...)
And yes, I play on the same server as The Stonewall Champions and The Spreading Taint, the two guilds in question.
Be careful! Bears shouldn't consume large furry dogs.
...considering that the entire game and anyone who plays it is totally gay.
Any of you every go out to eat? You know, something reasonable, not fast food but not too pricey either...
Imagine two, clearly gay men, enjoying a pepperoni pizza with mushrooms at this restaurant. They are polite and respectful. All of a sudden, and completely out of the blue, a fellow at another table turns and starts screaming hellfire at them, faggot this and homo that; threatens to kill them perhaps? Who do you think that manager is going to ask to leave?
...the entire fantasy genre is built upon racism.
Except your constitution does not allow this. Your founding members wrote it to protect the minority from the tyranny of the majority. So, in the case of the US of A, you are wrong.
Or, should I say Bill of Rights? I'm guessing, if that's the case, your founding fathers did not write this document. I apologise for my ignorance.
world. It is a collective world. And that includes all kinds of different physiological beings.
In addition to the other replies made against the parent,
No gay based organizations are 'hate' based groups who's primary message is suppressing others.
If I create an American Guild, I say thats fine, you're american and prowd. Even if you're not american, you may really like america and join the guild anyways. But, if I create a Europe, asia, australia sucks guild, it not based on loving who you are, its based on hating others. Its a fine line in some cases through. I could say "Manifest Destiny" (Guild on my server) is an offensive name to many, and could arguably be concidered a hate name against first nations people. If I called myself the patriots, you could arguably be hateful against imperialists, but in reality, most people accept the fact that the names aren't made for hateful purposes; That is also demonstrated by their behaviour to the rest of the player community.
Bye!
There is a rather large difference between a gay-friendly organization and an anti-anything-but-white-christian-male organization.
One of them is inclusive, the other is exclusive. I'll leave it to you to figure out which is which.
Since I can't tell them apart, I treat all ACs as the same person.
Then play on an RP server
Mad Software: Rantings on Developing So
I rather doubt this group goes around shouting pro-gay slogans on public channels; no, they probably talk to each other within their gay-friendly group about life, the universe and everything with little concern for promoting anything beyond civility to each other. No agendas, no secret meetings, its a friggen guild on WoW who's members are not hostile towards gays.
If this is true, how come we're here talking about it. Did a GM snoop in on their private meetings and then post a story to Slashdot or something?
Well the information got out somehow, and this whole argument appears to boil down to how tight the closet door should be from that point onward...
'People shouldn't be offended by the EXISTENCE of other people.'
Your right they shouldnt be. Doesnt change the fact that they are though, and people cant and shouldnt be allowed to choose what others are or are not offended by.
'Think about a guild that has a lot of black people in it. Your logic would say that it should then be fine to have anti-black guilds also.'
Not quite. The first sentance implies a guild simply has a lot of black people in it by chance. Your second implies the anti-black guild would be recruiting only white people. Thats a huge difference.
If a guild can not advertise for a specific colour of skin then that should apply to all guilds and if some end up predominantly white or black or whatever colour you can imagine then so be it.
If a guild can advertise for a specific colour of skin that that should... apply to all guilds and if some guild decides only black people can enter it then there shouldnt be a rule denying a white person to create a guild with only other white people in it.
Applied to what I posted its a case of allowing GLBT promotion while I am uncertain of groups that promote only non GLBT people. If that is allowed then, as I said before, thats going to cause upset on either side and I should think there will be more complaints to come. If that isnt allowed then you have a rather large double standard. Or from your example the right for black people to exist in black only groups while white people are not allowed to do the same.
Either way it isnt exactly laying the issue to rest. The only way that was possible was if they had maintained the original interpretation of the rule and banned getting bogged down in sexuality from the whole thing.
Yes you are! you are definitely intolerant. If I want to go onto general chat and sell cars, then I should be allowed to!!!!!!
<tounge planted firmly in cheek>
Ira
does this mean I can't start a guild for men with small penises and women with small breasts? I could call it the "Teenie Weenies and titties"....
on another issue, I recently saw a female night elf who was in the guild Knee High Knights. that offends me (as a Gnome Warrior).
Ira
not exactly correct.
It was to put in rules that ensured freedom fron tyranny, for the majority at the time. i.e. White males.
However is was written like a reed, so it can flex with the people.
This allowed people, small organization and minorities to enact change. So now we(and I include myself) look at those times and say they were wrong. But we are judging them from now, outside the context of that time.
