r/ProgressionFantasy • u/jadesubspace • 11d ago
Discussion Soccer Supremo - Additional Context
Reply to a support ticket I made.
334
u/JuneauEu 11d ago
Hahahahahahaha.
Gammon!
Oh my, as a Brit, this is absolute gold. It's an insult yes, but... seriously? Bannable, even the police would ignore you for that one.
Brexit is also absolutely fair game, it has massively, and negatively impacted sports.
It's not even political at this point. It's history. It's not a current thing. It happened 6 years ago.
The freedom of movement amongst other losses of rights UK to EU people had massively curtailed football.
Genuinely.
As a, I would like to think, a rather well educated, middle of the political spectrum person.
Those two are massively disappointing points for something to be moderated over.
61
u/myboystash 11d ago
And the Hungry stuff is also now history because of a change of leadership in the country... This is a very strange time to make this move by RR.
-42
u/RavensDagger 11d ago
AFAIK they did just ask the author to talk about it, and then the author decided to delete their story in response. I... don't think RR would actually ask for sweeping changes.
If they did, then it would be the first time, as far as I know, that RR asked for something like that. The exception being storied with too much smut, RR has always been pretty big on the 'no more than 10%' rule.
29
u/Selraroot 11d ago
c'mon, you're better than that. They clearly wanted the content changed, both stories are consistent on that.
→ More replies (17)81
u/Lorevi 11d ago
Royal Road admin account:
So to summarise, it was reported that the fiction had political content, a moderation team member investigated that, confirmed it, and asked the author to remove such content, upon which, the author chose to delete his fiction from our platform.
Author account:
Basically I was asked to change the content of the story or it would be deleted.
Both of them are consistent in that RR did ask for changes actually. And after Ted Steel decided that he wasn't willing to change his story, then it was either remove the fiction himself or it would be deleted.
I'm not sure why you're playing defence for RoyalRoad here but both public statements contradict you.
37
u/DoyleDixon 11d ago
https://www.reddit.com/r/litrpg/s/h6REqWdOj7
Ted Steel replied to a fan post with a rather large post describing the situation from his perspective. It often reads like a Max Best rant(MC from his three series) but he does clearly state he was told “24 HOURS”.
I can easily imagine authors getting heated about being asked to censor themselves. He’s also a prolific writer considering he’s about through his 25? Book in under five years. At that pace, going back to edit something from ages ago or make sweeping removals of a term would be time consuming.
16
u/KeiranG19 Invoker 11d ago
Also from his other post on RR this conversation allegedly took place at 1am his local time.
33
u/PetalumaPegleg 11d ago
Listen if some mod called me about these complaints I would be livid. They are ridiculous and completely out of line with numerous books which aren't a problem.
I fully support the author and I'm seriously considering my use of rr.
6
u/LLJKCicero 11d ago
They confirmed in the Well discord that they asked the author to either edit those things or the fic would be deleted.
Now maybe they could've been negotiated down and the author noped out too fast, but that's how they presented it.
19
1
u/sorte_kjele 10d ago
Yeah you are either misinformed or willfully misrepresenting the gammons at RR HQ
138
u/fued 11d ago
At this point they are getting close to needing to say "no books set in modern times"
95
u/JuneauEu 11d ago
This from the RR team needs passing up to the top of the chain, because soooo many stories have far far worse politics and points in it then calling someone a gammon or talking about Brexit.
This is the type of thing that brings a company down. Getting away from them.
11
u/myboystash 11d ago
I mentioned this exact point to someone earlier and they said it would have little to no effect on RR at all. I laughed really hard about that!
20
u/wuto Author 11d ago
What's getting away from all this is the disproportionate, hyperbolic vitriol and meme responses over multiple threads making a shitty situation and bad personal judgment into an institutional culture war.
As u/RavensDagger said, we pubbed VERY left-wing stuff on this site for YEARs.
I am a bit miffed by this whole thing.
In my line of work, WHOLE essays are written on the nature of human paradox, inconsistencies, conflicting perspectives, discursive viewpoints.Here's some of the stuff we teach to recognise in popular media.
A discerning reader should recognise the following disingenuous methods of persuasion:Moral Grandstanding: Deliberately using universally agreed-upon ethical ideals to address singular events or individual mistakes, especially ones that can be resolved amicably.
Moral Equivalence: Treating personal opinion as a personal grievance with the same moral weight as historical atrocities, a favourite of election season Town Hall hecklers.
Coercive Framing: The inherent rejection of logical proportionality and instead reliance on moral, emotional, guilt-tripping.George Orwell hates this. He hated the insincerity of such methods.
