Magic The Gathering Cosplay/Deplatforming Fallout - Magic has certainly gathered. Grab your popcorn.

[Boones Farm Strawberry]

Wizards would only lose out if actual news organizations covered this. Speds sperging out on Twitter and Youtube won't get much attention.

yeah but MTG 2017 isn't little league baseball where participants are mainly heartland grassroots types; it's composed entirely on online autists

 

[captkrisma]

The corporate response was rational, but doesn't solve the overlying problem. They mentioned that they de-certified the judges, but not give them a DCI ban. As was mentioned before, a valid DCI number is required to become a judge and take the tests. So, while they're de-certified or not active (because they're locked up), nothing is stopping them from coming back into the program when they get out.

De-certification does not equal ban.

 

[Fervent Champion]

He's mentioned this before on other livestreams, but if his store gives him a burner and they get caught, the store itself is banned from WPN, so no more distribution of cards, and no more tournaments.

Thanks, I missed that completely. Still though from what he said in an interview with Arch it seems like he's was always into the more casual of the game anyway. Granted when has something not effecting them ever prevented a sped from chimping out?

 

[captkrisma]

Thanks, I missed that completely. Still though from what he said in an interview with Arch it seems like he's was always into the more casual of the game anyway. Granted when has something not effecting them ever prevented a sped from chimping out?

It was mostly for pre-release. Stores aren't allowed to sell the packs ahead of release, but can host a pre-release tournament a week early to get people excited about the upcoming set. Jeremy used to cover pre-releases but can not now.

EDIT: For clarification, streamers go to pre-release events to cover card interaction first-hand. It also helps shift the price point of certain cards if they mesh well together with current cards.

 

[CrunkLord420]

It's over, Wizards of the Coast is fucked. Creepy Rudy just dropped a reference to the judge background check controversy in one of his videos.

Jeremy being cringy as fuck.

 

[Racist Trash]

It's over, Wizards of the Coast is fucked. Creepy Rudy just dropped a reference to the judge background check controversy in one of his videos.

Rudy has been killing it of late and he does it in a really good way compared to the others which always ends in an autistic slapfight. A video a day or two ago he mocked WoTC for focusing more on politics and being Nepotistic rather than fixing glaring problems and in other cases making it worse.

 

[Test Business]

Rudy has been killing it of late and he does it in a really good way compared to the others which always ends in an autistic slapfight. A video a day or two ago he mocked WoTC for focusing more on politics and being Nepotistic rather than fixing glaring problems and in other cases making it worse.

Rudy is invested in the whole thing from a different angle at most, he runs a card shop and invests in vintage cards so he has a financial stake in the whole thing not going to shit. It is an amazing motivator compared to autistic card playing.

 

[KillThemCrackasBabies]

It's over, Wizards of the Coast is fucked. Creepy Rudy just dropped a reference to the judge background check controversy in one of his videos.

"I mean, it's silly! I mean if I wanna go buy a gun they check me..."

Yeah that's a reasonable comparison.

 

[captkrisma]

"I mean, it's silly! I mean if I wanna go buy a gun they check me..."

Yeah that's a reasonable comparison.

He deals in vintage cards. Guns would be cheaper.

 

[Racist Trash]

"I mean, it's silly! I mean if I wanna go buy a gun they check me..."

Yeah that's a reasonable comparison.

He is talking about how cheap and quick background checks are and the fact that gun stores can make a profit off them, other card games do them but Wizards won't.

 

[proteus4994]

"I mean, it's silly! I mean if I wanna go buy a gun they check me..."

Yeah that's a reasonable comparison.

His point was that it costs $5, the entire cost can be pawned off on the customer, and WOTC could actually MAKE money from doing it like gun shops do. Therefore there's literally no reason why WOTC doesn't do background checks.

I feel like you listened to the first six words and then turned off the video and said "AH HA I GOT YOU YOU STUPID TREE HUGGER!"

 

[KillThemCrackasBabies]

His point was that it costs $5, the entire cost can be pawned off on the customer, and WOTC could actually MAKE money from doing it like gun shops do. Therefore there's literally no reason why WOTC doesn't do background checks.

