Full Games List
Featured Games
New Games
Reviews
Media
Images
Blogs
Game Updates
Images Feedback Summary
Game Design Highlights
Tutorials
Articles
Scripts
Utilities / Plugins
Resources
Engines
Engine Bulletins
What is Makerscore?
Past Events
Achievements
Misaos
Forums
Post History
Chat
New to RMN?
Full Store List
RMN Music Pack (free)
Profile
Locker
Play ListsSTATUS
Posts 
CloseYou know, I don't agree with JonTron, and I never liked him. I've never understood what people like about him. That said, that a man can absolutely be destroyed in today's society for speaking his mind is terrible and totally indicative of how sick our society is, but I really don't see how Playtonic had much of a choice. Regardless of whether or not a person should be allowed to express his or her opinion, a company, an organization, and their product, has an image that they have to maintain.
Corfaisus
"It's frustrating because - as much as Corf is otherwise an irredeemable person - his 2k/3 mapping is on point." ~ psy_wombats
7874
Another question is: do you feel the Kickstarter backers have a right to demand a refund for an as-of-yet unreleased product solely on the grounds that Jontron no longer has a voice-over in it? And do you feel like the Steam page is a valid venue to voice their disappointment?
http://steamcommunity.com/app/360830/discussions/
I personally believe Jontron should get a partial refund of his backing money (assuming he's a backer) down to the next lowest tier seeing as he's no longer a voice actor in the game. Aside from that, I think the people demanding refunds are mostly Jontron fans who backed the man instead of the game, therefore Playtonic has no need to refund their money seeing as it's understood they never cared about the game anyway (if they did, they'd still be happy with the product they backed).
http://steamcommunity.com/app/360830/discussions/
I personally believe Jontron should get a partial refund of his backing money (assuming he's a backer) down to the next lowest tier seeing as he's no longer a voice actor in the game. Aside from that, I think the people demanding refunds are mostly Jontron fans who backed the man instead of the game, therefore Playtonic has no need to refund their money seeing as it's understood they never cared about the game anyway (if they did, they'd still be happy with the product they backed).
I understand them (Playtonic) as much as I understand Disney for giving Pewdiepie the boot. Like Piano, I do think it's kind of insane how much backlash someone can get for speaking its mind.
I've liked JonTron as a comedian/Youtuber for a long time and I will continue to like him as such.
I've liked JonTron as a comedian/Youtuber for a long time and I will continue to like him as such.
I just want one big kickstarter game that doesn't have some big controversy surrounding it before release. Is that too much to ask?
Corfaisus
Another question is: do you feel the Kickstarter backers have a right to demand a refund for an as-of-yet unreleased product solely on the grounds that Jontron no longer has a voice-over in it? And do you feel like the Steam page is a valid venue to voice their disappointment?
http://steamcommunity.com/app/360830/discussions/
That is a whole other can of worms.
Okay, whether JonTron is in the equation or not, I know the specific answer is "no". As long as the product is eventually delivered, there is no recourse for a refund. In fact, I'm going to go ahead and say, in my own opinion, no. I saw the earliest Kickstarter pages. It did not give a cast list. It simply told us what the game was. If I recall correctly, they ended the Kickstarter because they had met their goals, and by then, they still didn't have a cast. Even if they did, these people did not pay for JonTron, they invested in Yooka-Laylee.
It's a fundraiser. I know I'm not going to get my 10 dollars left because Bernie Sanders didn't get elected. The Salvation Army isn't going to give your money back because they didn't use it on the city you were donating for. People need to start being responsible for the decisions they make. This "do-over" culture shit we're establishing is for the birds. "Oh, let me do that again! I changed my mind!" Fuck that noise. It's all because the vocal minority in society can't handle having to deal with consequences. JonTron's dismissal is a logical consequence of business. JonTron got in the news for an issue that specifically ran counter to something the product is trying to represent, and his dismissal came as a natural consequence of the publicity he generated and its effect on his association with the product. It's the normal course of doing business.
