MTGNexus (2024)

Source: http://epicstream.com/news/JakeVyper/Wi ... -Gathering

Wizards removes MTG content creator Lizbeth Eden for posting content that violates their code of conduct for featuring adult nudity and sexualized postering.

Help fight forum ignorance, know how to code: click here

this year is starting to feel like Wotc version of the "Great Purge" in the Soviet Union - just kidding ok.

so who's next?

I was unfamiliar with them up until I saw a few people retweet the user's announcement that they had been removed by WotC. I guess they're really trying to change their image now.

I'm not really sure of how to feel about this one but I guess I sort of understand

Numquam evolutioni obstes. Solum conculceris.

Pascite draconem, evolvite aut morimini.

The Commander Legacy Project, Come say hello and give your thoughts.

Like to read? Love books and want to recommend one to your fellow forum users? Go here.

Here's her side

The Secret of Commander (EDH)

Sheldon-"The secret of this format is in not breaking it. "

Hermes_ wrote: ↑

3 years ago

Here's her side

"Other people do worse" is never a good position to argue from. Though I can't actually find what she has done that violates their terms. Also, if her defense is true we can expect more fallout from Wizard's new stance of "caring about their image".

user_938036 wrote: ↑

3 years ago

Hermes_ wrote: ↑

3 years ago

Here's her side

"Other people do worse" is never a good position to argue from. Though I can't actually find what she has done that violates their terms. Also, if her defense is true we can expect more fallout from Wizard's new stance of "caring about their image".

if you click on it,it's a thread in which she explains what she did and the actual email she got.

The Secret of Commander (EDH)

Sheldon-"The secret of this format is in not breaking it. "

Hermes_ wrote: ↑

3 years ago

if you click on it,it's a thread in which she explains what she did and the actual email she got.

No, she explicitly doesn't explain; she brings up some things she think might have been the reason then explicitly says she didn't break code of conduct. Her exact words are "i haven't actually done what i'm being accused of. the card i made doesn't "feature adult nudity," and i've posted zero explicit content related to mtg." The email wizards sent her can be summarized as "You posted adult nudity or sexualized posting" She says she didn't do this.

user_938036 wrote: ↑

3 years ago

Hermes_ wrote: ↑

3 years ago

if you click on it,it's a thread in which she explains what she did and the actual email she got.

No, she explicitly doesn't explain; she brings up some things she think might have been the reason then explicitly says she didn't break code of conduct. Her exact words are "i haven't actually done what i'm being accused of. the card i made doesn't "feature adult nudity," and i've posted zero explicit content related to mtg." The email wizards sent her can be summarized as "You posted adult nudity or sexualized posting" She says she didn't do this.

It's exactly what I said would happen. Art is subjective and if the social mob decides to be offended by a person's art well then it must be removed. I have no earthly idea what they will decide is offensive next. This person's art seems pretty tame to me and unoffensive but I am not part of the mob. They are in control.

robertleva wrote: ↑

3 years ago

user_938036 wrote: ↑

3 years ago

Hermes_ wrote: ↑

3 years ago

if you click on it,it's a thread in which she explains what she did and the actual email she got.

No, she explicitly doesn't explain; she brings up some things she think might have been the reason then explicitly says she didn't break code of conduct. Her exact words are "i haven't actually done what i'm being accused of. the card i made doesn't "feature adult nudity," and i've posted zero explicit content related to mtg." The email wizards sent her can be summarized as "You posted adult nudity or sexualized posting" She says she didn't do this.

It's exactly what I said would happen. Art is subjective and if the social mob decides to be offended by a person's art well then it must be removed. I have no earthly idea what they will decide is offensive next. This person's art seems pretty tame to me and unoffensive but I am not part of the mob. They are in control.

Apparently not, because there was no movement to get her cut loose. You kind of need "the mob" to be involved to blame them. This seems to be entirely coming from Wizards, and Wizards has a history of this that dates back a lot longer than this year. They did something similar to Steve Argyle when he drew Chandra and Lili about to kiss.

Ironically, the best chance she has to get this reversed is to rely on "the mob" to pressure wizards, and that looks like her strategy (in non crazy terms, she's taking to Twitter to plead her case and get people to agree that wizards was unreasonable, and thus get fans to pressure wizards into reversing their decision).

onering wrote: ↑

3 years ago

robertleva wrote: ↑

3 years ago

user_938036 wrote: ↑

3 years ago

No, she explicitly doesn't explain; she brings up some things she think might have been the reason then explicitly says she didn't break code of conduct. Her exact words are "i haven't actually done what i'm being accused of. the card i made doesn't "feature adult nudity," and i've posted zero explicit content related to mtg." The email wizards sent her can be summarized as "You posted adult nudity or sexualized posting" She says she didn't do this.

