MTG Salvation

I feel so old...so old that I can remember MTGNews (where I was briefly a mod), which begat MTGSalvation, which will beget...something else, I suppose. End of an era indeed. While never a place for robust strategic conversation, it was THE place for spoilers for the last decade and a half or so, and a place I've been happy to call home.

I will miss this place, and will probably resist creating a new account in the new place before finally relenting in a few years after getting too sad to not be able to discuss Commander and rumored cards.

Farewell and RIP, 'Sally. It's been real.

I wish I owned a copy of this little gem, as "My Library is Riding the Dilu Horse" sounds like the most vaguely disturbing and awesome thing in the history of MtG.

Quote from GreenJobTzar »

See your number one shows why the costume people are immaterial to the community, they only show up at high level events, therefore with CS gone, nothing was lost. No one is cosplaying at my kitchen table or any other. Saying someone playing dress up makes someone buy an intro deck is such a leap of logic even the worst digital marketing hack wouldn't try it.

And your number two, couldn't agree more. Harassment's just not happening at the players playing with cards level that people think it is unless one thinks social media reflects reality. Try going to you local LGS and be a salty POS. People will play the games for an event, but you're not going to participate much beyond pay to play.

If your LGS is rife with rape jokes, name and shame bruh. Can't find Jeremy doing it, though most of his content isn't great, but would love a link.

Fair that we've gotten pretty far into the weeds here. My LGS seems generally great, my wife hasn't run into issues there and has generally bowed out because she hates limited and we're too poor for constructed. I haven't seen much/hardly any of Jeremy's stuff. I've seen a few of Christina's pictures on WotC's social media page but this whole scandal is the first I've really heard of both of them. They'll be gone, and there will be new cosplayers and scumbags to take their place.

I do think there's room for improvement and inclusion, because data says that something like 35-40% of players are women, but only 1% of serious tournament players or even casual "weekend warriors" are women. Some of that may be legitimate gender and cultural differences, but some of it is almost certainly that women feel unwelcome at local FNMs. It doesn't take the extremes of rape jokes and threats to scare 'em off.

Still, we're way off the issue here. It seems like we're both generally in agreement that being civil is good and that we're here for the larger issue and have no actual buy-in on the individuals involved, and I concede that cosplay is a poor/nonexistant marketing tool as it's pretty niche even among nerds. I do think they should be treated with respect, but fair enough that paying cosplayers to come to events like Hascon is probably money better spent elsewhere (like on fixing Gatherer or improving development or getting mainstream press attention).

Quote from GreenJobTzar »

That begs the question, what special accommodations need to be made for non-majority people? As far as I saw from 95-201X, none, but my group and LGS doesn't do any language policing, though we did make fun of the guy with waifu lands until he stopped using them.

I would say the people who demand things non game related do affect the game. Beyond salaries paid by wizards for content managers and other community management roles, money that could be spent on more RnD, better quality product and tourney prize support, we've already seen calls for wizards to pay adults to play dress-up.

So yes people who want to enjoy the game differently are detracting from the game by sapping finite resources. One could say they are growing the pie, but a worse product (ICM and other recent sets) is shrinking the pie more.

1) MaRo doesn't lie, and has repeatedly noted that "casuals" - folks who play for costumes and stories and flinging cards around their kitchen table - are the major audience of Magic the Gathering by a vast, vast magnitude. Super serious players who play professionally, and even semi-serious players who grind FNM every week, are an overall minority of the player population. It is THEIR enjoyment that funds the serious R&D to grind out good products and develop a game that rewards good play at the highest levels. While the recent Standard issues are likely in small part due to overtaxing the development team to serve a story team, the ability to hire new developers and refine/improve R&D with the Play Design team is due to the ever-growing sales from that story change, which has been a huge success for MtG's primary consumers.

2) I don't see why not hitting on people, commenting on their body shape and appearance, or "joking" about rape is an undue and unreasonable accommodation to expect in a professional setting, if you are dead-set on being the very best player beating the very best opponents. If your pleasure comes not from winning but from getting to be a dick to your opponents and drink their tears, you are at odds with the intent of the game. The author, and most female/colored/disabled players, are not asking you to treat them like Kings and Queens. They are asking you to treat them like adults and fellow players.

Quote from Negator_402 »

One major difference, and I hope you can appreciate this: heterosexuality is, FAR AND AWAY, the norm. Your analogy would make more sense if women (lets, for the sake of argument, make them all unattractive women) continually asked me out this poorly at a card tournament. It would be sad. If men hit on me, that would be very creepy, because they are presuming interest in homosexual activity, which is a minority. That would be like me handing out Planned Parenthood fliers in Iran, and wondering why I am getting shot.

