I'll just say what i did in the other thread when i copy-pasted the article from Pundit's blog.

Anyone doing this runs the risk of becoming the 'devils rejects' of online RPG pdf suppliers with all the dross from people worrying their bestiality game won't be held by OBS deciding that the 'free expression' site will hold it.

Good luck with that.

Quote from: soviet;853575I'm a publisher on DTRPG and I think this is a ridiculous persecution fantasy that has no basis in the reality of what has happened.

If DTRPG started removing your games, or James Raggi's games, or any other games that aren't so clearly beyond the pale as a tournament of PC rapists who gain mechanical bonuses for raping women to death, then I would be taking action as well. But I see no evidence whatever that this is going to happen.

I'm not sure how you think it makes any sense for the owner of the dominant PDF marketplace to suddenly want to stop selling a whole load of popular games.

I'm also not sure how you can try to claim the moral high ground on the one hand, and advocate a scorched earth attempt to sabotage DTRPG's entire operation (including all publishers who don't join with you) on the other hand.

Everything you just posted lends credibility to Pundit's concerns.

He is wanting people to decide which side of that line they stand on, freedom or censorship. Some people will try to straddle the line, but really that's a slippery slope and once enough momentum is reached impossible to stop.

Based on past history he is right to be worried. If that button existed a while back his products would have been targeted in an overwhelming wave of vitriol and spite. Not because the products are offensive, but to drive him out. Besides taking it personally there is a business aspect to this issue.

Removing his products from a venue that exposes them to the risk of not being able to sell them anyway is a valid business move - risk analysis, CBA, etc.
Establishing an alternate venue for selling his and other products that certain groups have deemed unacceptable is what happens when the existing system doesn't work or entails too much risk.

Forming a sort of co-op to support the creation of that venue might be the right way to resolve this issue. If it hurts OBS's bottom line, that's the way business works. They did their own risk analysis, CBA, etc. and made their decision.

Based on your comments it appears that you have judged the offending product through your own subjective personal lens, probably using other outraged views to support it.

Would you have used a report button for this product?

Did you actually look at the product?
Or are you offended from just the title and maybe misreading the promo blurb?

Quote from:  The TOR BlurbThe Tournament of Rapists details the sadistic Rape Pure Fight circuit, expanding on what you've seen already and introducing dangerous new sexual predators. This sadistic bloodsport takes place in abandoned office buildings and atop Tokoyo rooftops. An assortment of superhumanly powerful and inhumanly misogynistic mean, and even worse women, step into impromptu fighting arenas, killing and raping the weaker in search of a multi-billion yen purse provided by a half-oni billionaire in thrall to dark impulses.

Also: Politically Correct Rapists?
Probably more offensive than an RPG supplement where the heroes fight evil rapists.

Quote from: Sytthas;853597See, I don't care if it was only SJWs who were offended, or if it was 90% of the world. My feeling on it is that, if someone is offended by something, it falls to the offended party to figure out how to deal with that for themselves. NOT for everybody else.

Yes, but he is under no obligation to sell a product if he is offended or feels that 90% of his clientele are offended. DTRPG is not a repository for RPGs.

Quote from: BedrockBrendan;853602I just heard back from Steve on the clarification. His response indicated:

-He cannot say yet where the line will be drawn because he isn't the only one making decisions about these things. Edit: he also stated that he thinks the line will be defined as the first batch of reported products are handled. Basically precedents will be set by which titles they end up deeming an issue.

-On issues of content, like human sacrifice for example, he says there is a spectrum where some treatments will be better than others. If the game rewards you with XP for raping and sacrificing virgins for example, that may be an issue, at the other end where you have selfless self sacrifice to the god it would not be an issue.

-He does think there is difference between RPGs and movies, because there is the "I" element of people playing their character. Sidebars that discuss the issues raised by edgy content might be a good idea. Seems to be concerned if the games veer into encouraging PCs to do certain things.

I should emphasize this was a quick response given while he is away for the weekend, and I am paraphrasing.

I'd personally be very curious to hear his take on Maid

Well, David Chart has come out as against the decision.

http://www.davidchart.com/2015/09/04/onebookshelfs-offensive-content-policy/

Quote from: Endless Flight;853588I don't really see too much of a problem there, to be honest. He's right: 99.9% of the RPG products there are not worrisome and will never see a ban, including Arrows of Indra.

 itl.

My gut tells me Indra is safe. The content isn't offensive at all. People who hate pundit have made that argument and it never took hold because a read of the content makes that pretty clear. Pundit is actually is actually pretty tasteful designer.  He doesn't put in stuff to shock or deal with heavy sexual content.   My only concern with Indra is if things get taken down for issues around cultural borrowing. I am more concerned about stuff like LotFP that does get closer to being provocative. With my own profucts I am more concerned about a game Like Crime Network being taken down.