It's exactly what I said would happen. Art is subjective and if the social mob decides to be offended by a person's art well then it must be removed. I have no earthly idea what they will decide is offensive next. This person's art seems pretty tame to me and unoffensive but I am not part of the mob. They are in control.

Apparently not, because there was no movement to get her cut loose. You kind of need "the mob" to be involved to blame them. This seems to be entirely coming from Wizards, and Wizards has a history of this that dates back a lot longer than this year. They did something similar to Steve Argyle when he drew Chandra and Lili about to kiss.

Ironically, the best chance she has to get this reversed is to rely on "the mob" to pressure wizards, and that looks like her strategy (in non crazy terms, she's taking to Twitter to plead her case and get people to agree that wizards was unreasonable, and thus get fans to pressure wizards into reversing their decision).

The "movement" to get her cut loose already happened when they panicked about BLM. This move is just the fallout from that. They thought that by dumping her they were being "woke" but they dumped her without getting official mob permission. Now she will plead her case in the court of the mob (twitter) and the mob will decide whether or not her art is offensive or should be protected.

The Fluff wrote: ↑

3 years ago

I've read the posts on twitter, and up to now it's still a mystery to me what exactly is the offending content she posted?

It's probably just wizards overreacting to some soccer mom complaints or something who couldn't handle their kids seeing stuff that is sexy, even all the important parts are covered.

Decks: Feather, Syrix, Millie, Zabaz

The Fluff wrote: ↑

3 years ago

wotc should not be vague on this. They should show it, so that people could see if it's actually offensive.

While I agree it would be nice to see exactly what the problem is so we could judge ourselves. I fully understand why wizards aren't posting something they deem against their code of conduct and saying "This right here, don't do this thing right here. Everyone, get a good look? Because this is the stuff we don't want people associating with us so don't do this."

user_938036 wrote: ↑

3 years ago

The Fluff wrote: ↑

3 years ago

wotc should not be vague on this. They should show it, so that people could see if it's actually offensive.

While I agree it would be nice to see exactly what the problem is so we could judge ourselves. I fully understand why wizards aren't posting something they deem against their code of conduct and saying "This right here, don't do this thing right here. Everyone, get a good look? Because this is the stuff we don't want people associating with us so don't do this."

BS. They could put black bars over whatever they feel is needed, but SHOW us what she did that was worth this reaction. Don't just fabricate some %$#% and then randomly choose her as your scapegoat to make your company seem more "woke".

robertleva wrote: ↑

3 years ago

user_938036 wrote: ↑

3 years ago

The Fluff wrote: ↑

3 years ago

wotc should not be vague on this. They should show it, so that people could see if it's actually offensive.

While I agree it would be nice to see exactly what the problem is so we could judge ourselves. I fully understand why wizards aren't posting something they deem against their code of conduct and saying "This right here, don't do this thing right here. Everyone, get a good look? Because this is the stuff we don't want people associating with us so don't do this."

BS. They could put black bars over whatever they feel is needed, but SHOW us what she did that was worth this reaction. Don't just fabricate some %$#% and then randomly choose her as your scapegoat to make your company seem more "woke".

This doesn't seem to be for the sake of being 'woke', this seems more like for the sake of appeasing anti-lewd think of the children types, like the sort who have ratings increased on TV shows and movies just for someone wearing a swimsuit or flirting too blatantly, and tend to cause ratings to be more extreme for mild sexual content than horrific violence. So more Puritan types being appealed to than trying to seem woke.

I just can't dig this one. Shaming people over sexuality is so 1950. Let's knock it off.

Magic art has flirted with too sexy for years and our obsessively prudish culture always seems to be about limiting women.

(There's definitely a place you can go that's too far but I kinda doubt that's the case here or it would have been outed already)

pokken wrote: ↑

3 years ago

I just can't dig this one. Shaming people over sexuality is so 1950. Let's knock it off.

Magic art has flirted with too sexy for years and our obsessively prudish culture always seems to be about limiting women.

(There's definitely a place you can go that's too far but I kinda doubt that's the case here or it would have been outed already)

Wizards doesn't have the faintest idea what the mob wants, they just know that they need to get appeasing and get appeasing now. To be fair I don't think the mob actually wants this kind of censoring, it would be considered "slu*t shaming" to use their term. But who cares right because it's not about the actual content of the cards it's about the optics of the banning.

WOTC wants the optics, they don't give a %$#% about right and wrong or hurting an artist that has done some really impressive work for them for years now.