Why were Magic players (especially on Reddit) so adamantly opposed to background checks for judges and tournament staff?

Why were Magic players (especially on Reddit) so adamantly opposed to background checks for judges and tournament staff?

Pokemon and Yu-Gi-Oh have had them for ages. It sees logical for card games children play.

Other urls found in this thread:

chroniclelive.co.uk/news/north-east-news/operation-shelter-probe-offensive-comments-14143548
blogs.magicjudges.org/conduct/2018/01/11/statement-ross-prajzner/
twitter.com/SFWRedditImages

It has gone full circle. Now the anti-SJW crowd is using noble goals to allow themselves to be bullies.

Because they always defend pedophiles who hold the "correct" political opinion. Gamergate, neoFAG and now this, each time the "progressive" cult has outright loudly defended pedophiles because they believe they are defending political allies.

There is no depth of hypocrisy and sickness to which these cultists will not sink.

You defend the idea of registered sexual offenders working with children?

Yes, of course he does. He's a member of a fucking insane cult that will excuse any crime no matter how vile if it was committed by someone who professes to be a member of that cult.

>Implying background checks for people in a prominent position for a public activity is "bullying"

That rings true, but I don't think random pedophiles from the Judge Program were a part of the progressive cult. So it's baffling that Reddit would defend them.

There are tons of pedophiles in the progressive cult, just see "anti-gamergate" and neofag as examples. That being said it was enough that the person exposing these pedophiles was a target of the progressive cult. That alone gave them license to justify the crimes of convicted pedophiles who were actively seeking contact with children.

>There are tons of pedophiles in the progressive cult, just see "anti-gamergate" and neofag as examples.

I know, especially the ones so opposed to Japanese video games with fanservice often turn out to be into real world shit.

It's just so weird to see Redditors argue for the sake of convicted sexual predators based on just flimsy reasoning. Especially considering some of those predators are the kind of people they would otherwise hate by default (creepy looking fat white guys).

They don't use logic to determine what position to take or course to follow, they use political affiliation. The "wtf I love/hate x now" meme is about this reaction.

WotC won't pay for them

The problem is that the registry is fucked. Nobody is opposed to rapists and convicted kiddy diddlers judging events, but you end up on the same list for sone asinine bullshit. Some 16 yo girl ended up on the list for taking pictures of herself.

>disgusting cultists just can't fucking help sliding in here to do a little bit of damage control real quick. After all, someone dared speak ill of a cosplayer one time.

>Everyone I don't like is a reddit tranny sjewdabbuu
Take your schizophrenia medication, Pablo

>Nobody is opposed to rapists and convicted kiddy diddlers judging events

I'm pretty opposed with that.

>everyone who isn't a member of our sickening cult is insane!!!
Yep, typical hole arguments, just like every other soyboy cultist

Because the guy who proposed it said mean things about a woman they deemed attractive and vulnerable.

There's a human factor in the decision.

I believe she was vulnerable at that moment. Her Patreon was dropping lower and lower, so her bringing up some mean Tweets from six months ago saved it.

I am a very PC, somewhat-far-leftist and I think background checks are a good idea. Harder to implement outside the US tho - background checks go through the national government.

Jeremy is a shitstain who is only taking up this mantle to spite WOTC, but that doesn't mean we should dismiss background checks for judges as a bad idea

>I am a very PC
>Jeremy is a shitstain

I'm genuinely curious (I study psychology as a hobby). How do you rationalize calling other people bad while simultaneously being almost the worst kind of person there is? Additionally, how do you do it while the people you call bad are far less bad than yourself?

>I'm a bad person and I think we should be on the look out for bad people in mtg
Well I guess it takes one to know one

Okay, I will take this bait.

Why do you think that I am the worst kind of person?

>I don't have any arguments! I know, I'll call him a redditor cultist!
>Oh no, he called me out on being a mentally deficient mongrel! AD HOMINEM REEEEEEEE
Back in the day, we'd have gassed your kind first. I want /r/thedonald to leave

Because if you assert that a person you don't like is objectively the worst person in the world, it will be so. That's how internet arguments work. Nothing can change that.

I didn't say "the worst"; I said "almost the worst". I don't know your specific beliefs, but I do know that at a minimum, you want people to be silenced and punished for things they say.

>I've been found out, better pretend to be a nazi real quick
Every fucking time. The funny part is that you actually are a nazi and every other vile thing you project onto the rest of us

Sorry. I wasn't quite accurate, but I believe you get the point regardless.

I believe that speech that disrespects identities should be punished, yes. To preempt a potential next argument - identity is different from individual / ideology

>I believe in censoring opinions I don't like
Why is it that socialists always do this?

Do you have an answer to my question?

>I believe that speech that disrespects identities should be punished, yes.

Even speech that disrespects Muslim grooming gangs?