I could be wrong of course. I have only emailed with Steve and don't know who else will be making these decisions. I think pundit and James valid concerns. It is early though to know if they will materialize. The policy is a big change IMO.

Quote from: soviet;853575I'm a publisher on DTRPG and I think this is a ridiculous persecution fantasy that has no basis in the reality of what has happened.

If DTRPG started removing your games, or James Raggi's games, or any other games that aren't so clearly beyond the pale as a tournament of PC rapists who gain mechanical bonuses for raping women to death, then I would be taking action as well. But I see no evidence whatever that this is going to happen.

I'm not sure how you think it makes any sense for the owner of the dominant PDF marketplace to suddenly want to stop selling a whole load of popular games.

I'm also not sure how you can try to claim the moral high ground on the one hand, and advocate a scorched earth attempt to sabotage DTRPG's entire operation (including all publishers who don't join with you) on the other hand.

There have been several factual blurbs on ToR. One by Steve Weick is quoted in this very thread!

How do you keep getting this wrong?

Shanna Germaine has posted a veiled shot across the bows about the decision too. Not too specific, just against 'censorship'.

Quote from: BedrockBrendan;853608My gut tells me Indra is safe.

I think Indra and LOTFP stuff are safe because the mob has cooled off over  Pundit into a simmer and the shock of LOTFP has settled down into a bemused to grudging acceptance. There are newer and shinier things for them to snap at.

I'm just waiting for "Rape for Satan" to hit DTRPG.

Quote from: One Horse Town;853607Well, David Chart has come out as against the decision.

http://www.davidchart.com/2015/09/04/onebookshelfs-offensive-content-policy/

I dont know the fellow from dam, but that was a very well written objection and most of his points mirror my own thoughts on the subject.

Quote from: One Horse Town;853603I'll just say what i did in the other thread when i copy-pasted the article from Pundit's blog.

Anyone doing this runs the risk of becoming the 'devils rejects' of online RPG pdf suppliers with all the dross from people worrying their bestiality game won't be held by OBS deciding that the 'free expression' site will hold it.

Good luck with that.

Good point, actually. Though, it's worth wondering what is a good solution to a policy that really feels like it will become a cheap heckler's veto for malcontents with enough energy to click on a button, and engage in a little online rabble rousing.

Quote from: Warboss Squee;853609There have been several factual blurbs on ToR. One by Steve Weick is quoted in this very thread!

How do you keep getting this wrong?

What do you think I got wrong?

Quote from: Endless Flight;853605Yes, but he is under no obligation to sell a product if he is offended or feels that 90% of his clientele are offended. DTRPG is not a repository for RPGs.

Again, I have never said OBS is obligated to sell anything. BUT you don't get to have it both ways. You don't get to say, "there's no reason to be concerned that this decision from OBS will result in bigger problems because it was all about this one offensive product" while also saying, "you don't get to buy anything Steve Wieck (or the mob that defines these things) considers offensive."

If the latter is true-- and I'm not contesting that it is true-- then the former is bullshit. And people need to stop trying to pretty that bullshit up.

Though I'm not sure I agree with some of his methods, I fully agree with Pundits sentiment. Only by realizing this is bullshit and rejecting it as adamantly as possible will there be any chance of it not becoming even deeper bullshit.

Quote from: TristramEvans;853614I dont know the fellow from dam, but that was a very well written objection and most of his points mirror my own thoughts on the subject.

Yeah, it's a good piece. I worked with David on one project for WFRP!

He's also been the main man for Ars Magica for a long time.

Quote from: Sytthas;853618Again, I have never said OBS is obligated to sell anything. BUT you don't get to have it both ways. You don't get to say, "there's no reason to be concerned that this decision from OBS will result in bigger problems because it was all about this one offensive product" while also saying, "you don't get to buy anything Steve Wieck (or the mob that defines these things) considers offensive."

If the latter is true-- and I'm not contesting that it is true-- then the former is bullshit. And people need to stop trying to pretty that bullshit up.

Though I'm not sure I agree with some of his methods, I fully agree with Pundits sentiment. Only by realizing this is bullshit and rejecting it as adamantly as possible will there be any chance of it not becoming even deeper bullshit.

I think the basic issue is by enacting this policy OBS has agreed to act as a kind of censor of RPG content because in order to make sales, people have to have their stuff on OBS. There just isn't any other way to be viable unless you are WotC or Paizo. If you want to make a product that will sell, you will need to pass through that OBS filter and if they decide that certain content is no longer allowed, depending on what they are talking about, I think it could impact a lot of games people don't normally think of as offensive. I am not sure where they stand. I will say I am less and less confident that this won't be abused as I learn more and as I see some of the things people are taking issue with on forums.