I feel like you listened to the first six words and then turned off the video and said "AH HA I GOT YOU YOU STUPID TREE HUGGER!"

A gun would make sense to background check for, is the thing.

"Aha, but wouldn't it be a great moneymaking opportunity? Riddle me that!". No, because it'll strike the vast majority of people who would be asked to do it as unnecessary. Aren't all of you people advocates of "the consumer" to begin with? How many people do you know would actually go for that shit? I listened to what he said, and then kept listening, and then acknowledged he literally had nothing else to work with other than 'I mean you'd get some cash if you knew what the fuck you were doing...', with it just sort of assumed that would ever actually fly with anyone who would be asked to do so.

I understand most of you think sweet sweet Jeremy has a super good point and everyone is out to just fuck with him for no reason, but there's no way none of you think that's actually a bulletproof system they refused to adopt out of sheer stubbornness or spite of the guy who thought of it.

 

[proteus4994]

Aren't all of you people advocates of "the consumer" to begin with? How many people do you know would actually go for that shit?

I can only speak for myself, but if I signed up to be a judge for WOTC and they were like "Our events have a lot of children, so we run background checks on our judges to make sure they're not child molesters." it would seem completely reasonable to me.

Hell, just roll it into whatever registration fee there is in the first place.

Edit:

there's no way none of you think that's actually a bulletproof system they refused to adopt out of sheer stubbornness or spite of the guy who thought of it.

I don't think anyone's saying it's bulletproof, I think most of us are saying "checking to see if someone has a history of child molestation is better than not checking to see if someone has a history of child molestation"

 

[Done]

A gun would make sense to background check for, is the thing.

"Aha, but wouldn't it be a great moneymaking opportunity? Riddle me that!". No, because it'll strike the vast majority of people who would be asked to do it as unnecessary. Aren't all of you people advocates of "the consumer" to begin with? How many people do you know would actually go for that shit? I listened to what he said, and then kept listening, and then acknowledged he literally had nothing else to work with other than 'I mean you'd get some cash if you knew what the fuck you were doing...', with it just sort of assumed that would ever actually fly with anyone who would be asked to do so.

I understand most of you think sweet sweet Jeremy has a super good point and everyone is out to just fuck with him for no reason, but there's no way none of you think that's actually a bulletproof system they refused to adopt out of sheer stubbornness or spite of the guy who thought of it.

No disrespect dude, but as much as you continually claim Jeremy is cringey for trying to forcestart #Magicgate, I'd probably say you yourself are being pretty cringey right now for trying to force stop this thread.

Like, I am honestly trying to understand what you want to achieve by shrieking every time Jeremy or someone else makes a video about WOTC's practices, do you want him/them to stop? Do you want us to stop discussing it? What exactly is your end-point here, man?

Background checks are considered routine for any job that involves being with children for any extended time, is it foolproof? No, but it's better for everyone involved in the hobby if they do it. Now one of the bigger arguments against background checks that we've seen in this thread is that they're cumbersome and impractical, but here you have a store owner saying that it isn't, with him comparing it to the established practices of the gun industry. He is clearly not trying to be hyperbolic or saying gun ownership = WOTC judgeship in terms of importance.

And the company already requires people to take multiple tests and other requirements to become judges, and they do it gladly, I am sure that whoever is autistic enough to take the time to actually sit down and study the laws of a fucking card game is probably gonna be ok with filling out a form and paying 5 bucks. There is also an element of common sense to it, in that it protects the company from any future lawsuits relating to negligence.

SJWism or not, culture war or not, Jeremy being involved or not, this is something everyone should be able to agree upon.

 

[CrunkLord420]

I really wish MTG wasn't labelled as a "kids game". I get that now with Hasbro owning WoTC it's sort of stuck in that category, but in the 90s there was this push to make "mature" nerd shit (muh graphic novels). If I had to guess I don't think WoTC was describing themselves as a "kids game" back in the day. Especially with their more edgy/satanic art style, which was even more taboo in the 90s with the religious puritanism still in style.