SgtMettool
I just want one big kickstarter game that doesn't have some big controversy surrounding it before release. Is that too much to ask?
Well, it is actually. Again, having to deal with a problem that makes you look bad is the normal course of doing business. For a company dealing with public, it would be odd, and actually quite suspicious, if they were able to conduct business from start to conclusion without any kind of setback.
Good for Playtronic, fuck JonTron.
Did the Pillars of Eternity suffer any big controversy? I kickstarted it but I never followed the development but never heard of any over the regular game news white noise. Hell I still haven't started it (like half of my steam library).
author=SgtMettool
I just want one big kickstarter game that doesn't have some
big controversy surrounding it before release. Is that too much to ask?
Did the Pillars of Eternity suffer any big controversy? I kickstarted it but I never followed the development but never heard of any over the regular game news white noise. Hell I still haven't started it (like half of my steam library).
LockeZ
I'd really like to get rid of LockeZ. His play style is way too unpredictable. He's always like this too. If he ran a country, he'd just kill and imprison people at random until crime stopped.
5958
Apparently having an opinion on this issue is a thing that gets you fired from game design jobs, so you probably shouldn't talk on a game design forum about your opinion on it.
author=pianotmi'm really struggling to understand your point of view here, how is a company dropping a working relationship due to a party publicly expressing white supremacist views reflective of a sick society?
That said, that a man can absolutely be destroyed in today's society for speaking his mind is terrible and totally indicative of how sick our society is.
I'm interested; how is JonTron considered a white supremacist? I thought he just mentioned a bunch of stuff from some articles he had read and that you're today painted as a white supremacist if you, as a white person, speak up in what you believe is the best interest of your race. Shouldn't everyone be able to speak their mind equally on topics concerning their race?
This is his statement:
I don't know how or why, but I am pretty much sure that I am now labeled as a racist/Nazi/White Supremacist, hater etc. here because I don't consider JonTron to be one. I really hope that's not the case though. :/
I don't remember everything he said in the debate, so take what I'm saying with a grain of salt.
This is his statement:
I don't know how or why, but I am pretty much sure that I am now labeled as a racist/Nazi/White Supremacist, hater etc. here because I don't consider JonTron to be one. I really hope that's not the case though. :/
I don't remember everything he said in the debate, so take what I'm saying with a grain of salt.
author=Luiishu535
I'm interested; how is JonTron considered a white supremacist?
- He believes there's a Mexican plot to take over the US
- He thinks that minority communities are "turning everyone against each other."
- He expresses ludicrous concerns that the "white race" is ending
- He believes that all black people are inherently more violent than white people
- He supports the viewpoints of other white supremacists most prominently Steve King, LePen and Geert Wilders.
In particular Kings statement that "(we) can't restore our civilisation with somebody else's babies"
- It's worth noting that almost everybody, left and right alike, have condemned King's statements with the exception of everybody's favourite holocaust denier David Duke.
- He thinks that current immigration is to whites what apartheid was to South Africans.
Basically, he's hit every single talking point in the dictionary of white supremacy. This is not how healthy individuals think.
Corfaisus
"It's frustrating because - as much as Corf is otherwise an irredeemable person - his 2k/3 mapping is on point." ~ psy_wombats
7874
In defense of Jontron, he's actually a first-generation Iranian immigrant, so if anything he's just a nationalist and not a white supremacist. He's also a bit of an airhead and has become the go-to guy for the likes of Sargon of Akkad and Mister Metokur (people who've constructed entire monetized platforms from creating and exploiting divisions). Frankly, I think he's just gotten himself swept up into a crowd that would drop him immediately if he even so much as stepped a little out of line (so essentially any crowd). Hell, even MundaneMatt (yes, that MundaneMatt) got called out on for "virtue signalling" when he said something incredibly dumb and insensitive about a female teacher preying on a male student (essentially dismissing the wrongs she committed because she had a "troubled past").