There is also a public policy issue. We want humans to live in the US, interestingly enough. For that, we need people to, you know, mate! Unwanted advances are sad, and when made repeatedly, are in fact harassment. One-off failed pickup attempts are not, and punishing them will lead to more introversion from an already-introversive group. Should we not be encouraging players to date each other, rather than making women at Magic events sacred cows??

I can accept a middle ground: flirt with tact. At a bar, grossly creeping at a girl results in a drink tossing. At a card event, perhaps a shove? But banning that behavior is wrong.

I get what you're saying, and am all for tact. The point of the author, and many other eloquent folks in this thread, is that it is never "just you" playfully flirting and dropping it if she says no or says nothing. It is every. single. opponent. Every single time. My wife usually made clear she was with her husband, and got creeped on the few tournaments she has been to back when we were just engaged and long-distance so she was attending alone. The fact that it is a constant barrage from all parties means even the guy who says "Hey, you're cool, that game was great, let's get coffee sometime" (which I'd consider to be respectful, tactful, and focused on positive qualities instead of just having sex ASAP) can feel pretty unwelcome because you are in fact the 10th guy to proposition her that day. The truth is that the far too many men are NOT that tactful and respectful, and I get that's because they're nervous and awkward but that is a reason and not a terribly compelling excuse.

Quote from Kryptnyt »

That's fair. I didn't know about any Wolfenstein outcry. If there's flamethrowers in that game, it makes a lot more sense I guess. I still don't think Nazism has anything to do with cosplay however.

Yeah, I spend a ton of time on AV Club and most of my friends are hyper-liberal so I saw some of it. There is a legitimate phenomenon of making a tempest out of a tea kettle so I'm not sure how widespread the outcry REALLY was, but it was widespread enough to vaguely ping my radar so I understood that reference. Considering how fresh, and not well-disseminated, the reference is it would probably be good to edit the section to clarify.

Quote from Negator_402 »

What you just mentioned (that pickup line) is not harassment, and I fear for a world were that is considered such.

Context matters, so consider my post to be "unsolicited pick-up lines that clearly make the recipient uncomfortable" since sure, you might be flirting and it makes sense to drop old gems like this - but also, if all your pickup lines relate immediately to sex with someone who's just there to play Magic, perhaps you should find a few new ones. THAT's the overall point, really, of my thread here - many here are saying "just let me play cards, this is a game, leave politics and identity out of it", then defending dropping cheesy pick-up lines and trolling for sex with their female opponents who are also just there to play cards. You can't have it both ways. It can't just be a game when it makes you comfortable, and be about your out-of-game needs and wants when it makes you comfortable too.

I opted for a clean example in the interest of not getting a warning or infraction.

Quote from Negator_402 »

No, that is NOT what it is. I never mentioned feminism and its goods/ills once. I just want to be left alone and not having thought policing.

I know it's a tough line sometimes, but the issue here is that your privilege to be left alone ends when you harm someone else. If you say "hey, you look great in that dress but it'd look greater on my floor", your female opponent calling you on it or reporting you to a judge for unsportsmanlike conduct is no longer a "Thought Police" issue, it is an anti-harassment issue. Treating people with respect, decency, following the golden rule, etc, shouldn't BE a political issue, and the point of the article is that if you take this as an attack on your personal beliefs and politics, perhaps it is time to do some real soul searching regarding those beliefs and politics.

The full, in-context quote is:

"It should go without saying that if you feel personally attacked when someone denounces the Nazis, you ought to take a good, hard, long look inside yourself to find out where that Nazi sympathy comes from. And then you kill it with fire from a good, old-fashioned, American-made M1A1 flamethrower, a fine weapon responsible for killing many Nazis in the actual World War II."

In context, she refers to killing "those feelings of sympathy" with fire, and there is no advocacy of violence against Nazis. "Kill it with fire" is a common turn of phrase, and is here directed entirely as a metaphorical fire-bombing of negative attitudes some may possess, internally.

The "shoot Nazis in Normandy but not New York" bit is specifically referencing the outcry over Wolfenstein's recent release, which a handful of conservatives decried despite Wolfenstein being a long-running series predicated on shooting the hell out of Nazis (something it has in common with many, many, many other Triple A shooter titles on the market), as the context of a Nazi-controlled US still featuring Nazi-shooting was apparently too close to home for some. I admit the messaging is muddled by the long gap (she mentions the game in paragraph one, and the line, with no reference to the game, in her final paragraph), but there is no advocacy of violence here. An edit to make it clear she's referencing Wolfenstein: The New Colossus, however, may be beneficial.

