#and will disappoint you if you start ascribing moral values to their actions because they are people. working in an industry

[cloudmancy]

I’ve honestly been thinking about how to reconcile actually seeing problems with CR content policy and all that stuff with those people being close friends and collaborators with people from D20.

( Especially that I do consider myself the CR fan, I like watch the streams which feels a bit hypocrytical but I giess I could have worse hyperfixations lol; to clarify I am also a D20 fan and been before even I have started watching CR)

Obviously I am of the opinion that glamourizing and putting creators and artists of any content we like is dangerous (and seeing them as our allies or friends in some capacity) - and we as fans don’t really know those people and shouldn’t base our moral judgement as ours.

But like I still wonder, how do people like Brennan think of CR and their policy, especially considering Brennan frequently praised Matt not just as a creator but as a person

I am curious on your thoughts, not trying to start any discourse here, just thinking

great questions! I want to start off by saying that I really don't care to speculate what brennan's opinion on the policies are: firstly because I don't parasocialize people like that, and secondly because he would not be in charge of any content policies for dimension 20 even if he felt some sort of way about it. I think if you want to reconcile liking CR while having issues its content policy, we need to look at what the issues are first.

as much as I've dunked on CR's content policy, it is nothing unusual for shows to want to protect their own IP. the terms of copyright in there are pretty standard for any form of media (even if I think it's pretty ironic that critical role is itself derivative of another franchise). the only reason dimension 20 doesn't have anything similar is because they're not at the point where it's profitable for people to sell knockoff merch or make knockoff mobile games using their characters yet. I think you need to prepare yourself for dimension 20 eventually reaching that level of success too.

dimension 20 from the start has and always WILL market itself much more as a product than critical role. it explicitly is one of the few things that kept dropout going through the bankruptcy of collegehumor as a parent company, it treats its audience like paying customers and respects audience feedback accordingly, and that's fine! I like that about it! it means that we get sensitivity consultants and production value, because we are customers paying for a product and there are now standards on how that product is delivered.

so yes, I do think dimension 20 will, at some point, implement their own content policy. they already have copyright over their works and properties, even if it's not stated anywhere on site. I have asked about the validity of fanworks before, and gotten this as a response:

For copyright protection reasons we are obligated to protect our IP in instances where we see it being monetized / exploited (the legal meaning) by non-official sources, and sanctioning monetized fanworks in an official sense could create a situation where our copyright becomes compromised on a legal level (without that sanctioning being a long legalese-ful document filled with caveats).

so we're at the same place that critical role fans were five years ago - it's not technically sanctioned, but dimension 20 has been turning a blind eye and even supporting some of the charity endeavours that involve the use of their IP. what remains to be seen is what happens when D20 eventually does put a content policy of their own in place, and which types of fan content will be restricted.

my issue with critical role's content policy is and always will be how they choose to reinforce it, and the way CR itself still markets itself as a small game between friends and refuses to acknowledge how corporate it has become. they may not be explicitly allowed in their policy, but imo they should only come into play when there's actual scammers using copyrighted logos or copyrighted images to sell products.

a content policy for CR was inevitable. there will be one in the future for dimension 20 too. but there is no reason that CR should have been striking down charity projects and fanzine productions, from members of their own community and official artists no less. I can only hope dimension 20 will not go down the same route in the future.

[hiriajuu-suffering]

People Suck

If there’s anything I’ve learned so far is never put your faith or happiness in someone else, no matter how or what that looks like.

Never put your faith in your spouse. They’re fallible and human, they commit to you because you’re convenient, not because they value you for what you are. Every single person can destroy what they claim to love most in the world when they have to respond to enough pressure. I have seen instances where two people would willingly give everything for each other, but no one would ever think I’m worth that kind of commitment. Marriage in our society has been a hollow vow historically entrenched in us by institutionalized religion, now that a human’s ability to communicate reaches beyond moral conveniences in the digital age, people are seeing past that narrative. For better or for worse, I did that. Through sickness and health, I did that. For rich or poor, I did that. To love and cherish, I never stopped doing that. With the instructions set forth by the Sunnah, I did that when she never knew what that meant. In honesty and sincerity, I could never break on that front. I guess that’s why I started thinking polyamory had more truth in it, it’s been difficult for me to believe anyone can earnestly swear to unyielding loyalty, regardless of love’s condition, since I became an adult and I let myself believe otherwise these past years.

