[Shark Noises]

Don't get me wrong: I investigate warnings, and I act on them if they're true and relevant. But callout posts are, on a very fundamental level, not about what people say they're about. There are exceptions, but generally speaking they're made for one or more of the following reasons:

OP didn't like the subject to begin with (often for bigoted reasons), and they wanted a reason, and a following, to justify and validate that.

OP wanted to gain popularity, so they made themselves look like either a victim, a hero, or both.

OP wanted to claim victim status in a private falling-out in order to preserve good standing with their own friends/their community.

OP didn't like what the subject was saying, and wanted to silence them (often for bigoted reasons).

OP genuinely just wants "revenge" on the subject, or otherwise wants to ruin their reputation and have them sent harassment.

Again, there are exceptions: there are "callouts" that just unravel a subject's lies, or point out problems in already public actions. If OP is claiming to have been personally victimized in a legitimately serious way, and especially one that indicates the subject might be a danger to others, I'm definitely more willing to believe it- one obvious example being sexual violence.

But oftentimes, callouts are incredibly personal, misleading, emotionally manipulative, blatantly untrue, or all of the above.

This person came to me on anon; I have absolutely no way of knowing what their motives are or how trustworthy they are. There is no credibility or accountability here.

And I did read the post. Lo and behold, it's riddled with emotionally manipulative language, false accusations, and the biggest reaches I've ever seen:

"DON'T READ THIS CALLOUT, IT'S SO TRIGGERING TO EVERYONE, JUST TAKE MY WORD FOR IT. But the proof is here if you REALLY don't believe me"

"Proof" is a scarce handful of screenshots taken out of context that contain emotionally evocative language, but do not support the accusations at all.

Some accusations are genuinely just weird logic leaps with no support, others are matters of personal opinion obviously driven by bigoted motives.

OP themselves expresses very publicly that they believe people who are marginalized in the ways the subject are, who speak on that marginalization, should be silenced.

I try to assume good faith here, and I want to believe this anon was just guilt-tripped and manipulated by the post in question. I don't hold any ill will here.

But anon, I want you to ask yourself:

Are the accusations you're making something you have personally investigated and found to be true?

Does this person deserve the harassment and ostracization they will likely receive as a result of your accusations?

Will you hold yourself accountable for the damage you've caused if you're wrong?

My job (and the rest of R&D) is to make everyone love some of the cards. It’s an impossible task to make everyone love all of the cards because the thing that makes one player love something will make another player hate it. There’s literally nothing we’ve ever done (and I’m not using hyperbole) that someone didn’t strongly dislike.

It’s not my job to keep anyone from hating anything. That’s a recipe for disaster. One of my 20 game design lessons is “If everyone likes your game, but no one loves it, it will fail.” It’s not enough to just make players not hate something. And making players love things requires passion, and passion goes both ways.

I do want to hear if players dislike something because if enough players truly dislike it, we will stop doing it. Ante is a classic example. March of the Machine Aftermath is another. When stuff like that happens, we stop doing it as fast as we can (just remember we work far ahead, so it takes time to turn the ship).

But what happens when some players hate something while some other players love it? Assuming the hate group isn’t a giant majority, we’re probably going to keep doing it. Again, because making things players love is my job.

When you say you hate something, I do hear you. I acknowledge that you hate it. That feedback is absorbed. I’m not ignoring what you’re saying. If enough people give the same feedback, things will change.

But what kind of answer do I give when I have strong evidence that a large majority isn’t going to hate it? Is there an answer other than, “we’ll never do it again” that will satisfy you as an answer on this blog?

The whole point of me starting this blog is to give you honest, behind-the-scenes information. I can explain why we’re doing something you don’t like. But if there’s a strong game design reason to do it, I’m not going to tell you we’ll stop doing it.

Its for a good reason but it's kind of also undeniably funny. It really looks like that.

This confirms that there is a civilization older than the Sumerians that we have yet to find

Some people get existential dread from this

Source (non Aboriginal)

And a quote I picked out from a longer interview with an Aboriginal local elder about the area where he touched on the history

@rpepperpotshipssciencebros please forgive me for this one