We also shouldn't forget that one person's facts and another person's facts are both equally factual, just not indicative of a consistent and widespread problem. People always point to third world countries for how bad things really are, yet they forget about the individual in their own first world country who's suffering from their own experiences with a wage gap and systemic sexism/racism/homo/transphobia. These things are things that actually happen to some but not always to others, hence why we have such an ardent divide on the talking points of things like privilege and feminism.
About the video: around 4:12 he said he's getting back to comedy which he "does better anyway". I just wish he'd direct his comedy towards video game criticism instead of movie/drug psa (?) criticism. It was a lot better during that era.
We also shouldn't forget that one person's facts and another person's facts are both equally factual, just not indicative of a consistent and widespread problem. People always point to third world countries for how bad things really are, yet they forget about the individual in their own first world country who's suffering from their own experiences with a wage gap and systemic sexism/racism/homo/transphobia. These things are things that actually happen to some but not always to others, hence why we have such an ardent divide on the talking points of things like privilege and feminism.
About the video: around 4:12 he said he's getting back to comedy which he "does better anyway". I just wish he'd direct his comedy towards video game criticism instead of movie/drug psa (?) criticism. It was a lot better during that era.
ESBYpianotmi'm really struggling to understand your point of view here, how is a company dropping a working relationship due to a party publicly expressing white supremacist views reflective of a sick society?
That said, that a man can absolutely be destroyed in today's society for speaking his mind is terrible and totally indicative of how sick our society is.
Of course, if you read the whole post, you'll realize I said no such thing. Either that, or you DID read the whole thing and completely failed to understand that I was defending the company's decision to broom JonTron's ass.
Corfaisus
Hell, even MundaneMatt (yes, that MundaneMatt) got called out on for "virtue signalling" when he said something incredibly dumb and insensitive about a female teacher preying on a male student (essentially dismissing the wrongs she committed because she had a "troubled past").
I don't remember what he said, or if I even watched the video, so I don't know if I would have agreed with him, but I could see it potentially pissing me off, because I did, in fact, unsub from him and no longer watched any of his videos, for another reason I can't remember, but it really pissed me off, to the point where I told him to go to Hell in the comments.
author=Luiishu535
I'm interested; how is JonTron considered a white supremacist? I thought he just mentioned a bunch of stuff from some articles he had read and that you're today painted as a white supremacist if you, as a white person, speak up in what you believe is the best interest of your race. Shouldn't everyone be able to speak their mind equally on topics concerning their race?
no, they should not be able to equally speak their mind.
This is a serious answer that is informed by studying the history of "race" as a social construct, and hell, even focusing on immigration history in the US
When I say this, I'm making a distinction between, race (tends to focus on physical traits of a group), ethnicity (tends to focus on cultural traits of a group), and nationality (tends to focus on where someone lives and their relationship to that place).
plenty of diff spots around the world have their own approaches to race/ethnicity/nationality, but thanks to colonialism and globalism, it's very hard to be 100% uninfluenced by the view of race that stemmed ultimately from colonialism. in the case of jontron, specifically, he's in the US and has referenced US-specific issues, so the convos about him are very US-centric
Especially if someone is white, the moment they start talking about "the best interest of the white race", they are going to be sipping from a well white supremacists have been pissing in since the 17th (arguably 18th) century. Just to emphasize: when a white person "speaks up in what they believe is the best interest of their race", that is something white folks, as a group, have been doing for centuries. Usually through race-based violence and redirecting resources away from those who aren't considered white
that shit gets people killed, and sometimes, the best way to help out is to give someone else the room to speak. if you view this as "giving someone room to speak", yes that does also mean "taking room away from someone else"... but there hasn't been an equal amount of space to begin with
like I don't want to write a dissertation on this, so i'm trying to be brief for once, but i watched his statement and you know what really stood out to me?