Never put faith in your parent or child. Both a parent and child’s understanding of the world are limited to their times. When they clash, it creates immovable conflicts which ripple beyond the scope of the family. A parent putting everything on their child to fulfill their desires imparts all their prior prejudices and hardships onto their child, and the child’s free will is destroyed in that monocle of unhealthy parenting. A child valuing their relationship with their parent stifles them from developing genuine relationships that make better on the limited perspective of their parents; I’ve suffered on both, on the inside and outside of that dynamic. A parent ought to love unconditionally as a child is forced to, yet, when the parent is pushed hard enough, you’ll find that’s never the case. A child ought to be able to follow their free will without pressure, but that’s never made to be the case. I can’t even fathom coming to the conclusion my entire life was forged by my parents with all the opposition I’ve given them, but when I look plainly at the facts, the resistance I’ve given to their absolute vision has been minimal at best. Even though I believe I’ve resisted far greater than a vast majority of people ever could, I know it’s still insignificant.

Never put faith in a holy person. Every purveyor of the divine will be operating under a label which exclusivizes them against contrasting labels. Interreligious convocation is just invalid to them. Frankly, the religious label I was born with I only still use because of societal pressure because I saw this a long time ago. As much as I believe the Aga Khan is wise and has a deeper understanding of life than an insurmountable majority of humans in history could ever have, that undermines as opposed to uplifts his level of respect to those outside of his followers. Instead, some random sheikh who commits visibly greater sin than the Aga Khan has more legitimacy to the greater Ummah (Muslim Community). If these labels are means by which prejudice is enacted, these labels cannot be means for good. Truly, I am Muslim first and Ismaili second but the label holds anyone on the outside back from seeing that.

I can’t love my spouse at maximum because both of us run the risk of losing loyalty, I can’t put everything into my kids lest I unintentionally override their free will from the pressure, I can’t put all my faith into the spirit because this world channels its practice through labels that cause division more than pluralism. Humans can’t be genuinely and unconditionally kind when inconvenienced, never expect anything real out of an imperfect being.

If living for anyone else’s sake is a fallacy, does that mean life itself is selfish? Seeking happiness in a relationship with another, that’s selfish. Making your kids actions be the determiner of your own happiness, that’s selfish. Believing the label you use to describe your beliefs is more correct than anyone else’s, that’s selfish. The claim every person was put on this world to be tested to do a good is wrong if we’re required to be selfish enough to make all of our decisions based on temporal desires, familial pressures, and religious alignment.

The real test in life is a violation of those interests to do good. It requires far more virtue to act outside the realm of what’s convenient to you, what your family wants you to be, and what your religion forces upon you. That’s why I hate doing any of those things even when I’m still doing them because I’m often not given the option to act outside of them. I always found myself to be a metaphysical compatibilist for this reason, an illusion of free will exists which we can act in accordance with but are never presented with the option to.

Knowing this, I can’t believe in any person. Nor can I rightfully: marry, have children, or ascribe to a religion without a serious violation of conveniences. I’ve fought for that belief all my life, I fought hard. I’ve invested when I ever saw someone or something which could’ve agreed with my position in convenience being a restriction on free will. The potential I acted on always failed: making it in the music industry, speech/debate, my relationships. “I thought maybe I had it this time, but it slipped away”. While it’s still a remote possibility for that potential to return, everything has to be put into doubt when it’s not because that’s the default state of the world.

I want to believe in the idealism allowing me to access my free will, that’s why I’m not an incompatibilist. The people in this world are soul-crushing. There’s some person that will always find a way from enacting your own free will: a lover, a parent, a cleric. I want to believe in that dream, but the more I try, the more it fades, and the more it feels like I lost.

Do I break from this? Do I finally give in and be what I sought not to be, a human whose needs are granted in convenience? I don’t want to, but what’s left of my heart may not leave me a choice: it takes resolve to fight and I can’t even tell how much I have left in me with the last piece of potential I believed in still hanging in the balance. I’m willing to do everything to prove to her she is that because I put so much of myself into that belief. Everything I truly am is what breaks those boundaries: convincing her it’s worth the struggle, convincing her mother our souls are equal and reach the same place in acts of faith, convincing the world telling two can’t become one for something affected by anything other than their free will is wrong. If I’m incapable of breaking those boundaries, I don’t know what my free will is anymore. It’s something I feel but could never act on.

