How would it commercialize anything? Having a harmless little decor for those who want would be nice. There's no reason not to add a few decor/explore encounters.

An example of adding other religions is the decor of The Goddess' symbol. People who don't want to use it for religious purposes don't use it. People who want to use it for cosmetic things use it. People who are Wiccan use it. If you don't like the idea of decor celebrating other religions, you don't have to use it. I'm having problems seeing how it would "cheapen" a religion.

You have liked this post!

^ well put

You have liked this post!

Okay, I guess I'm really confused as to why adding a nod to other holidays would ever be a problem? I'm not trying to be condescending here, I just dont get how anyone could be passionately against inclusion of other people or ideas around the world.

There are a lot of comments from non-religious people mentioning that they celebrate Christmas because they don't associate Christmas with religion. (I'm an atheist myself and do the same, and celebrate for the friend and family get togethers.)

Wouldn't it stand to reason that there are other cultural backgrounds that people have, in which they celebrate holidays like Hanukkah despite also being atheist or non-practicing? Having a small dose of diversity with the addition of say, an encounter with cubs or a family of lions playing with a dreidal, or like others have mentioned, a menorah decor, would literally impact nothing negatively. In fact, the only thing it would change is other users feeling more included.

There's also the disturbing narrative that some sort of slippery slope would happen as a result of mentioning other holidays, in which if one is included, they all would or should be. Where... is the problem in that? There isn't one. There would just be more decors that you could choose not to buy or equip, or more event encounters to earn event currency that you can also choose not to interact with if it disturbs you so greatly.

Lastly, to suggest that it would be offensive to include other holidays because it would cheapen them is absurd. A Jewish user is requesting a nod to that holiday. It's not a greedy business man coming in and rubbing his hands together asking how latkes can be marketed in the same way as the Coke-vision of Santa Claus.

Anyway, if it wasn't obvious, I fully support this idea.

You have liked this post!

Very well said, Bel. You captured all of my feelings.

You have liked this post!

one of the issues I have with this argument is that people are looking at it like it would be used in isolation. But it won't. It's all fine to say, "I want some decor based around my religion," and another to realize that mass producing said decor means anyone can use it however the see fit and the people asking for it lose all control or say in how it's used. Now, I'm not Jewish. But the idea of seeing a still obviously sacred symbol like a menorah potential surrounded by mangled animal corpses and blood-dropping lions covered in demon sigils is still rather unpleasant. But if such a decor was made, that is how it could be used and no one could really object. Only encounters and no decor could avoid that, but then you lose your argument that people can avoid it if they don't want it. That's the can of worms that's being asked to be opened. There's always the option of custom decor if you really want something but don't want to give other people the potential to abuse it in your eyes.

As for the slippery slope argument, that's exactly what's happening now. "We have Christmas, so we should have Hanukkah!" Implement that as it's ,"You put in Hanukkah, what isn't there Kwanza!" And so on and so forth. It will happen. It's happening now. And then there will be tons of decor and encounters that make it harder to get the ones you want and are open to being used and misused by everyone.

Basically, think of all the potential pieces of including something, not just the positive ones, before you rush to decide that this is something you really want. Then, if it happens, at least you're prepared for the bad parts too and have realized and accepted that they will happen and have consciously decided that it is still worth it.

You have liked this post!

Misused? It’s a decor. If someone is upset by that, then that’s their own issue tbh? I don’t get what you’re saying lol

You have liked this post!

@timbergray
Just because somebody might do something bad with it doesn't mean nobody should get it- as a jew, that would be awful to see, yes. but you know what I would do? block & move on. Right now, I could go and add a Christmas tree to a burning scene with satanic decor. Does that mean we should remove all the Christmas decor? No.

Whats the issue with more holidays? More diversity? What harm could come from explore encounters celebrating different religions? A couple more decors? We aren't asking for a revamp of this event. Its not a "slippery slope" to want more diversity. They could all potentially give event currency, so I don't know what you mean by wanting the encounters. There could be a lot, yes, but what's so bad about that?

This isnt directed at anybody in particular, but if you're so against this just because it mentions Chanukah in particular, maybe you should re-examine yourself.

You have liked this post!

Oh no, what an ~awful~ slippery slope, timber. God forbid people request more different holidays as decor or encounters, we're all so scared of the Lioden war on Christmas, I guess. Don't worry, we'll tone down minorities literally just existing so we can avoid scaring you. /s

You have liked this post!

im late but @bel very, very well put

You have liked this post!