The Kruger Dunning explains most post on
*alright, no one could hate the danes, but you get my point.
Well, except for a few million people in the muslim world who don't like their cartoons...
Since I can't tell them apart, I treat all ACs as the same person.
What, are you fucking stupid?
It's protection of players' rights. There is no ban on what you say in private chat (whether guild, party, raid, or whispers) to another friend. In fact, when I play with my roommate, I'll call him a useless nigger faggot in a whisper or while we're questing together.
But if somebody calls me a dirty sand nigger faggot cunt twat boy in public chat, then that is NOT allowed. I'm not gay, but if I were, I'd expect to be able to play without hearing slurs about people like me and incitements to violence, or any other derogatory comments, in the PUBLIC chat. Because, you know, children play these games too.
If someone has a GLBT guild, the only thing that could 'offend' a homophobe would be the fact that the guild exists at all. And if you can't stand to see the name of a guild with "GLBT", "Gay", or whatever in it, maybe you should just... get over it. But no one is forcing you to listen to what they have to say.
But if a gay person sees a guild called "Fag Haters", they're going to feel 1) uncomfortable 2) unaccepted 3) like they don't belong. You might be offended by the word gay, but at least it doesn't imply that the person hates you.
So really, Blizzard is forbidding players to make other players feel like they're hated.
It's this bullshit anti-gay right-wing nonsense all over the place. Homophobes are 'offended' by the fact that gay people exist, and they think to make it fair, they should make signs that say "Gays Burn In Hell". They are NOT equal, they are NOT even closely related. One is simply "Look, this is what I am, if you don't like me then go away" whereas the other is "I believe you're going to burn in hell and that you don't deserve the rights I have." There's a HUGE fucking difference.
You know what I hate? Watching rules and laws created and enforced based on someone's determination of who is and isn't "hateful" while ignoring the actual actions of those involved.
If you kill someone, it's murder.
If you kill someone because they're gay, black, white, Muslim, Christian, fat, stupid, bigoted, or politically correct, it's still murder.
Same goes for slander, stealing, assault, verbal abuse, and every other detrimental thing one person can do to another.
Realities:
Humans beings often hate various things and groups as well as each other.
Humans play World of Warcraft.
The worst thing you can do to someone *inside* World of Warcraft is harass them.
My point? Shit's gonna happen. I'm glad the CEO pulled his head out long enough to realize they made a mistake categorizing some speech, but I doubt he'll figure out these are bordering on determinations that we may never be able to usefully make as a species.
Note: I really hope they don't start putting the word hate in their terms of use in more places. (2 is more than enough thought-crime mentality thank you!)
Im hardly feeling woe and dispair... more mild irritation.
'He's saying punishing someone for saying "GLBT" in game was not an appropriate response.'
The case was someone recruiting GLBT in to a guild not saying GLBT. Theres a bit of a difference.
and what are you trying to say? That someone recruiting GLBT in prefrence to others is better than someone who would recruit non-GLBT people in prefrence to others? If you are saying that then isnt that a fairly obvious double standard. If your not then I assume, seeing as you have no problem with people promoting GLBT, that you wont have any problem with people being derogatory about GLBT people either.
'And yes, saying "gay" when you mean "bad" was always punishable, and should continue to be.'
Oh... I guess it was the double standard option then.
'I can't tell if you're a troll, or just not very intelligent.'
Thanks for the choices...
'you seem to be reacting based on bias rather than reason or logic'
Quite the opposite if I was biased id be saying either. 'Damn gays shouldnt have any right to say anything ever.' or 'Homosexuals should be allowed to say whatever they like about anything to do with there sexuality at any time.' Or something along those lines but probably not quite so blatent.
Instead what im saying is that if you have rules that allow people to promote GLBT friendly guilds then unless you want a huge double standard you shouldnt stop people from promoting guilds that dont allow GLBT. Cant really get more reasonable or logical than that.
Now im not even sure if Blizzard do restrict nonGLBT groups but if they dont I could imagine this will be deemed offensive* which is what the rules restricting these things were supposed to stop in the first place. Which is why the rules, in my opinion, should continue to be interpreted that you dont mention sexuality in these ways. (because you're technically right the rules didnt change. The way they were utilised, however, has.) It was a simple, blanket ruling, that probably should have been enforced with a little more tact, but that they have now backed down on. (Which was due to an attack on Blizzard I wasnt entirely comfortable with in the first place.)