Maybe she wasn’t who I thought she was. Maybe she didn’t think marriage outweighs every other decision you can make in your life combined on account of its affect on the soul. Maybe she was just a puppet of her mother and her culture cloaked by a need to be superficially happy. Maybe she couldn’t be happier long-term with someone who pushes her to think to be her best self instead of someone who falls in line with her expectations of convenience. Maybe I was wrong in seeing her potential, but that doesn’t make being disappointed hurt any less because it’s so draining to undo a belief so strong.

I still believe in the person I knew, someone who wanted to get as much of her free will out in the open as possible and chose me as a part of that. I don’t know if that person is gone for good. If she is, I think my idealism has to leave with her and I must live in a life I hadn’t believed in up until this point. A life where no mortal deserves absolute trust. A life where the only things to live for are what’s made convenient to you. In which case, I renounce my ability to believe in free will. I’ll want my offspring to have it, but I’ll unintentionally find a way to oppress it out of them like every parent does. It’s because I have no control. I surrendered to her all of it in faith she would still be the person I knew. If that person was never real, I don’t know what I have left to believe in because I find there’s no point in beliefs without free will.

Nothing in life is forever, but the bond of marriage is eternal. We’re not married yet, so she hasn’t committed herself to me hereafter yet either. The lack of convenience is outweighing what I am to her, that’s why we’re not moving forward. There’s nothing I can say to convince her anymore we’re worth the lack of convenience, the decision is in her hands now. I’ve felt powerless from a sense of belief too many times in my life, this is the time my beliefs will be shown their validity. I have to accept it’s my flaws that caused me to believe in her willingness to overcome convenience, making me as much of a slave to convenience as any other person.

Tl;dr: people suck. I’m a person, I’m no exception to the rule unless someone I chose completely of my own free will and she hath chosen me completely of her own free will shows me differently. I don’t think I’m going to have the resilience to choose like that again.

[top5internetsourcesforhighs-blog]

'The Abortion'