 

[captkrisma]

I really wish MTG wasn't labelled as a "kids game". I get that now with Hasbro owning WoTC it's sort of stuck in that category, but in the 90s there was this push to make "mature" nerd shit (muh graphic novels). If I had to guess I don't think WoTC was describing themselves as a "kids game" back in the day. Especially with their more edgy/satanic art style, which was even more taboo in the 90s with the religious puritanism still in style.

It's trying to strike a balance between skill of the player and youth. There are many examples of someone being extremely talented, to a professional level, but are very young compared to the average age. Kobe Bryant is a great example. MTG is no exception, with a 7 year old going 5-4 in her first big Grand Prix. Not good enough for day two of the tournament, but still enough to get wins over adults.

TLDR; There will always be people who can excel, regardless of age.

 

[CrunkLord420]

It's trying to strike a balance between skill of the player and youth. There are many examples of someone being extremely talented, to a professional level, but are very young compared to the average age. Kobe Bryant is a great example. MTG is no exception, with a 7 year old going 5-4 in her first big Grand Prix. Not good enough for day two of the tournament, but still enough to get wins over adults.

TLDR; There will always be people who can excel, regardless of age.

Not saying kids shouldn't play, I did plenty of "not for kid" things as a kid. I don't like the idea of doing background checks on judges and it's really only justifiable by saying "oh well you're basically a glorified babysitters because muh kids game". I don't want to live in a society where I can't freely associate, or volunteer, or participate unless I'm vetted for being the right kind of person™. These background checks pull up more than just sex offenses and muh slippery slope. Isn't the actual sex offender registry just a public thing, anyways?

Implementing these background checks make it worse for everyone, it's just a narrative being pushed by Jeremy as revenge. WoTC is still retarded and handling this all terribly, but that's what started this all in the first place.

Remember, cries of "pedophiles! terrorists! think of the children!" are most often political covers to push intrusive rules and laws.

 

[proteus4994]

I don't want to live in a society where I can't freely associate, or volunteer, or participate unless I'm vetted for being the right kind of person™. These background checks pull up more than just sex offenses and muh slippery slope. Isn't the actual sex offender registry just a public thing, anyways?

I see what you're saying, but I think what you're missing is that this isn't "the right kind of person", this is literally checking to see if you're a child molester. There's no slippery slope here. They do a background check and say "is this person a literal kiddy fiddler?"

Could WOTC eventually turn the background check into some sort of purity test? Yeah, sure, eventually maybe (although that would kinda be retarded because first and foremost WOTC and Hasbro exist to turn a profit and excluding players on dubious moral grounds is a great way to kill your product). But should we just shit on the entire idea on the basis that there might be a slippery slope, maybe, at some point in the future possibly? I don't think so.

As far as the public sex registry goes, as a large company I'd be more comfortable with paying a firm to do a real background check versus having some minimum wage employee google sex registries. I'm almost positive this would be required as some sort of legal CYA thing.

 

[CrunkLord420]

I see what you're saying, but I think what you're missing is that this isn't "the right kind of person", this is literally checking to see if you're a child molester. There's no slippery slope here. They do a background check and say "is this person a literal kiddy fiddler?"

Could WOTC eventually turn the background check into some sort of purity test? Yeah, sure, eventually maybe (although that would kinda be exceptional because first and foremost WOTC and Hasbro exist to turn a profit and excluding players on dubious moral grounds is a great way to kill your product). But should we just shit on the entire idea on the basis that there might be a slippery slope, maybe, at some point in the future possibly? I don't think so.

As far as the public sex registry goes, as a large company I'd be more comfortable with paying a firm to do a real background check versus having some minimum wage employee google sex registries. I'm almost positive this would be required as some sort of legal CYA thing.

The idea that we're going to do professional background checks on volunteer MTG judges basically implies we should background check anyone who comes into contact with kids in any capacity, which is basically everything when dealing with public settings. WoTC should investigate when reported, they should not go be going above normal professional employment standards when dealing with volunteer positions.

It's really quite crazy to imagine wizards effectively having an HR-file on these barely associated people.

 

[proteus4994]

The idea that we're going to do professional background checks on volunteer MTG judges basically implies we should background check anyone who comes into contact with kids in any capacity

Any PROFESSIONAL capacity, yes. Nobody's saying that you need to run a background check on the stranger at the park before he gives your kid a high-five.