*This is a large key to the problem right here. Discussing GLBT shouldnt be offensive. I know this, most reasonable people know this but in the real world where it takes all kinds this just isnt so. People take offense at GLBT heck I used to work with a gay guy who would take offense at people announcing there sexuality because 'I dont see any straight people mouthing off about the fact they like women.' Saying its okay to announce you are GLBT friendly while banning people from announcing they are GLBT unfriendly doesnt seem right to me, no matter what I believe to be the correct way of thinking.
from bliz originally: 'To promote a positive game environment for everyone and help prevent such harassment from taking place as best we can, we prohibit mention of topics related to sensitive real-world subjects in open chat within the game, and we do our best to take action whenever we see such topics being broadcast. This includes openly advertising a guild friendly to players based on a particular political, sexual, or religious preference, to list a few examples. For guilds that wish to use such topics as part of their recruiting efforts, our Guild Recruitment forum, located at our community Web site, serves as one open avenue for doing so.'
I don't see anything wrong with that... oh, except not everyone can show how proud they are of their sexual orientation.
I guess it's just sad that they have to promote it. It should be assumed that guilds are friendly to everyone (realworld) and only against certain gameworld-traits for RP purposes.
Intolerance of football scores and intolerance of people are two completely different things. That's really quite laughable to compare them. But what I hear you saying is that you're a role player, and you want other people to role play, too. At least in theory, that means you don't mention your child, your injury, your local weather, or anything that exists on your side of the screen. Supposing you're playing such games on role playing servers, it's completely reasonable you'd be making such requests of other players. Of course, if you're not playing on role playing servers or you actually do share details of your real life world - ever - you've got no ground to set those kinds of expectations for other players.
... pictures of the prophet mohammed.
If Google really cared they would fix Android Chrome to reflow text, instead of discriminating
Given that, it's kinda hard to make a sound argument that Blizzard is now allowing guilds to pick and choose who may and may not join based on things like race, sexuality, etc. On the contrary, they're quite insistent that you're not permitted to do that.
As such, promoting guilds that discriminate is still a violation. Promoting special interest guilds that are inclusive is not. It's a subtle difference, but it's also significant. It's significant because at least in theory, you should be able to announce a heterosexual white-male friendly guild, just so long as it's inclusive. And that means permitting members who happen to be homosexual black females.
I don't see how that's a double-standard. You could also be warned for saying "digusting heterosexuals." Both are a violation of the policy against insulting people's sexuality. I don't see how that's a double-standard. Math is hard. This isn't.
That's right fuck Blizzard, and fuck their CEO and his politically correct bullshit. I'm so tired of everyone being so afraid to make decisions and stick to them because of PC pressure.
It's a game. I don't give two shits about the nightelf I'm teamed up with prefering to suck cock while I'm killing 50 bunnies to get a patch of fur to craft a new tunic or whatever lame ass quest I'm on. I don't feel compelled to talk about screwing chicks while I play a game. Gay/lesbian people need to ease up on this force-feeding of their views and lifestyle on everyone else. It's a game, just fucking play it. Period.
http://teasphere.wordpress.com - A little spot of tea
if there was a hetrosexual friendly guild in the game that discussed hetrosexuality on public chat channels in the same way that GLBT friendly guild and discussing GLBT sexuality on public chat channels?
You would think, under equal rights, that one does not need to say X-Friendly in their guild or chats and just accept everyone equally? Doing so is sort of starting a segigation between groups of people, saying one type they are friendly to, but not mentioning what other types they are friendly to. It makes people get the perception that if you are X-Friendly that you are not Y-Friendly because you did not even mention Y. Sort of like having a company of all GLBT people, and not hiring any Hetrosexuals is still discrimination even if you claim to be GLBT Friendly.
Remember, Slashdot does not have a -1 disagree moderation, and no, troll, flamebait, and overrated are not substitutes.
Fair enough. I see your point. I spoke too quickly. The majority once thought slavery was acceptable, now they don't. If it ever came back in vogue the majority could legalise it. It would be difficult (If I understand correctly, it would take the ratification of the congress, senate and all 50 state legislatures). If the majority wanted it bad enough, they could get it. In that case, the minority wouldn't be protected - thus your point: What society accept, and what is correct, is defined by the majority at any given time.
I agree partly - what society accepts is defined by the majority. Just not so sure if what "is correct" is defined by the majority. 300 million American's can be wrong. For instance, if they decided that the sun revolved around the earth...they would not be correct. However, in the case of morality - 300 millions dictating what's "right" would suggest that morality is "culturally relative." If that's the case, one could argue that morality can be deduced further - it's all realitive...down to the individual. You could even argue...that it does not exist. In that case...the majority rules anyway, by virtue of the fact that they hold power in their numbers.
blah blah blah...sorry for the verbal diarrhea. But, I do want to apologise for jumping the gun and calling you out. After thinking it through, you do have a valid point.