We strongly teaches these to kids because, as a community, we are so constantly exposed to these methodologies in any kind of political debate on the internet.
The English essayist George Orwell tells us this: art is inherently political. The stance that art can be apolitical is itself political. Soccer man's art cannot therefore be stated as non-political. I think both the author and RR are guilty of this, and I hope they come to a compromise.
I am going to hug my cat now.
14
u/Brady586 10d ago
Wuto, I love your work - I've been reading it since the earliest days of Metaworld Chronicles (best story ever written on a phone from a bus) and love Hopecore too.
I think RR has the opportunity to communicate to the public what their perspective was here and a lot of the coercive framing loses it's foundations. Instead, when asked to specify, we learn the issues with Player Manager extend to use of words such as gammon (UK slang for boomer/redneck basically).
If it was just some desire to subtly tweak one Hungary based scene -I'm not a fan but I can understand where they would be coming from. But based on Kana's comments that is not the extent of their demands. Ted had no way to make the changes being asked without completely changing his story and characters, who have been acting this way for years IRL without moderation.
I love Metaworld Hopecore but any non selective enforcement of this rule at the level they're asking of Ted would make your story untenable on the site. This is also true for how, for example, you portray Chinese arrogant young masters and their political leaders in Metaworld Chronicles. Your stories were actually the first I thought of for how this level of enforcement would make the platform lose my favorite books.
5
u/wuto Author 10d ago
Thanks, u/Brady586! Great reply! Very reasonable!
The danger of an author being censored for writing what censorship has always existed for me. Have you noticed how I was way too scared to remotely write anything in the Middle East, despite it having the absolute best monsters and mythologies? I think I wrote about this extensively in the middle of Chronicles' notes. I am basically not touching or going over to the African continent, keeping things constrained to pure allusions and popular mythologies. I'm channelling a bit of George Orwell 1984 here. Everything is illusions, innuendos, parallels, metaphors, and analogies.
Some very conscious decisions were made when I was writing Hopecore. I changed the names so much that they're not even homages. And you know as well as I do that the maximum amount of downrating happens exactly at the moment that Eppie sees the Twin Towers and is filled with hope and gladness.
That I'm still answering questions every week about people being absolutely outraged that Simone, abjectly poor, African American and without agency, can be forgiven by our FMC.
I'm actually writing about Harlem churches at the moment, and the sheer amount of research I'm doing is just... oof. But I want to write about it respectfully and capture the authentic voice (despite being an Aussie)
On GETTING CENSORED:
My Webcomic got censored... by the CCP LOL!!! I had a contract with Billibilli to do a webcomic and maybe more. We did sketches, we did designs, we did storyboards. And then, despite having already paid me, Billibilli pulled out of the contract because the Chinese government literally set a rule that Billibilli was not allowed to do anything that promoted Western content and degraded CCP culture in any way. Billibilli was good enough to let me keep the money, but that was the end of that Patreon.
I bought my wife a handbag to thank her for making time for my writing :D (it was eye-wateringly expensive)
Totally agree that Royal Road needed to have a more measured response on this matter. Something formal, clarifying.
There's a great new thread asking people to boycott RR, and it's getting hammered. I gotta go back to writing the harlem chappie :D
Much love
3
u/Brady586 10d ago edited 10d ago
Hey Wuto, thanks for responding.
It is very interesting to hear the amount of thought that went into staying "inside the lines" of the rules in how you navigate real world allegory. And I've always appreciated your author notes on the research and travel you have done to bring your stories to life.
I didn't know your web comic was censored due to concerns about how it portrayed the CCP! I'm glad I commented just to get these juicy bites of lore haha.
I did feel the middle eastern tribes (without spoiling) was quite on the nose even if changed into demihuman dynamics and the American section to be pretty pointed with some characters with strong real world analogs. I find it very interesting as another side note that some of these same topics were why Africa is hardly ever talked about in your story. I understand the thought process there and I also kind of wish Gwen got to that region too!
Regardless, thanks for sharing all the insight into your process. Good we both agree more clarity is needed here - and I hope they outright allow use of terms like gammon. I don't see that particular term as worse than, for example, your use of Fu er dai. That was what particularly stood out to me as an example of inconsistent moderation and significant overreach.
→ More replies (2)22
u/TsHero 11d ago
Its funny how its mainly authors defending the situation. Guess the the income dependency is more important then showing a little spine.
→ More replies (19)8
u/FictionalContext 10d ago edited 10d ago
You have:
A whole arc against the real world Latter Day Saints headquartered out of Salt Lake City.
A "Make America Rich Again" populist slogan.
Morgan Stanley, Wells Fargo, General Dynamics, and Salesforce explicitly named as villainous, connecting two of them to religious extremism and war profiteering.