Police in Britain does.
>chroniclelive.co.uk/news/north-east-news/operation-shelter-probe-offensive-comments-14143548

>Deleting bunch of facebook rants ir constitutes nowdays as censorship

Jeremy, I know you're upset, but at this point you look like a spoiled child throwing a tantrum because you got your favorite toy taken away. If there are registered sex offenders in the judge program (and I have yet to see proof outside of your clickbait videos), then report it to the offenders local police and let them handle it. Otherwise just stop this. You're making yourself look like a fool.

>and I have yet to see proof outside of your clickbait videos

You keeping your eyes closed is on you, not anyone else.

Yes, deleting online posts is censorship, and prosecuting people for those posts is far worse.

Then please, post that proof, and I will report them to the police.

Why would you report them to the police? Being at the stores and events is not illegal.

I don't have the links, but I know they are in Jeremy's videos.

Even the Judge Program itself acknowledges it as the truth.
blogs.magicjudges.org/conduct/2018/01/11/statement-ross-prajzner/
Even that they ignored it being reported in last July.
>Recently, it was reported that the case was sent to the [email protected] address already in July 2017. This is true. Due to an administrative error, the case was not handled at that time, and I wasn’t aware of the e-mail until it was shared on social media.

What do you do? Cry that some neckbeard was mean to a female half a year ago? Go give her more money on Patreon.

I don't want PC people to be censored either; I'm not an asshole.

kek, assblasted SJW shitbag btfo and retarded SJW/pedo organization proves themselves culpable for whatever crimes their pet pedo committed after the report got ignored. bretty good post my friend

Well, according to that blog post, the registered offender wasn't active at all in 2017, and in December he was removed from the judge program. What else do you expect them to do about it?

I don't believe I am the worst kind of person, so I can't answer your question since it relies on there being some kind of cognitive dissonance
Jeremy isn't in prison. He still has an online presence and is free to say whatever he wants. He has not been censored.
The actions taken by WOTC are capitalistic in nature - they want to make more money and so they distance themselves from toxicity.
Identity vs. Individual/Ideology
18 people were arrested for sexual exploitation? Good.
Using those 18 people's actions to defame a religion of 1billion+ people/region of 218 million people? Bad.

>lies and projection
Why do socialists always do this?

Free speech gives you a right to say what you want. It doesn't entitle you for a platform nor does it protect you from repercussions of the shit you say.

>What else do you expect them to do about it?
I think they eventually did enough by removing sexual offenders and introducing background checks.

From the very first post, this thread isn't about what more the Judge Program needs to do. This thread is about how Redditors like you support sexual offenders by being against background checks.

First, free speech does give me protection from the law (and I know that doesn't apply in this case since the events in that link didn't happen in the US, but I want to make it clear). Second, regardless of whether or not I have free speech, deleting or preventing my speech is censorship.

>No arguments
Why do frogpeople always do this?

The government didn't do shit to him. Private companies have the right to control who can or cannot do what on their property. It's like how you can tell someone to get off your front lawn if they are standing there and you don't want them there.

>Second, regardless of whether or not I have free speech, deleting or preventing my speech is censorship.

So would it be censorship to kick you out of a movie theatre if you were making so much noise the other people can't enjoy the movie?

Sorry, humans don't argue with communists.

>No arguments
kek you really do always project, that's hilarious. Now double down.

So why are you having trouble then?

You need to read the link. You should also look into other, similar occurrences.

It would be censorship. It would be acceptable for the movie theater to do. The difference between this and, for example, banning someone from Twitter is I can't press a button to be completely immune to anything you do in real life. I can do that on Twitter.

>3-word answers devoid of facts to actual arguments
why do libertarians always do this?

(Libertarian is just a guess as to your actual ideology, but you seem like a libertarian to me)

>damage control and deflection
why do numale soyboy cucks always do this?

>It would be censorship. It would be acceptable for the movie theater to do. The difference between this and, for example, banning someone from Twitter is I can't press a button to be completely immune to anything you do in real life. I can do that on Twitter.

So? Does that make it unacceptable for twitter, it's as much their private property as the movie theatre.

It would be unacceptable, yes, for the reason I gave. They would still have the right to do it and I would never even dream of trying to take away that right.

So that's an argument for WOTC banning that guy from events? Since you don't have any online button to press to stop interacting with him if he turns up an event?

I love how keyboard communists always immediately try to play the corporate rights card in response to criticism of their advocacy of censorship. The fact that they cannot even bear to speak their real opinion aloud is all the proof anyone needs that their philosophy is just as retarded and evil as it was in the 20th century.

Everything he has said has been online. He hasn't done anything in real life to diminish the experience for others.

You got a problem with corporate rights? Or are you some sort of big government fuckwit? Property rights should not be infringed, everything else is just agreements.

>Why were Magic players (especially on Reddit) so adamantly opposed to background checks for judges and tournament staff?
that’s because people on reddit are upset that Wizards is acting because of Jeremy’s videos.
they feel it validates his arguments and that Wizards is showing support for a sexist, racist individual.
if it was someone like the Professor then mtg reddit/sjws would be praising the decision.