Here's the thing, Timber, I don't think anyone is asking for religious symbology for the sake of the religion so much as they want holiday representation. I don't want to put words into anyone's mouth, either, but like I said in my initial rebuttal, there are a lot of atheist and non-practicing people who still celebrate holidays for the cultural aspect of it. If we can have Santa hats and Christmas trees, having a menorah or dreidal isn't going to hurt anyone.

There might be players who can use a decor to sculpt a terribly hateful scene with their lions, but the same could be said for the Christmas tree, like Mochi pointed out. While it's not a cross, or other overtly obvious symbol, if there are players out there that truly wanted to go out of their way to make upsetting scenes, that wont stop them from doing so. And at that point, to emphasize Mochi's point, other players could block them.

My point about the slippery slope is that I dont care if it opens up a slippery slope. More encounters for potentially more stink bugs? Sounds good to me. I dont care if its Christmas, Hannukah, Kwanza, Yule, or a totally secular winter encounter. This is not going to impact anyone. Is your argument that you might not see your favorite encounters because more will be added? That's not a good argument for exclusion.

I dont think you're doing it on purpose, but "what about all the BAD stuff that could happen because of diversity?" is a really gross argument.

You have liked this post!

@no supporters
They added a fucking game of thrones reference as a decor
Why can't they add Hanukkah

You have liked this post!

I think the real 'slippery slope' here is the hole being dug when you try to justify not supporting something that is just asking for some diversity; this isn't some huge request to rehaul the event, it's asking to add some stuff to the event to make it more inclusive.

You have liked this post!

Very good point, R

You have liked this post!

Timbergray expressed their opinion on the matter in a very calm manner, let's not mock each other shall we? So far this debate has been pretty civil....

You have liked this post!

I've said it before, but I suppose it merits repeating - Christmas Trees, candles, holly, snow, Santa Claus, Santa Hats, Reindeer, and Mistletoe are not Christian symbols! The decor and encounters on Lioden for Christmas are from the secular practices, not the religious ones. If they called it Saturnalia, which is older and upon which most of these activities, timing, and items are based even in the Christian practice of Christmas, they wouldn't really have to change anything, but no one would be complaining about it being "Christian". Honestly, it seems to be that it's using the name Christmas that makes people call it religious rather than what is actually included in the event.

@ yeehaw country man - Some people will see symbolic decor and intentionally use it in a way that is meant to seem spiteful, disrespectful, or sacrilegious to the origins of the symbol or the people to whom the symbol has meaning. That's what I meant by someone misusing it. Hate is everywhere, sadly, and that is the sort of thing some people will do. If it becomes a decor, that is something that the people who are asking for it need to be aware that they will likely see. If they know it can/will be used that way, and still want it, then more power to them. But going into it blind to that concept is likely to make it shocking and even more hurtful when they come across it later.


@ Bel - read my response to Yeehaw for an example of how it is possible for something negative to come out of something like a decor. The idea that there can be absolutely no negative aspects or repercussions from such an inclusion is misguided and I'm trying to explain that. As long as people are aware of the possible negative outcomes of such a suggestion, and still want it, then all power and luck to them. But insisting that nothing bad can happen is looking at it through rose colored glasses and will result in a rather rude awakening when someone does something negative with it. And including a symbol that is still highly religious in nature is including part of the religion, because the two are not well separated. If there was more separation - such as between Santa Claus and the original St. Nicholas - you'd see a lot less resistance because it would be less of the religion and more of the generic holiday. The issue is that the Hanukah is still very religious and has not yet been spread into generic ambiguity like Christmas. To most of the people who celebrate it, it actually still has real meaning.

As for saying that inclusion would not cause loss of meaning - well, seeing all the confusion by players on here as to whether there is any religious or even Christmas association with something like the Advent Calendar, especially depending on when it starts or how long it is, I wonder if people suggesting this are realizing that people eventually say the same about their included symbol. As it were, Advent used to be incredibly religious! More so than a Christmas Tree. The fact that most people on here don't know that is the case in point about how mass distribution to people not using it with religious significance can dull meaning to nonexistence over time. Will it happen right away? Absolutely not. Will it happen eventually? Yeah, probably, given enough time if it starts getting mass distributed with no significance. The only way to prevent that would be to continually emphasize it's religious meaning and purpose. And at that point, you are including and promoting a religion. Sorry, you just can't have it both ways. Not in perpetuity.

