I appreciate your patience, but you're wasting your time. This poster is just trying to Alinsky you. No set of rules or principles will always work for every case, and these kinds of arguments are just designed to obfuscate. They have no desire to understand; they are just trying to undermine.
No, I am not.
I am asking for consistency. The lack of which has been pointed out before.
The man may be speaking for his company, but has his company produced an RPG or card game or something that had "woke politics" in it that you would discern if you didn't have a connection to the Internet?
If not, then I question why they get put in the red from originally being orange, when there exists other items in the list that did not get pushed into the red for having politics that were "not part of the finished product."
"There exists no set of rules that works for every case."
It's not about a set of rules that works for every case, it's simply an acceptance that this is what it has claimed to not be.
A list of folks that disagree. And that's an acceptable statement.
But if you say it's not, then I challenge you to find some Munchkin card that somehow reflects the opinion that SJG stated on the Daily Illuminator. Heck, you're hard-pressed to find many posts from Mr. Jackson. He's mostly retired.
And as folks had pointed out many times in the past, the other posters in the blog have had these opinions and politics all along.
But folks are up in arms NOW as if they can somehow put him more red than red because he has right to free speech.
And you'll notice that here, as in other posts, I am going to explain my points, I'll act like a guest, and I'll eventually bow out since I expect to gain no ground.
Because I keep hearing "For a lib, you sound reasonable." Because a lot of folks do the same thing that I have to remember to not do myself, lump the group of people that disagree with me into one homogenous whole.
I understand that there's going to be a difference between Shark (recently banned) and Ocule in the opinions that are given, and when I fail at it, I will accept that as a criticism. And I've accepted counterarguments in the past. I've gained insights in the past. So, you can claim that I am insincere, but ... hey, I know what is in my head better than you do.
And finally, with regards to the t-shirt being made from the company's money. It's a self-funding t-shirt being made and the proceeds going towards the fund that the t-shirt was made for. IF you don't want to donate, then don't buy the t-shirt.
The game GURPS won't put one penny towards the Lilith fund, just as the Ukraine t-shirt before it.
And the message about "support of the board" was with regards to them providing money to employees affected by the policies of their state so that they can go to another state, not about donating to the charity.
And as you quoted, this list is about TTRPGs themselves, but if it's about the owners and people who make up the comapny, then the statement on many of the entries about how they keep their politics separate from the products is kind of ... pointless? Is it a measure or not?