justicebeliever

Just to be clear, its possible to oppose the change because you find the logic behind it insufficient or ill-reasoned. Yes? Depends on the change. Are we talking about powersets or AT's - something that will have extended ramifications when the change is executed? Big ramifications to a broad base of players, regardless of whether the change is well executed or not. Yes...let's have lots and lots of debate on that. If I change my mind and want a new bio for my character, no matter how bad or ill-reasoned you think I am, then no, you really shouldn't get an opinion on whether I change it or not. This lies in between - it will have no ramifications except to the small villain playerbase (sorry it's true), but not all of them, just the even smaller amount of that base who reads the mission objectives carefully, but not all of them, just the even smaller amount of that base that actually likes to immerse themselves in the storyline, and not even all of them, just the few that actually care about the quality of the content. So for that small minority - I say they are the most impacted, why not allow them to make the change. Is there a bigger stakeholder I am missing? Also, my suggestion was that someone from the community propose a new storyline to the community and the Dev's...so in that case, where's the risk?

I don't see how this arc is any different from Terra or blinding the two children so the guy can creep on their mother. If you can't see the connection i can't help you. I've said: Yeah. This discussion might spark other discussions of problematic arc. Like Terra in particular. That's not a slippery slope. That's people continuing a conversation. The slippery slope part comes from the idea that such continuing discussions WILL result in the banning of female NPCs. Or result in them becoming immune to damage. Or some other "All Violence is unnacceptable!" ending. The part where you go from A to B right over over to P238 and hit cricial mass. I don't know how to convey that to you. I can't help you if you're dedicated to not comprehending. Super Atom - I agree 100% with what you just said. The conversations might continue...and in fact, probably guaranteed at this point, more so by the people who keep pushing back on the change who are causing others like me to dig in more and more. The conversations continuing isn't the slippery slope. There is no slippery slope. No one is going to suggest banning female NPC's, making them immune to damage, or saying all violence is not allowed. Since those outcomes are beyond the extreme in likelihood (I mean your odds of getting struck by lightning and winning the lottery, in the same day, are higher), it brings us back to the discussion on this particular change.

There are not 2 sides to the slippery slope. It is a logical fallacy used to generate fear. That's it. Slippery Slope assumes that once one change is made there will be no stopping future changes. But the fallacy is that you (or the Dev's or whoever is invoked in the discussion) is powerless against future changes. But that's not how life works. It's a series of decisions one by one...

You're entirely avoiding the point just to dismiss me and its becoming annoying. I don't want this changed because i don't think its a problem and i wouldn't want anything else to be changed for the same reasons this one is suggested be changed for. Its not a leap or stretch to make the assumption that this will continue forward to more and more especially when its been boiled down to a claim of misogynistic writing. No one, and I mean no one, except those who oppose this change are making this suggesting. It's fear-mongering, and it has no basis in reality. And...so what? What if someone rewrote every single story line that has also been cited by those opposed to change. Are you suggesting that the existing story lines absolutely cannot be improved on? I'm really unclear here on what it is you are defending? Are you afraid that all of CoV will get reduced to storylines about people who fail to spay or neuter their pets?

To quote Ricky Gervais, "just because you're offended by something, doesn't mean your right." Or as Stephen Fry commented about saying something is offensive, "it has no meaning, it has no purpose, and it has no reason to be respected as a phrase." Where do we draw the line on making sure content isn't offensive? I don't know what the answer to that question would be, but the story arc doesn't teach that anything Harris does is okay to do. If it had, I might be on board with changing something about it. But it explicitly treats it as a bad act and not a morally acceptable course of action. Rylas - I like how you post. You are evenhanded, and don't add drama. (I mean that) With respect to Mr. Gervais - I agree, that's why we have the discussions. With respect to Mr. Fry, I believe plenty have reasons have been given, beyond "I'm offended" (which is what I believe he was referring to - people just saying they are offended without any real insight about how/why). I don't know the answer to your question about where to draw the line. But since we are still miles away from any morally reprehensible lines, let's focus on this situation, and not the ones that could be. I agree that the story doesn't, for me, need to be changed. I think it's bad writing, and that could always use a change. But I'm not opposed to someone proposing a rewrite., and I wouldn't want to dig in on an area where I don't have a vested personal interest in the status quo. And I think that's where we are getting off in some different tangents. We are assuming that any change to the story would only be worse - bad assumption - odds are 50/50 it could be better. We are assuming that there are suggestions here of wholesale content changes, and there are no such suggestions. People keep throwing out an argument of "I don't see the need for change", and that's fine. But unless there is an argument to keep it as is (like - hey this is great writing, or this is a great morality lesson I'd want to share with my kids), then what's the harm in changing it?