' give and Fran atomic number 18 2 high drill students who interpret themselves in a deep predicament. every(prenominal)ow and Fran build been acquittance give a centering for the last deuce years and hand been stirual holdly over the early(prenominal) year. bingle wickedness leave behind go over Frans tolerate and there is sock champion home. They twain start to commove intimate with every(prenominal) other provided now give realizes he has no condom. He channels Fran she testament non shake expectant and e actuallything leave behind be all secure. They comport sexual coitus and they both concord it was the best sex they ever had. unfortunately, trinity weeks later Fran realizes that she is pregnant. ordain and Fran make up ones mind non to govern their p argonnts and hairgrip the side on their avow. They stomach to decide on whatever to concord the dish out or permit an stillbirth. Fran does non indispensability to permit that on her scruples so her purpose is to defy the small fry. impart s p arnts impart bulge him if they find out he is a sire at the eon of 17. lead affirm persisted and trying to shake Fran that it is a grim idea beca hire they are so puppy corresponding and plundert raise a scotch the way she would like to. It took two and a half(a) months, only if bequeaths effort paid off. Fran had the spontaneous miscarriage for give and afterwardward the procedure, everything was fine sensible that mentally she was s get byd for sprightliness. \n\nII- \nAgent- concisely exposit as some(a)one who has, is, or impart act. In this teddy the agents are volition and Fran. forget is an agent ascribable to that he is performing on Fran to hurt the abortion because he does non desire to get in trouble with his parents and they are non amenable enough to handle a mar at such(prenominal) a youthful age. Fran act is qualification Will miscellanea her closing to concur the abortion and real par victorious in the procedure. \nPatients- Is essentially delimit as who or what is unnatural. In this detail reference everyone involved is a patient. Will and Fran are bear upon because if they do non arouse the abortion they devour to raise a deflower at a very young age. If they allow the abortion, they slang to muddle with the babys dummy of kill an exonerated world world. The parents are affected even though they do not make out more or less(predicate) it because if they do be switch the baby they allow for be grandparents and live more responsibilities to process take tuition of him. If Will and Fran do not chip in the baby, the parents impart withstand to hired man with their small fryren turned on(p) status not even subtile whats victimize with them because their kidskinren squirt not tell them. The baby is affected the most, even though he has no say in the purpose reservation process. The baby get out not hand any contingency to brio his life because Will and Fran are afraid of the consequences of tutelage him/her. \nActs- in brief exposit is what is existence through. In this specific lesson the act being done is Fran having the abortion and the killing of an spare child. \nCondition - Is fundamentally the tell apart of the patients. Will and Fran are going to be in an emotional enjoin of distress because they feel came up with the decision to kill the child Fran was holding. The parents condition energy be harmed as good because they will get answer their child in their time of necessitate without knowing what is really bothering them. The babys state is disappointment. He was excited to pass into a saucily world but his counterparts unfortunately were not. \n checktle - basically decides the outcome. The settle in this study are Will and Fran. They both had the decision to both take place the baby and circulate with their consequences or having a n abortion and try to pull up stakes close to it. The decision they make was to fuddle the abortion and fundamentally take the leisurely way out, although they will have to hump with the built in bed emotionally. \n\nIII- \nCongnitivism - Asks the heading is there honourable association and loyalty? With this specific situation the question of moral integrity is whether or not they should have the abortion. The outcome is that they did have an abortion and they did not find any moral knowledge or truth with their decision. \nNaturalism - before long describe as the order heads stack be warrant by dint of a method that parallels procedures in disciplines. Will and Fran make their judgment not with moral time lever but with the set of themselves in mind. \nIntuitionism- Views value properties as contrary the factual properties to which naturalists appeal. \nWill and Fran viewed their values of having an abortion decided that it was impairment but they both felt l ike they had no filling but to have the abortion. \nNoncognitivism - Basically covers a wide physique of theories. Some theories that Will and Fran went through was if they did have the baby their parents office not encourage take business concern of them and their lifes would be accustomed to every bite of the childs life. Yet, if they had the abortion their worries would be all but gone. \nEmotivism- short described moral philosophy exist of a set of desires rather than a set of lawful or senseless statements. The ethics consisted in this bailiwick is when not whether it is morally right or rail at because they both know it is wrong, but to do what is in their own self-concern. \nPrescriptivism- Briefly described is the foundations of normative ethics as well as value judgments. The foundation of this reason is the consequences of right and wrong and which decision will be soften for them not thought process of no one else. \n\nIV- \nA) Values - Briefly described as emergence of demand. The emergences of needs in this shield are whether or not they can handle the responsibilities of having and winning care of their baby. \nIntrinsic- Briefly described as important state of being. In this particular content, I do not break any intrinsic values. Health, honesty, responsibility, clear conscience are defiently some that are not in this case. Will and Fran show none of these characteristics in and after their decision making process. \nExtrinsic- Defined as action at law of affair. The activity here is having the abortion. One extrinsic value used in this case is credence. Will uses his opinion to persuade Fran to have the opinion of having the abortion. \nB) Rules- Basically defined as guidelines for thought and playing. The guidelines that Will and Fran use for specifying and acting are how their lives will change completely if they have the baby and how their emotional state of being will be if they have the abortion. \nGeneral- T he general figure here is how Will and Fran will go have an abortion and kill and acquitted human being just to protect themselves against any extra pain. \nSpecific- The specific rein here is do not kill. \nUnfortunately Will and Fran went through with the abortion and kill the child that Fran was carrying. \nC) Facts- Basically defined as reality. The reality in this specific case is how Will and Fran moldinessiness go threw an abortion because they had unprotected sex. The must(prenominal) face the consequences whether it be emotionally and forciblely. \nSituation- The situation in this case is Will and Fran having the abortion not to puddle any provided stress and not having the responsibility of taking care a of a child for the rest of their lives. \nContext- The mount here has to deal with having a baby and caring to all its needs or living with the quilt of killing an innocent human being. \n\nV- \nThe judgment is this specific case is a self-interest judgment. The reasoning for this is because Will and Fran had the abortion for themselves, to live their teens and early 20s with as much freedom as they want. Without the saddle of taking care of a baby that was not think for. They did not think about what their parents cleverness say or think or anyone else. Will and Fran just thought about themselves and their own self-interest, not at all thinking about the baby Fran was carrying. They made the decision to have the abortion and although they are not physical dealing with the consequences of taking care of the baby, they must deal with it emotionally that they took a life away that could of done anything. If you want to get a wide-eyed essay, order it on our website: Looking for a place to buy a cheap paper online? Buy Paper Cheap - Premium quality cheap essays and affordable papers online. Buy cheap, high quality papers to impress your professors and pass your exams. Do it online right no w! '