@ Mochi - Christmas trees are not religious symbols, so it would not be the same impact in an otherwise satanic scene. A cross or a nativity would, though. But those Christian symbols are not part of this event, only secular ones. If you believe that blocking a person for using a decor is the solution and are otherwise still wanting the decor knowing that people can/will/are using it in such a manner, and it will not bother you beyond that, then that's perfectly fine. Keep advocating your perspective and asking for your decor, and I wish you the best of luck in getting it! As long as you acknowledge it's not going to be perfect, but want it anyway, then you'll be arguing from a very strong point of view and I'm sure you'll win over many people to your perspective on the point. I'd suggest considering which specific item made into decor you'd like to see added with the knowledge of how it could be used with other decor and make a new suggestion for that specific item to start with. I'm sure you'll get plenty of supporters doing it that way. Maybe even a mock-up image?

The argument about explore encounters was in counter-point to the argument about decor. In Decor, the argument was that if people didn't like it, they didn't have to use it. But that argument is lost in advocating for explore encounters, because those are random and you can't avoid just one without having to hide all the event's encounters. The avoidance suggestion was introduced as a solution to people saying that they wouldn't like to feel like they were being forced to participate in something with religious significance. They're basically two different suggestions and need to be approached with different logic and perspective as to their impact on gameplay. And when there are several dozen new encounters made to include everything, plus the original ones and the standard explore encounters, people who are hoping to get encounter XX might get frustrated that they get encounter YY, and ZZ, and RR, and MM, and AA, and YY again, but go days, weeks, the whole month, without getting their XX encounter just because of how many there are. And if they're difficult to get because rng is being a pain, it might make for feelings of being even more excluded because they found group A, B, C, D, and E's encounter, but not the one for their group, so why is theirs so hard to get?! It's just a thing that should be kept in mind with that suggestion and the reason that people might see more as a bad thing.

@ the serval spots - Inclusion of religion will have positive and negative aspects and results. Ignoring one side is intentional ignorance and helps no one. Pointing out that there is that other side does not mean one is against diversity, but rather that one is aware of the other side being intentionally ignored. What I'm doing is actually called playing devil's advocate. The point of such an action is to bring up negative outcomes for people to think about and come up with solutions for or otherwise find reasons why it would not actually be a problem so that the end result is better made and overcomes obstacles more easily because many have already been accounted for. Frankly, I find the "war on Christmas" concept ludicrous at best, as Christmas has become so secular that it's hardly religious at all anymore, so the celebration and inclusion of other religions and holidays doesn't change Christmas at all. It's already pointless! And celebrating other holidays doesn't prevent anyone from celebrating Christmas their way either. But the condescension doesn't help your position, as it makes it seem like you can't counter the points being made so have devolved your argument to character attacks because you have no other leg to stand on. Instead, you might have done as Mochi did and stated that what I was saying wouldn't be a problem because of XXX, or as Papellia did when suggesting a new event that could focus on all the different religions so everything is covered, or as Kiri did in suggesting that a decor was the better option over an encounter to accommodate the way to allow people to avoid things they didn't like. Any of those would have been much more effective and given your perspective and opinions more weight and merit. But the combative manner of your posts are more likely to turn people against your perspective on principal of disliking your mannerism rather than on the merit of your position.

@ ra ra Rasputin - Game of Thrones is not a real world religion. (Cult at best). So it's not an equivalent argument. Religion and politics are highly controversial and can cause a lot of hostility and aggression between people and last for a very long period of time. TV shows, while sometimes strongly debated topics, rarely have as strong or as lingering an impact as religion or politics. Including a TV show reference neither mandates nor prohibits the inclusion of any other sort of content, be it religion, secular, or other entertainment franchises.

@ R - The suggestion may be asking for diversity if you simplify the more detailed request, but the implementation is rarely as simple as the concept, especially when you're already simplifying the concept. It is doubtful that people are arguing against including diversity as a general idea, and more about the specifics and execution of that overly broad concept that is being argued against. Pointing out potential pitfalls doesn't mean one is against a suggestion as itself, but rather that one might be against the pitfalls they see as coming from it. No good comes from rushing blindly into a situation just because a very general concept is desirable with no other consideration to any other aspect of it's use.

@ Kiri - thank you. :) With the responses, I was beginning to wonder if I was coming across as calm or thought out to anyone. But it seems I may have to try harder to get my point across in a less divisive manner if so many people are reacting so badly to it. Right now, I'm not sure if it's what I'm saying or how I'm saying it that has people up in arms. I'm actually fairly for this suggestion, I just don't think in it's present suggested form that it will work out as hoped. Too many things that can go wrong and not enough solutions yet suggested for them. Quite curious to see how it all turns out, though.

You have liked this post!