he never says "I do not support white supremacists or their beliefs". that's not reading into something he said. there is at least ONE THING he could have said that might help him out of the "people think he's a white supremacist" hole...and he didn't say it. at least pewdiepie said "I am not an antisemite, I don't support the neonazis praising me" in his half-assed (maybe 3/4ths assed?) "dealing with recent controversy" vid.
i mean, i'm echoing solitarye's "not a high bar to clear" sentiment. the closest jontron gets is that he is not "ethno-nationalist". he claims that he understands how historically "african-americans" have gotten a raw deal, then compares antiblackness to how the irish were initially treated. that's like comparing durians to pine trees. not even pinecones, pine trees. The best you can say is "they are both plants", the same the closest comparison you can make is "these are both examples of discrimination". they played out totally different ways with very different modern implications.
I could do a cited play-by-play commentary of the things he says in that video. but I'll limit myself to this: arguing exactly what flavor of shit he's been acting like isn't a useful conversation. Regardless of jontron's personal identity, he's been saying shit that is awfully similar to white supremacist talking points, now and historically. Note that throughout this post i have gone to great pains to avoid saying he is a white supremacist because i don't want to have that argument.
I'm saying it doesn't matter what we call jontron, that doesn't change what he's been doing (using his platform to echo, again, some very specific talking points that have a lot in common with white supremacists). I hope that platform becomes smaller, because there's enough of that in the world already
ESBY gave a bullet point list of some ways jontron's statements have led to him being considered a white supremacist, and there's all those articles he references in his video if anyone wants to find out why some folks think this.
(also note i'm not like, mad at you or anything luiishu, idk i always feel like i come off mad in these things. the bolding is for anyone who sees a wall of text, won't be arsed to read it, then quote me and bring up something i already addressed)
author=Corfaisus
We also shouldn't forget that one person's facts and another person's facts are both equally factual, just not indicative of a consistent and widespread problem.
man, I feel truth is ultimately subjective and ppl can believe very different, true things, but this is still not a good standard to apply to every aspect of your life. not all facts are created equal. Some of them should be slam dunked into the garbage
Housekeeping
3571
Regarding the "everyone has a right to an opinion" argument: while this is true, if your opinion constitutes treating large groups of people as villainous cartoon characters who exist purely to destroy your culture because their insides are filled with bile and secret envy for your prosperity, then you shouldn't be surprised when other people voice their opinions that they no longer like you very much.
Corfaisus
"It's frustrating because - as much as Corf is otherwise an irredeemable person - his 2k/3 mapping is on point." ~ psy_wombats
7874
author=PentagonBuddy
not all facts are created equal. Some of them should be slam dunked into the garbage
Without creating an even bigger social war than we're already in the process of dealing with, how do you plan to throw away someone else's facts that you say are unequal? If we aren't careful with our methodology, we'll end up with people thinking they're unwelcome in society, and that's the last thing we need.
author=Housekeeping
Regarding the "everyone has a right to an opinion" argument:
Everyone has a right to voice the very factual things they've witnessed without blemishing their witness with subjective quibbles.
Opinions are a dime a dozen.
Imagine this scenario that probably happens everyday (but don't quote me on this because it's a hypothetical with no factual basis):
Person 1: He spit on me.
Person 2: Well, you deserved it.
Outsider : Who cares if he did (opinion)? You spit on him (fact).
At the end of the day, a factual witness would be that person 1 was wronged by person 2. There's physical evidence that this has occurred.
Housekeeping
3571
What facts did he mention? I wasn't responding to you directly but to something I'd been hearing a lot. I only watched like five minutes of his debate with that streamer, so maybe I just entered into a conversation I wasn't prepared for, haha.
author=Corfaisus
Without creating an even bigger social war than we're already in the process of dealing with, how do you plan to throw away someone else's facts that you say are unequal? If we aren't careful with our methodology, we'll end up with people thinking they're unwelcome in society, and that's the last thing we need.