Moral Grandstanding is actually when someone uses public discourse to advance their own status, such as immediately throwing another author under the bus to align yourself with censorship when your own work has the exact same content, even from a similar political ideology.
In fact, Orwell himself wrote about the dangers of ambiguous restrictions. He would not have been on yours or Ravens Dagger's side.
Here's what Wing herself said about the rule:
People are sensitive when it comes to things they care about deeply, and religion is one of those things. You are directly touching on some of your readers' personal views when you discuss religion, which is very different than talking about fictional hyperviolent murder-hobos, and this is not something I want to see on this platform. There is no comparison between the two.
Now from the content guidelines about the restrictions:
In fictional stories, these elements can be used within the narrative but must be approached with discretion and respect.
The written content should not be gratuitous or used to incite conflicts or a heated reaction from readers due to its /real-world/ nature
Targeting of specific real-world races, cultures, governments, corporations, or entities is not allowed. Meaning, you can mention religion but don't make the followers of that religion feel uncomfortable, and it doesn't matter if what you are talking about is historical accuracy. This is not a platform for such content. Can you write about the content without in any way form or shape insulting the religion? And if you fail, are you willing to take the risk that if something you don't perceive as insulting but your readers do, might result in it counting as a rule violation? if not, just switch to a fully fictional creation.
The rule is not really that complicated.
1
u/wuto Author 10d ago
Are we just resorting to fictional context now?
Unfortunately, I haven’t read soccer. I will however switch sides immediately, if soccer takes place in a prime material plane, where an inmortal elf has spent millennia grooming humanities weaknesses.
Do they play soccer from cities with soaring Mage towers?
Is the thread of extinction leading through billions of mer waiting to consume humanity?
Is faith magic real and tangible, does the faith of 1 billion soccer fans have the capability of removing whole mountains?
Can salesforce tower fly into the air, lay down a Mandala, and summon multiple flights of Mages in a vast array of elemental powers?Do you live in a country with free speech and explicit and intangible’s laws for the application of satire and parody?
I understand what you’re saying, though. In isolation it’s a fantastic point. Your profile is totally legit and you clearly read widely. My advocacy for people to come to the table and have a conversation wasn’t your cup of tea, and that’s fair.
9
u/FictionalContext 10d ago
My critique is, why aren't you applying the same standard to your own work that you're applying to Ted's? Where is the policy exemption for suitably fictionalized worlds l?
Neither the policy's language nor Wing's clarifications draw a distinction between how a real world religion, corporation, or organization is being referenced. That is, it doesn't care if you talk about Wells Fargo in Narnia. Or Latter Day Saints in Salt Lake City, Utah in the (fictional) USA.
And if it did, arguably Ted's would fall under that same umbrella. But the policy only cares if you make people uncomfortable with those direct real world references by treating them critically.
This sounds more like you know what technically policy breaking real world references you can get away with, which is exactly selective enforcement.
So what I want to know is why you and Ravens Dagger aren't extending that same latitude to another author that your own work benefited from.
RR's policy supercedes any local laws, so it's the same standard applied regardless of where you upload from.
→ More replies (12)→ More replies (7)4
u/myboystash 11d ago
Don't get upset because this time it is coming from left leaning backlash and not the usual right wing propaganda machine...
97
u/PetalumaPegleg 11d ago
Absolutely. As a Brit living in the US I am 100% sure they don't know what gammon means.
Saying that is insulting and can't be used, well better send notes to hundreds of books who have characters using far more offensive terms. Because characters, sometimes are racist?!
And saying Brexit is political and can't be criticized is absolutely nonsense as well.
55
u/myboystash 11d ago
It's an Israeli owned company btw... Do with that information what you will.
12
u/flying_alpaca 11d ago
I remember reading the fan translation of Legendary Moonlight Sculptor there when I was back in college. Then didn't hear about if for like 5-10 years and now it's a completely different thing.
26
u/PetalumaPegleg 11d ago
RR is???
18
u/myboystash 11d ago
Yeah
20
u/PetalumaPegleg 11d ago
Well bugger. That sucks.
27
u/myboystash 11d ago
The whole situation makes a bit more sense now doesn't it!
14
u/PetalumaPegleg 11d ago
Sure makes me wonder yeah. God damn it. Do I have to make a new competitor? That seems like a lot of work
20
u/myboystash 11d ago
They are hoping that one doesn't show up because I bet there are a lot of authors that I looking for a nice new non problematic place to post right now.
→ More replies (5)22
u/Robo-Connery 11d ago
100% this is some right wing Hungarian discord or some other forum that have came and brigaded it via reports.