The problem is that silencing "sensitive real-world subjects" punishes minorities. Minorities are always "sensitive." Furthermore, it punishes the victim, not the harasser. It's roughly equivalent to saying that because a woman wears a short skirt, she deserves to be raped. Do women who wear provocative clothing deserve rape? I, at least, would say no. And I don't think that women who wear short skirts should be punished and forced to wear unattractive clothing as a means to protect them from rape. I also think it's wrong to say that because someone mentions that they're gay that they've invited harrassment. And it's no more appropriate to punish gay people who mention their sexuality than it is to force women to wear pants.
I take your point it has made me rethink my stance on things somewhat.
I guess im a troll after all.
No, no, no, this was never an anti-gay statement. (Infact that would be a pretty damn hard thing for me to be.) It was only about positive discrimination.
The whole point was equal view of what people are offended by. The preference for GLBT is giving the GLBT players a right over the prefrence for a Heterosexual group. As someone has already pointed out my view of the situation has jumped to a possibly incorrect assumption that if someone made a heterosexual friendly group they would get in to trouble.
That was because the way I thought of it was that the two sides were either for GLBT or against GLBT rather than being for Heterosexual. My mistake, and it justifies the troll rating though thanks to the guy who stood up for me.
The only way that my original post can be relevant is if Blizzard take action against people advertising as heterosexual friendly.
It's not a mental disorder, that's why.
'Math is hard. This isn't.'
If its the choice between a maths problem and a making the rules for peoples rights ill choose the maths problem.
That said I do take the point and this whole thing has been caused by a badly made assumption on my part.
Nope, those are half-halflings.
Slashdot: Where anecdotes and generalizations can be freely substituted for facts, logic, or intelligence
I have nothing to disagree with what you said. I'd like to add only that what people should understand is that what you are shouldn't be more important that what you do. What you are is a given, and as such is neither something for you to be ashamed off nor for you to have pride about. What you do upon what you are is what to base any shame or pride in, nothing else.
;)
For instance, if the GLBT guild does better than mine in WoW-PvP, that's something for which to have pride! After all, other than that, what's the matter?
Conservatism: (n.) love of the existing evils. Liberalism: (n.) desire to substitute new evils for the existing ones.
I mean, if you are going to let in guilds based on sexual orientation why not allow guilds for epople who just want to engage in a little farmplay?
Plus, beastiality friendly guilds would actually have more real world to WoW world value than gay guilds because several of the races are animal races to begin with.
I mean, just imagine a level male Dwarven Paladin mounting a female Tauren Shaman.
Can you say "MOO"?
Buy Steampunk Clothing Online!
We're talking about it because they went and said something along the lines of "hey, we don't mind gay people in our guild and won't be assholes to them."
Except they said it as "GLTB-friendly"
And, god forbid, they made sure people knew this, in public.
The nerve.
A blog about stuff.
wow, blizzard, gay
...my thoughts precisely.
Karma: It's all a bunch of tree-huggin' hippy crap!
Wow, you can't even be bothered to read EVEN ONE OF THE ARTICLES about this stuff, or even the article summaries. It wasn't a gay guild, just a "gay-friendly" guild, which basically meant no gays-are-going-to-hell types. And people do care about sexual orientation, not just the gays, look at anything from Fred Phelps, and look at one of the Constitutional amendments(which I would like to kill some people for--the only other time the Constitution has gotten rid of rights was Prohibition, which was repealed) to ban gay marriage? And of course, if gay people want THE SAME RIGHTS AS EVERYONE ELSE, people like you bitch at them and claim they want something special, just because a movie was made about gay cowboys(How many movies about straight cowboys are there?)
Please, for the good of Humanity, vote Obama.
Forgive my ignorance: I haven't played WarCraft since back in the Win '95 days.
Back then, the premise of this (most excellent) game was to raise an army of ugly trolls in order to lay siege to an opponent's defenses.
Please explain this to me: after spending 9 hours pretending to be trolls burning down human villages, players were offended by people who enjoy company with similar genitals?
Yikes. I'd move to Canada, but they are just as crazy...
Math is math. Regular expression is regular expression. The tools are there. The future is now.
Your well thought out reply is apology enough!