Things like white nationalism, Islamophobia, antisemitism, etc. aren't 'disagreements' or 'differences in opinion.' They are hate speech that can lead to people being hurt.
White supremacy is an ideology designed to hurt others. That is its purpose. Its goal. Anyone who claims otherwise is lying. If someone is spouting that bullshit and claiming it's 'just their opinion,' be wary of what they've revealed about their true intentions.
author=Corfaisus
Without creating an even bigger social war than we're already in the process of dealing with, how do you plan to throw away someone else's facts that you say are unequal?
by establishing clear standards for "believing this probably harm less people than not believing this" rather than strictly focusing on "is this true/false". Things that seem to have more potential to hurt others get dunked in the garbage, things that don't get to stick around for further consideration.
2 of my personal standards:
If I accept this as true, what are some possible consequences? I can look at what's happened in the past when people accepted this as true, and what they've done while believing this to be true. In my understanding, people are generally pretty shit about predicting the effects about something. I tend to err on the side of caution and planning for "what if this has negative repercussions? how will I deal with that?"
Is someone bringing fabricated evidence up to support their claim? Why do they feel the need to make shit up if they think they're saying something true? Like, fact-checking can actually be pretty hard, and it's real easy to fall prey to confirmation bias (paying attention only to information that fits what you already believe) so... that's a complicated process, but it's worth doing.
Honestly tho that might sound pretty vague. I'm not gonna pretend i know the answers to something like "how to end social warfare", but i know how i, personally, approach "which facts will i trash and what will i accept?". and depending on the topic, i might care enough to tell people "hey I think it's better to think X than Y". Especially if it's something that, y'know, directly affects my life.
I also don't care about avoiding "an even bigger social war" when it comes to discussing white supremacist views. There are some things I'll have a "civil debate" about, and even then it depends on who i'm talking to. I won't have a civil conversation with someone who questions my humanity as one of their basic assumptions. This is kind of a defining factor of how white supremacy works: either you're white, or you're less than human/your life has inherently less value. So I won't have a debate about it, and i might fight to keep a space i'm in free of people who think that
Is that equality? no. do I care? also no.
This also doesn't apply to how i conduct myself with all topics or contexts, but i got no shame about loudly saying "hey if you think white genocide exists, one of us needs to leave the room". sometimes I'll just leave, sometimes i'll fight to get the other person to leave. it just depends
author=Corfaisus
If we aren't careful with our methodology, we'll end up with people thinking they're unwelcome in society, and that's the last thing we need.
I actually think it's a net benefit. this is letting some people know hey, if you espouse white supremacist views, you are not welcome in all spaces, you will be denied support, your platform will shrink, and you will face social consequences. Like, sucks for jontron personally, but i'm not convinced his life's gonna be ruined or anything.
I'm well aware that if you slam the door on people like that, they're just gonna find somewhere else to gather and tend to become more extreme in their beliefs. So it actually is important to try and bridge empathy gaps and have honest conversations with individual people... but if someone isn't willing to listen to begin with then that convo is doomed from the start. It's complicated to deal with, but I don't think the answer is "give everyone equal access to all spaces all the time"
Again, i'm focusing on the white supremacy angle here. If someone comes to a convo thinking "this person isn't white, therefore their life has less value than mine", i'm wasting my time to try and convince them otherwise. I want them to feel unwelcome so i can have some breathing room.
BONUS Q ABOUT TERMS: what do you mean when you say "fact"? I actually make very little distinction between "fact" and "opinion", same way I don't make much distinction between objectivity/subjectivity. Like, I acknowledge there are differences, i just don't think they matter much in the grand scheme of things. If someone wants to see themselves as objective, they will find a way to do so. If someone believes something is factual, they will find a way to act as if it is. How people respond to the "truth" of something can be entirely separate from how true it is/is not