This is where that whole "self awareness" concept I was talking about. Nowhere in the post you quoted, did he attack someone's morality. He literally just made a post about not liking the suggested changes and nothing more. Seriously, he suggested that the poster doesn't think women of domestic violence are worth rescuing. Seems like a morality attack to me That is literally NOT what was said. Of course it's not literally what he said. If I took it literally, I would think he was questioning the need to rescue domestic violence victims himself. And that women should just rise above domestic violence on their own. But that would make the poster a monster, and I do not think that little of Castrum. So the only alternative is that he was suggesting the OP had that attitude.

and thus the "slippery slope" argument represents itself. If you don't have a personal stake, where's the slope? I think preventing people from making changes, when I am not personally impacted, on the grounds of "well I just don't like change" seems a rather restricting view for a MMORPG where change is norm...

Agree 100%. No ands, ifs, or buts... Well one question - Would you...kick...the ball? +1 Inf

Women who need rescuing from domestic violence don't exist? Cool story bro. Maybe she just needed to suddenly become an Uberfrau like in your dialog edit. What are you talking about? It's not a real story...It's a story that HE wrote...Are we in such a place that we can't even criticize our own writing? Seriously...If you don't like the changes he's suggesting than don't like them - but attacking people's morality over this? Seems unnecessary This is where that whole "self awareness" concept I was talking about. Nowhere in the post you quoted, did he attack someone's morality. He literally just made a post about not liking the suggested changes and nothing more. Seriously, he suggested that the poster doesn't think women of domestic violence are worth rescuing. Seems like a morality attack to me

I think changing something because people are offended by it, when I don't have a personal stake keeping it as is, seems appropriate to me.

Leogunner - I think you are treading into a much more deeply political space than these forums allow. I hear your argument, and your passion. I know you aren't trolling here, but tread carefully, there is a code of conduct. But rather turning this into an unwinnable game of personal life philosophies that no one can win...let me ask you - what do you like about the story that makes you want to keep it as is without edits?

I don't care if the story line gets changed. I do care that it could lead to more story lines being changed under the same premise. But this is where the slippery slope argument falls apart. 1.) It supposes that one change will most certainly lead to a 2nd change - no one who has suggested changing the storyline has made the insinuation 2.) It supposes that we can't have a separate discussion, based on the merits, when the next change is requested. So instead of discussion this storyline on IT's merits, we are discussion potential future storyline requests based on potential merits... If you don't care about this storyline, then just leave it at that. "I don't care if we change this storyline, but I don't want us to go willy-nilly and change every storyline..." is a perfectly valid opinion without jumping into a slippery slope.

Imagine telling the victim of a crime that they have to shelve their sense of disenfranchisement because the offense against them isn't, I dunno, fashionable or something. EggKooKoo - you are clearly just playing devil's advocate here, or the argument would be - let's get rid of CoV in totality. And City of Heroes, because it too deals with violence... But since that isn't your argument (and if it is, you picked an odd game to play), let's stick the specifics and not abstract them beyond the pale. And I'm also assuming that when you suggest gender violence is "fashionable" you are being facetious, which would be unhelpful in a serious discussion about a serious issue. So my question to you - why are you for the current storyline as is and unchanged?