When I was talking about correct, I was meaning socially/morally correct.
The Kruger Dunning explains most post on
Oh, I'm sorry, my bad. So, different genders should be allowed. Different races should be allowed. Different religions should be allowed. But different sexualities shouldn't. We only want part of who players are to be expressable; the rest is forbidden and taboo.
By a scallop's forelocks!
Currently the "tags" that I see on the mainpage read:
WOW Blizzard gay
So?
Blizzard wasn't banning people from the game because they were gay. So that law has nothing to do with this.
I do not think that you are correct. Consider the code:
All persons within the jurisdiction of this state are free and equal, and no matter what their sex, race, color, religion, ancestry, national origin, disability, medical condition, marital status, or sexual orientation are entitled to the full and equal accommodations, advantages, facilities, privileges, or services in all business establishments of every kind whatsoever.
Whether or not the service is provided or not is not the issue -- I think that you are making an incorrect assumption here. It is whether or not "full and equal" service is provided.
It's hardly a far stretch to consider that banning a guild that states that it is LGBT-friendly is not exactly providing "full and equal" service.
On the other hand, transsexuals specifically are *not* covered by this. A straight transsexual *can*, as my understanding goes, be discriminated against.
Any program relying on (nontrivial) preemptive multithreading will be buggy.
Thank you. A good post or chunk of text makes you look at the world differently. This did that.
Any program relying on (nontrivial) preemptive multithreading will be buggy.
Are your out of your friggin' head?
Welcome to the real world, just like making disparaging remarks about people believing in a god is currently ok, welcome and even illustrates that you must be one of the intelligent enlightened in current society.
Ever made a comment about "Kool-Aid drinkers" or cult members otherwise?
That is how a lot of us feel about the Christian right. Except said Kool-Aid drinkers don't hurt anyone but themselves, but the Christian right is out pushing anti-gay marriage amendments, trying to have the adopted children of gay couples taken away from them, trying to keep people (including non-Christians) from having the option of seeking abortion, harassing gays, trying to censor media (I think many on here are familiar with Jack Thompson's antics), keeping condoms out of the effort to stop the spread of AIDS, pushing creationism over evolution, and so forth.
I think it's less of a social requirement and more of a backlash. Christianity is well-organized as a political power -- it has hierarchy (well, a number of hierarchies), funding systems, lobbyists, media, and so forth. It has an effective system for organizing voting blocs. As a result, it does a good job of pushing political influence. The problem is that the less-organized people that are getting increasingly irritated with Christianity don't have much of a rallying flag (well, there's the Flying Spaghetti Monster) or much of an organization to speak for them. So you see a groundswell of irritation at places like public forums, where anyone can express their feelings and things are rather more democratic. Slashdot, which is composed disproportionately of well-educated and well-to-do individuals, leans even more away from Christianity.
I'd say that expressing irritation about Christianity is not done to win social approval. If this sort of thing were the case, person on Slashdot would vocally love Apple, love Linux, love anime, love Babylon 5, love perl, etc. And while each group has its adherents, nobody seems to be simply doing the social equivalent of karma whoring in all categories. That indicates to me that it probably isn't being done to win social approval.
Any program relying on (nontrivial) preemptive multithreading will be buggy.
Oh man you are batshit crazy and all over the goddamn map! I love it! They should've modded this funny though, not troll. This stuff is pure genius. You've conjured the essence of James Dobson and Mike Tyson.
No matter what Blizzard does here, they're screwed. The ban on Gay guilds wasn't intended, I dont think, as a biggoted decision. Rather, it was to keep guilds open. Because they made that call, they were getting busted on, so they reversed the decision. This isn't 'caving into pressure'. It's simply changing policies to conform with what the current social situation seems to require of them. So, yes, it could be seen as caving. But it's also part of the process a company has to go through to create a product that is acceptable to the most of their fanbase. If they ban the guilds, they're seen as biggots. If they reverse that decision, they're seen as caving and condoning devisive behavior. Personally though, I'm glad they 'caved' as it were. Other devisive behavior is allowed and really, the whole point of an MMO over an offline game is devisiveness - forming communities with whatever traits, from the superficial to the profound life choices, that you wish to spend the time with. Unlike in the real world where excluding groups prevents others access to equal opportunities, in WOW it allows everyone to tailor the game to their particular requirements. So, go Blizzard for choosing, what I believe to be, the best option in a difficult situation. And revisiting a choice isnt always caving to pressure. Sometimes its learning from experience.
