Concerning 9-11 Scenarios

[WarVoid]

I've been doing a lot of thinking about this lately and have decided to rescind the ban on making scenarios about the 9-11 terrorist attacks and the war in Afghanistan.

Why? Particularily because here at Scenario League we portray history through Civilization scenarios. Inaccurate as it may be sometimes, we still do our best. And, what happened on 9-11-01, no matter how bad it was, is still a part of world history.

We portray WWII in many scenarios, in which the world saw the most deaths and atrocities it will hopefully ever see, without repurcussions. We portray many similar events which, in their own time, were considered major atrocities; VietNam, Arab-Israeli Wars, Ancient Egypt, etc.. Therefore, to portray scenarios about what happend to America, Afghanistan and the world should be allowed and tolerated.

I do, however, wish to stress a couple of stipulations I expect to be followed.

I will NOT tolerate racist or hate scenarios like the "Let's kill all the Afghans" scenario. As designers, we are here to simulate historical conflict through the Civilization genre, not spread hatred, racism and violence. So if you plan to do a scenario and release it here, just make sure you know the facts and implement them properly. I've already seen and played two very nice scenarios about 9-11 from CivFanatics and hope to see many more like them.

I hope you all will agree.

[Case]

There are some moral issues involved with making computer scenarios based on on-going wars.

For example, a few years ago during an Iraq-US Crisis I made a scenario for Harpoon 97 based on the American and Iraqi deployments in the region.
However, once the scenario was finished I didn't feel that it was a good idea to release a game based on something that people were going to die over in the next few days, and as a result I sat on it untill the bombing had stopped.

[Dr. Nick]

Why ban them? It may be bad taste, but hey, it's reality.

[Stefan Härtel]

Anyone can make those scenarios they like, no-one's forced to play them.

[ravagon]

Re: Concerning 9-11 Scenarios

Originally posted by WarVoid
I've been doing a lot of thinking about this lately and have decided to rescind the ban on making scenarios about the 9-11 terrorist attacks and the war in Afghanistan.

I would tend to think that more harm would come from threads/posts discussing them than from the scenario's themselves. Keep a close eye on any discussions and it'd probably work.
OTOH Chris, for one, was close to being caught up in it and may feel differently...

[Jacobite1688]

I didn't realize that a "ban" was on. Are other topics not open for scenarios here? Yeah, a thread ban is a bad idea. If someone is anti-arab (or anti-anybody) I say let 'em speak up. If they can voice their complaints with some brain power, I think people should disagree with them but let them have their piece. If they are just the "kill all the 'slur-types'!" then at least you know who the morons are. Do you follow me?

[WarVoid]

Scenario League is a design, creation and historical discussion forum, not a political debate board. If someone is anti-Arab, anti-Jewish, anti-Semitic, or whatever, they can voice their opinion elsewhere.

The sensitivity of 9-11 forced me to place a ban on it's discussion here - the only such incident in the entire history of Apolyton. Now that it is lifted I expect people to do the right thing when they discuss and keep to the concise point, not get into heated political arguments.

[St Leo]

Hmm, a 01.09.22 scenario would certainly be interesting to make. The main problem will be keeping all the NYC buildings at the same scale and still legible...

[Goingonit]

A 9/11 scenario would be hard, and an Afghanistan scen would be boring. I'd be surprised to see a good scenario come out of this.

[Jacobite1688]

Yeah, a scenario would be boring alright, but that was not my point.

Originally posted by WarVoid
Scenario League is a design, creation and historical discussion forum, not a political debate board. If someone is anti-Arab, anti-Jewish, anti-Semitic, or whatever, they can voice their opinion elsewhere.

I agree, and yet opinion is often projected into the processes that we carry out here. I found some examples of what I was taking about. They are scenario descriptions taken off of 'poly or hosted sites:

From "The Holy War" by Stefan Härtel
Scenario intro: "At the end of the 11th century AD, the emperor of the Holy Roman empire, France and the rest of the Roman Catholic Church, and not to forget the Pope decide that the 'Holy Land' of Palestine must be 'cleaned' from Islam and the Jews... The goal was not only to conquer Jerusalem, but to 'clean the world from the 'dirty' Islam. Now you have the possibility to take your spot in this idiotical massacre...

Q: Is this a fair assement of the subject?
A: No, it is a gross over-simplification that includes some outright factual errors.

Q: Is it offensive?
A: Damn near, but I would just have to say that Mr. Hartel and I have VERY different takes on the political implications of this historical event and I would let him "have his piece."

BTW, it was a lousy scenario for Stefan, anyway.

On the other hand:
From "Jewish" by Unknown
Scenario intro: "After the great war only 6 nations survived, the world has become a polluted inhabitable world only europe is habitable and the nation's moved there country over there,most of europe is a desert or jungle...when the nation colonized the area they discovred the jewish people that are living in a paradise of welth...meanwhile the jewish are amassing a force to inhabate the rest of the world."

Q: Is this a fair assement of the subject?
A: What the subject is, other then kill the evil Jews, is not even clear.

Q :Is it offensive?
A: Well, I would say it certainly could be. Would I want discussion of this scenario "banned"? No, the description was so informative that I didn't have to even waste my time downloading it.

Is my point clearer now? If anybody wants to discuss this further, keep it out of the thread and PM me. Thank you all for your time and input.

(Edited to remove rogue smiley faces)

[Stefan Härtel]

It was my first serious attempt at scenario-making, and it's three years old. I was half a child back then Regard it as an outdated youth sin.

[Paul Hanson]

I'm curious, Jacobite. Did you put the inverted commas in the description of The Holy War in yourself, or were they there already? If they were, it seems like the intro was being rather tongue in cheek about the whole affair, and if there is any criticism of anyone it is of the Crusaders.

But maybe I'm missing the point?

[Jacobite1688]

Originally posted by Stefan Härtel
It was my first serious attempt at scenario-making, and it's three years old. I was half a child back then Regard it as an outdated youth sin.

Stefan, your later works speak for themselves. I wish my work was on the same level as yours. It was just a good example of what I was talking about.

Originally posted by Paul Hanson
...Did you put the inverted commas in the description of The Holy War in yourself...it seems like the intro was being rather tongue in cheek about the whole affair, and if there is any criticism of anyone it is of the Crusaders. But maybe I'm missing the point?

The quote marks were there already. Given the overall tone and recent comments of the author, I don't feel that it was tounge in cheek. THAT SAID - NO, the point has nothing to do with where criticism really lies. Remember the topic of this thread - on whom would criticism lie in a 9-11 scenario? The answer depends on your oppinion. How well your oppinion is recieved by others depends a great deal on your manner of presentation and I think that is what Warvoid is getting at with his warnings. At the end, however, I agree with Stefan: make any scenario you want, present it anyway you want. If I disagree with the premise or the presentation I will not play it. It is just that simple.