In this case, there is a binary decision that can be made... a.) Change the story b.) Keep it as it is OR (I just said binary didn't I) c.) I don't care...but I don't have an issue with the story If you are C - then just say so. But don't get in the way of people who are offended and would like to see a change. If you are not C, then pick - are you A or B? And if you are B - please tell me why you want to KEEP the story. Saying it doesn't need to be changed isn't really an argument. Nothing in the entire game needs to be changed. The whole game could live in a bubble of non-change forever and no one's life would be harmed. So do you really care? And if so, why?

You still can sell those Large Inspy's for several ten's of thousands. And if you pick up Inner Inspiration from the P2W vendor in atlas, you can do it over and over and over again...

I'm a second person over-reacting to this story line. It genuinely bothers me. Why? Do you get upset every time you have to kill a female in game purely because they're a female? Should females never be used in tragedy? Should we only allow men to have tragic FICTIONAL story lines that progress a dialogue about the entire situation? Not in this situation it isn't, it's directly targeting violence twords women which there are other arcs that do so. To assume eventually the same people would want those changed is not unreasonable. By my count there are at least 4 people who aren't a fan of the storyline. So let's at least not pretend that any ONE person is the issue here. It's clearly a divisive issue... So let's turn this around...Why are you arguing FOR the storyline so much. What about the storyline do you like so much that editing it would cause you to enjoy the game less? And no, I am not insinuating that ANYONE likes the storyline because it's about killing women. If you do think that, you are a monster and should have no voice here. So I'm assuming ALL the posters here do not have that as their motivation. EDIT: Changed "removing" to "editing"...No one is advocating removing the storyline wholesale (which is a fact - not ONE poster has advocated for this)

Most slippery slopes never slip. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Slippery_slope. I post this not to demean your argument, because I believe it's well intentioned. But they always assume that there can't be a middle ground between one example and everything... But regardless, I'm with Steampunkette, who, like me, has suggested that the story need NOT be changed. I'd be fine with a warning if the storyline does trigger people in a bad way, as long as they are provided an out (their gameplay shouldn't be stopped if they need to skip it). I'd also be OK with someone (from the community) rewriting it and suggesting that to the community. Who know's, we might like it better...

Women who need rescuing from domestic violence don't exist? Cool story bro. Maybe she just needed to suddenly become an Uberfrau like in your dialog edit. What are you talking about? It's not a real story...It's a story that HE wrote...Are we in such a place that we can't even criticize our own writing? Seriously...If you don't like the changes he's suggesting than don't like them - but attacking people's morality over this? Seems unnecessary

I should point out that I am in the vocal minority on long TFs (especially Dr Q. or even ITF if it isn't a speedrun merit-farm) If I'm going to be here for hours I want to enjoy myself. I think it is a HUGE mistake to put your head down and just "grind" the longer TFs... adding just a few minutes (in the big scheme of things) to banter and role-play actually makes the thing FEEL much shorter and more enjoyable. I'll add my voice to yours...I really hate just grinding thru TF's...It's so much more fun (in fact it's only really fun) if you stop along the way to smell the sewers and chat about it.

It's always been like this...my trick from above was something I've done since I first learned binds in Live... Being a melee scrapper can be so annoying when everything you target is out of range...

Well the forums are "in development" themselves...One of the things they want to do soon is replace the current software with something more robust. I agree that searching and finding information is difficult... But, we also have a lot of veteran posters who have seen these posts, and know how to find them...So post in a place, ask the question - is there a good guide for healing? - and someone will post that guide within the day...

I never once in any post I have ever made, said "your idea has no value". But I do agree that crazy side projects are often catalysts for some really cool innovation that would otherwise not come about. And if the Dev's are passionate about it, it won't harm me... And I would...still...kick the ball

You're wrong. I mean, it's not "your wrong", it's "you're wrong", so, you're wrong. ... ... Captain Pedant awaaayyyyyyyyyyyy Also +1 Inf for grammar check

You're wrong. I knew it was coming...surprised it took you longer than a minute...+1 Inf

Well, the whole wrong place, wrong time still applies even on the internet. And of course, just saying "your wrong" doesn't usually win fans...