I suppose I can appreciate the desire to "face only the strongest". Christina doesn't even play so that's whatever. I would challenge the assumption that welcoming women, people of color, disabled people, etc to the community somehow will give you less worthy opposition. I'm also not sure that folks who enjoy the game differently (for its art, costumes, flavor, etc) should be made to feel unwelcome or be treated poorly when they won't ever dilute your tournament experience or environment.

I find it interesting that many posts here are to "keep politics out of my escapism". I understand and empathize with the sentiment. I come here to get away from the horror show that is modern politics and news. I generally prefer to tune out and avoid confrontation.

Here's the thing though; folks like Christina and the author are "bringing their liberal politics into your game" because you, or folks like you, started it.

I am a white man, so I have a limited perspective on many things, but I am also disabled and in a wheelchair. I have 100% had folks talk...real...real...slow to me, or make cracks about "feeling bad beating up on a cripple" at tournaments. I've let it mostly roll off my back or taken them aside and gently told them that that is very uncool of them, as my physical disability does not overly impact my cognitive functioning and it's a bit insulting to assume othewise. Are my opponents who do this immune to criticism? Am I injecting my "SJW politics" into the game by correcting them, or by posting this?

I would hope logically you'd answer "no, that's all fine and fair" - but then why is it wrong for Christina or Alexandra to similarly share their perspective and defend themselves? I would personally not have been as violent or blunt as the author either, but as someone who can only generally imagine what its like to be treated as "less than" every. single. minute of the day, since I get treated as "less than" a few times a week, I also don't really have the right to tell someone that their anger or protest is inappropriate. We can't endorse a community that does stuff like ask women "are you hear with your boyfriend/husband? You look GREAT in that dress. Are you free later? Do you know how to play? Do you just play for the pictures? Are you just doing this for attention from men?" AND also say "whoa, calm down lady, it's just a game" when they get upset at that treatment.

I was a bit nervous about the title here, but this article was dead-on. Many here are quick to say we need to protect valid criticism, but that wasn't the issue here. Christina didn't leave because of "criticism" - it's not like people were telling her she got the colors wrong or ought to have used metal instead of foam on her costume or she should switch to "Urban Decay" for makeup because it doesn't look as tacky and smeared after being in costume all day, or whatever and she couldn't take it. She left because of persistent harassment that crossed the line from respectful criticism to personal attack. The defense of criticism is a borderline non sequitur - it's like leaping into a discussion of how to prevent arson by adding "hey, just remember, roasting marshmallows in your backyard is great though. Let's just remember that some fires are helpful and maybe be a little easier on the arsonist, okay?"

The fact that there are so many comments here on MTGS are in defense of Jeremy, or a leap to "if you tell me I can't do as I please to others you are the oppressor and problem!!!!" is as depressing as it is utterly unsurprising. You hit the nail on the head. If you choose to spend your days protecting and defending Nazis, Fascists, rapists, misogynists, and internet trolls, even if you yourself feel you are NOT a Nazi, Fascist, rapist, misogynist, or troll, you can't be surprised to find that you are unwelcome in private communities due to the company YOU have chosen to keep, and the hill YOU have chosen to die on. You really should take a long, hard look at why you feel that this is the side you want to be on if you are uncomfortable with the labels that it entails.

One of the great lies of the 20th century is that all opinions are equal and sacred, that your ignorance is as valuable and valid as my knowledge, and that there is no objective truth. You are absolutely entitled to the opinion that Jeremy is right, that Christina is a crybaby, and that perhaps to go further, women are objects for your amusement or should only wear things that conform to your standards of beauty. You are also entitled to the opinion that the Earth is flat, but that isn't going to help you pass an Astronomy class or leap off the edge of the planet, and you are entitled to the opinion that gravity is a lie but that isn't going to let you take to the air on your own power. You're entitled to the opinion that all medicine is quackery and all nutrition is part of a conspiracy - take a decade off eating healthy and visiting doctors or taking any medicine and get back to me on how you feel. And you will face criticism by those that actually study, learn, research, and listen instead of forming a snap opinion based on their personal, anecdotal, and frequently privileged evidence. That criticism 100% means you will face consequences for sharing the opinions that underline and define Nazis, Fascists, rapists, pedophiles, and misogynists around the world.

I'd say that's the only misstep here. I am not calling you a Nazi - but your spirited defense of them is cause for concern and says a lot about your underlying beliefs and attitudes. If being lumped in with someone that, 10 years ago, we almost all agreed was synonymous with "punchable jerkwads and universal villains" is making you feel discomfort, perhaps it is your beliefs, and not my connecting of the dots, that is the problem.