>First, free speech does give me protection from the law
It doesn't, you don't get Carte Blanche to threaten people's lives over the internet and expect zero repurcussions.
To be clear here I'm not accusing you of doing that. I'm simply giving an example of things not protected under free speech.
>Second, regardless of whether or not I have free speech, deleting or preventing my speech is censorship.
No private company is obligated to provide you a soapbox. Facebook is not legally required to show your autistic ramblings. Wizards is not legally require to provide you an account, especially when you flagrantly and repeatedly violate their terms of service.

>continues to pretend to be interested in the rights of the same companies he screeches to try to force political correctness on every ten seconds
You're scum. The cult has affected your thought process so completely that you don't even realize how disgusting you are.

>buzzwords
Why do (You) always do this?

I do get to do that. The government infringing on my right to do so is on them, not on me.

I never said anyone is obligated to do anything for me.

>Why were Magic players (especially on Reddit) so adamantly Opposed to background checks for judges and tournament staff?
Because you are Americans.

>Pokemon and Yu-Gi-Oh have had them for ages.
Why the fuck is that a good argument? Magic HASN'T had them for longer since it's been around longer.

Oh you mean like the thousands of leftists who constantly post about assassinating trump but never face charges even though trump is supposedly a fascist? (wrong, he would never be a socialist) Even your examples drip hypocrisy.

Veeky Forums=political discussion.

You all need a fucking ban.

Ideally these people would face some legal repercussion, as well as the tea partiers who did the same for Obama.

I liked the British authorities' response to the Facebook comments mentioned earlier - don't throw people in prison for hate speech immediately but warn them that continued racist behavior will have actual consequences.

This is going to be a super unpopular opinion so feel free to get mad

>pretending that you want your oppressive rules applied equally when you only want them applied to political opponents
why do socialists ALWAYS do this?

I'm not pretending.

I hope you are only pretending to be stupid.

What about the American university professor that tweeted about wanting white genocide for Christmas? What about his students that defended him by saying university should be a place to discuss all ideas (appearently even genocide)? What if he wanted black genocide, would it be any different?

>lying and then doubling down when called on it
Honest question, why do socialists A L W A Y S do this?

>other people should face legal repercussion for shit flinging
>but not me

so many keks

How do you know he's lying? As this sorta seems recursive. 'Socialists always do X, so any socialist saying otherwise must be lying because socialists always do X'.

Yeah, that sorta should fall under it pretty heavily. As genocide involves an awful lot of murder and that's advocating crime.

>damage control
I wonder why it is so true that socialists always do this?

>but not me

But he did say they should. That was literally the first thing and second things he said, that both sides should be held accountable for it.

Yes your progressive pals are fully okay with it as long as whites are the target (despite them being whites too).

The police should show up to said professor' door and warn him that further violations will result in legal action

Refer to the British article posted earlier - person who posted it thought it was troublesome but I agree with how it was handled

I don't care what side of politics someone is on, crime is crime. You can't go about advocating criminal activities.

Then you're not progressive enough and should you attempt to gain any position in the progressive movement you'll thrown out (by being accused of rape or something like that).

If I make a death threat or am outwardly racist then yes, me too. Same goes with inciting others to do so.

I don't do those things.

Sticking with your bullshit lies this long certainly counts as doubling down, so I guess that's more proof that socialists ALWAYS do this

That's some serious no true scotsman going on there.

What if they are serious, rather than lying? How would you tell?

Progressive movement is based on the idea of progress. They need to push further and further. This is the logical result.

>Cost: WOTC is not footing the cost for these background checks, which can run over $100 a person in my area. The way this is written, all 20 employees plus people running events in the store need them--I don't even play Magic but because I organize events there it appears I need this check too.
>Utility: every sex offender judge I have heard of was not a sex offender when they became a judge, and were removed when it became clear they were. A background check is irrelevant when there is no background of bad behavior. What I HAVE seen are pedophile players. When will WOTC mandate background checks to play in their events? Oh right, never.
Also, the entire reason my LGS doesn't organize Pokemon events is because their registration system is extremely onerous.

>"""""""""""""""""""""""""they"""""""""""""""""""""""""
Nice try commie shitbag, get on the chopper and don't bother to buckle up

So what proof do you have that the other poster (second reply) and I (first and third reply) are lying

You're very lucky that I'm on a long car trip and have very little to do other than reply to you

>desperately trying to defend a system that allows active pedophiles access to children
>because you hate the person who pointed out the problem
Kill yourself

>you're very lucky i have nothing better to do

better to do than what? get baited into a useless discussion nobody here but you gives a shit about?

>doubling down
Guess you really do always lie and then always double down.

That sounds like a need to reform the system to not have obtaining legal documents be so very expensive. As that's not a WOTC-exclusive issue, there are a lot of charities, volunteer jobs or low income work that would require such a check.

t. Lawful Evil

I don't even know who tried to point this out, the entire reasoning behind my post is that this will cost stores around the world tens of thousands of dollars while failing to stop any sex offenses that go on.

Under this reasoning you should also be against any form of gun control. What say you?

>doubling down on your false objections
Why do you always do this?

>I believe that speech that disrespects identities should be punished, yes
that's pure Orwell