Genderlock reminder to SE

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by MsQi

You don't seem to understand what lore is. By your understanding there wouldn't be people who make and eat asian food in London. Also most of who are adventures would not be adventures, probably none.

---

This does not address my concerns. Male Viera adventurers completely conflict with lore. There is no wiggle room, not even a little. Asian food in London does not have anything to do with that.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Zsolen

This does not address my concerns. Male Viera adventurers completely conflict with lore. There is no wiggle room, not even a little. Asian food in London does not have anything to do with that.

---

No, they do not, the WoL is always the exception to lore rules. You're the only white mage, you're reviving bards, red mages, black mages, etc. For a plethora of jobs, you should by all rights be the only one. One lone viera deciding to leave the forest is not lore breaking, and never would be, especially when otherworldly forces like Hydaelyn become involved. Many deciding to do that? Yes, that might be lore breaking. However, other adventurers are not considered a factor in the lore, that's WHY you can have tons of white mages partying in a room and not have a problem.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Sated

"Made up words" is literally what language is and how it evolves, but that's not even on topic.

---

Made up words mean nothing. Gooblygobidtydibitydash

But if someone uses a word that doesn't appear to be rubbish, such as "Genderlock", in order to interpret this word we have to break it down to individual components and see what those might mean. "Lock" implies that access is being restricted. That is why you "lock" something up, or away.

A more appropriate term would be "gender options".

"Dear SE, are you able to introduce optional genders for Viera and Hrothgar?"

sounds a lot better than

"It's getting quite annoying to have to wait so much for you to say that we will get genderlock lifted"

I mean, who would you rather respond to? Words matter. A great deal.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by whiskeybravo

Made up words mean nothing. Gooblygobidtydibitydash

But if someone uses a word that doesn't appear to be rubbish, such as "Genderlock", in order to interpret this word we have to break it down to individual components and see what those might mean. "Lock" implies that access is being restricted. That is why you "lock" something.

A more appropriate term would be "gender options". "Dear SE, are you able to introduce optional genders for Viera and Hrothgar?" sounds a lot better "It's getting quite annoying to have to wait so much for you to say that we will get genderlock lifted"

---

People call it a "genderlocked" race because the race itself is locked to one gender. So, when people shorten it to talking about "the genderlock", that's what they're usually talking about.

Why are we suddenly redefining a word that's been used to describe races with only one playable gender since 1.0? is this advanced trolling?

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Thefates

No, they do not, the WoL is always the exception to lore rules. You're the only white mage, you're reviving bards, red mages, black mages, etc. For a plethora of jobs, you should by all rights be the only one. One lone viera deciding to leave the forest is not lore breaking, and never would be, especially when otherworldly forces like Hydaelyn become involved. Many deciding to do that? Yes, that might be lore breaking. However, other adventurers are not considered a factor in the lore, that's WHY you can have tons of white mages partying in a room and not have a problem.

---

It is still breaking more lore. The only thing you can argue with certain jobs is that the others are conjurers, etc..., but it is still bad to break lore. The jobs change the way the game is played and should have been better handled.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Sigma-Astra

The forums are not readily used by everyone who plays the game though, so no, you can't. If I claimed that the people using the forums were the vast majority vocalizing for the races to stay as they are, I'd get laughed at and rightfully so.

Using the forums as a factual measure isn't a good thing, even more so if you can't understand Japanese or the other languages to get an idea and feel towards what the other regions might think. You're literally pooling your facts and resources from a choice group of people on the NA side, claiming they're the majority, and then ignoring everyone else. Especially since that thread alone has several of the same people talking back and forth with replies in multiple cases.

It's a very dubious claim to make that hurts your point more than it helps.

---

And you can have that argument with someone else as that was not my claim. I spoke of a majority and then in a later post amended that I was referring to these forums and the posters there. I'm not so naive as to believe the forums to be a majority of players, however I can speak to the majority of what I have seen here. Granted I'll give you that I can't speak for the other sections as far as the EU/JP forums where other languages are used.

Apologies for being unclear.

As to Reddit and other 'outsider' forums. My issue with that is that it can be just as bad as the official forums, but in the opposite manner. Here we're at least able say that these are people who play the game, whereas sites like Reddit there's no reliable way of telling if they've ever played the game.

Both are double edged swords in their own ways.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by MrKimper

Why are we suddenly redefining a word that's been used to describe races with only one playable gender since 1.0? is this advanced trolling?

---

Just a common derailing tactic.

Though there's not a lot to discuss when the topic is really just "hey, a lot of us would like to play this, please add it". Keeping it visible though, I guess.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Kyuuen

And you can have that argument with someone else as that was not my claim. I spoke of a majority and then in a later post amended that I was referring to these forums and the posters there. I'm not so naive as to believe the forums to be a majority of players, however I can speak to the majority of what I have seen here. Granted I'll give you that I can't speak for the other sections as far as the EU/JP forums where other languages are used.

Apologies for being unclear.

As to Reddit and other 'outsider' forums. My issue with that is that it can be just as bad as the official forums, but in the opposite manner. Here we're at least able say that these are people who play the game, whereas sites like Reddit there's no reliable way of telling if they've ever played the game.

Both are double edged swords in their own ways.

---

My main point being is that we should just steer clear of using the terms "majority" or "minority" to make a point in any of this because in reality, we just don't know and relying on either side will show a clear bias that can easily be refuted. Are there some people on the forums that are really vocal about these things? Yes. Are they still the majority even if we were strictly referring towards just these forums and the posters here? I'd still say no, because none of us here would even know an accurate total or number of the "usual" or "daily" forum faces that frequent here to begin with. Sometimes I see names that I recognize, sometimes I don't.

Who on earth knows what the majority of people here or not are. It's an almost impossible task honestly. We would need like....a timecard system just to see who is more of a regular than another.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Sigma-Astra

My main point being is that we should just steer clear of using the terms "majority" or "minority" to make a point in any of this because in reality, we just don't know and relying on either side will show a clear bias that can easily be refuted. Are there some people on the forums that are really vocal about these things? Yes. Are they still the majority even if we were strictly referring towards just these forums and the posters here? I'd still say no, because none of us here would even know an accurate total or number of the "usual" or "daily" forum faces that frequent here to begin with. Sometimes I see names that I recognize, sometimes I don't.

Who on earth knows what the majority of people here or not are. It's an almost impossible task honestly. We would need like....a timecard system just to see who is more of a regular than another.

---

Fair enough. ^^;