Gay guild issue rises from its grave as a zombie. When interviewed, the zombie said: "Braaaaiinnnsssss...." and left for Europe to get some.
A 40-men raid group, dressed in thights and called the Merry Men of Sherwood, went after the zombie. The leader, a guy carrying longbow with the handle "Robin", commented shortly: "Well, we've been grinding by raiding the sheriff of Notthingham for the last thousand years every day, so it's time to try something new. Besides, the bastards stole our idea." The sheriff, along with his employer, prince John, took the entire English Army with him and went after Robin, to challenge him to a player-versus-army deathmatch.
The ghost of Richard the Lion-hearted declined to comment the matter.
Forget magic. Any technology distinguishable from divine power is insufficiently advanced.
So, you're suggesting a policy of "Don't tell, don't alt?
Also, that was a pretty good rant. And the underlying idea that this is just a game puts into perspective. You're 100% right that there are more pressing problems than sexual expression in games.
It's not offtopic, dumbass. It's orthogonal.
They literally try to suck you in.
Next time I'm in a coffee shop, I'm going to order a GBLT on wheat. Do I want fries or onion rings with that? I dunno. Which is gayer?
It's not offtopic, dumbass. It's orthogonal.
Of course it is, you stupid slashdork.
[pause]
Well, you are!
Mind the Gap
I might point out that, a hundred years ago, a woman might be committed to a mental institution for trying to open her own bank account. Things that were completely unclassified in psychology as little as 30 years ago are now officially recognized disorders (such as eating disorders), and things that were common disorders in the old days have been dropped and discarded as bunk (hysteria, anyone?). Psychology is as much zeitgeist as it is hard science.
As for homosexuality as a disorder, I think it highly, highly likely that many symptoms of this "disorder" which showed signs of strain on the "sufferer" were actually the effects of stress caused by being gay in a highly heterosexual-centered society. I think it takes only five minutes talking to a gay person to figure out that they aren't crazy, although in some cases I have seen people "turn gay" as a result of already being crazy. I've also seen people switch religions to the same effect.
As for your simplistic view of the evolutionary role of sex, I'd like to point out that reproduction is not always necessary or desirable for members of a species, especially when population growth increases drastically. However, all mammals have a sex drive no matter the desirability of offspring. I'm sure you can see a natural cause for homosexual behavior there. And we have observed homosexual behavior and sex-specific behaviors crossing sexes in many animals for a variety of purposes - everything from ensuring females gestate properly to raising abandoned offspring, to creating the illusion of sex balance when one sex becomes scarce. The "unnatural" label just doesn't stick any more.
It's a fantasy world, not real life. I like that I can log into WoW and not have to talk about issues like gay marriage, George Bush, the price of gas, NASDAQ, or spring training. Not that I don't have opinions or wouldn't want to discuss those topics in real life, but I enjoy that it's something I don't need to think about that when I'm trying to get into a ZF run to pick up a new staff.
It's kind of sad that people want to fit themselves into little narrow definitions of who they are. I don't spam "Looking to join guild of 27 year old, straight, white females with no children PST." When I log in, that's not who I am. I'm a 60 rogue, who will ambush you if you give me the chance. I'm a 40-something priest, who can heal a party like there's no tomorrow even though I'm shadow spec'ed...
I accept that the people I'm playing with are of all different ages, genders, races, locations, sexual orientations, religions, etc in real life. I just hope they can hold the aggro off me so I don't die before I can heal them. Apparently, that's just me.
A troll is an outrageous comment posted with the intent to arouse arguement.
In contrast, the posting uses a time-honored style of /. humor to comment on the content of the article in a humorous way. It refers to tabu subjects such as gayness and people who hate gays, but that's because the article is about those subjects.
If this posting is a troll, then the entire article is a troll and should be modded accordingly.
--- Attorneys Assisting Citizen-Soldiers & Families -
And, god forbid, they made sure people knew this, in public.
I'm just saying if you've got an agenda, you might as well own up to that fact. (Nothing wrong with pushing GLTB friendliness in a reasonable way, but the OP was claiming there was no agenda, which just doesn't ring true to me.)
Heck, even I've got an agenda here, which is to get people to quit lying about their agendas (to themselves and others).
A 'gay-friendly' guild is one that bans the use of 'ghey', 'faggot', and 'homo' as terms of general disparagement in its chats and enforces the ban. So, the situation is quite the opposite of what you think -- it could be described as an effort to stay in character by limiting the use of contemporary slurs.
Bah.
My other body is also not wearing any.