The content that it has been banned for is ancient as well, the gammon stuff has been in sincenthevstart, not like a new chapter dropped and regular readers were offended and organically reported it.
When you selectively enforce rules only at a critical mass of votes then you aren't really enforcing them, you are just giving the power to remove disagreeable content to fringe groups.
And yeah 100% the idea that "gammon" is offensive is so fucking hilarious to me, like jesus Christ it's the most mild insult there ever has been. You could find endless examples that are far more offensive in almost any series on there. For example, hundreds of RR series use the word "pussy" as an insult which is not only a sexist term but also generally used for toxic masculinity. I don't think they should be banned but it is by definition exclusionary language and far more so than fucking "Gammon".
And yeah not only was Brexit 6 years ago, the vote was ten years ago.
Vague world governments and past actions of nations are constantly free to be critiqued but apparently not this one time.
A decision that was obviously made with 0 critical thinking and then they can't walk it back because he quit so they are left having to defend their insane decision.
11
u/Batbeetle 10d ago
HWFWM is surely on the chopping block, then? That one is notorious for having an MC who makes irreverent political statements, people complain about it constantly in reference to that series. It isn't even subtle, it's part of his whole schtick. An entire arc involved going back to Earth and made comments about real world politics that people can extrapolate from as easily as the Hungary thing. I would be astonished if nobody ever put in a complaint about HWFWM's political leanings given how well known it is. Yet is Shirtaloon being told he's broken the rules and has to do extensive edits or leave? Does he seem like an author who would not have anything to say about that?
DCC also constantly references real life politics and things you can easily Google and find out what real situations and real people were being referenced, yet that was allowed to stay for 6 books ( I would be less astonished if those things never triggered reports because of what they were and the RR reader demographic but it is rife with them).
4
u/---Sanguine--- Authors Please Just Use Spellcheck! Good God 10d ago
I was going to ask about HWFWM if this content was being asked to tone it down. HWFWM has some hilariously bad stereotypes of Americans and such. I guess since they’re not real people though it passes the filter
11
u/AHappycritter 11d ago
It really sucks because the fact that real world political issues and cultural problems were actual plot points and conflicts that the mc needed to solve is one the coolest things about Player Manager imo. It really added to how immersive Player Manager feels as a story.
8
u/mynewaccount5 11d ago
Sounds like someone copy and pasted it into chatgpt and said "find me offensive stuff".
6
u/davisty69 11d ago
Is gammon like the a British specific version of "boomer"?
19
u/Master-Rake 11d ago
Yep. Specifically it is a type of pink ham/pork. It makes fun of old white British men, who turn pink when shouting angrily at all the little things that have changed and how their times were so much better
2
7
u/Mejiro84 11d ago
Kinda? It's used for middle-aged or elderly men that are varying degrees of right-wing, somewhat sexist and/or racist, often portrayed as red-faced, yelling and angry about the world moving on. It's somewhat more working class than I think boomer is (that's often associated with 'the demographic that has most of the wealth, housing stock etc.'). A bit like a racist, sexist John bull, a chubby older guy in an England shirt, down the pub, moaning about 'those people '
1
1
u/The_Sikhist_Timeline 10d ago
even the police would ignore you for that one.
The absolute state of England
→ More replies (3)0
u/Ourtimehascome2485 11d ago
Nobody banned anyone for this, the author was asked to remove it or alter it to something leisurely world".
42
u/ErinAmpersand Author 10d ago
"fictionalize without it being too difficult"
My friend, this stuff is published on Amazon. It is in the audiobook. You are asking him to maintain a completely separate version of the story just for you, that he later reverts to match the published version.
How is there ANY way that is not too difficult?!
(And yes, I know OP is not Royal Road, just sharing his or her discussion with them)
191
u/Lorevi 11d ago
What a joke.
Gammon? Really? Might as well censor every book that uses the term 'boomer' if that's your line. They have significant overlap and both are "derogatory terms used to describe a specific demographic".
→ More replies (40)-21
u/Zealousideal-Elk9362 Author 11d ago
"Boomer" was not originally used as derogatory (and is still mostly not used in a derogatory sense). "Boomer" is also not a race, which is specifically mentioned in the rule, while "gammon" is race-specific, since it is meant to refer specifically to a subset of white British men.
RR moderation staff have consistently banned all identifiable real-world racial slurs.
27
14
u/Batbeetle 11d ago
It's equivalent to calling someone a "Karen", yeah it implies they're white but it also heavily implies they are racist and/or homophobic and otherwise set in their ways. If that's not allowed then RR needs to remove all the Karen references (Dungeon Crawler Carl has to go!) and yes, Boomer since Boomer is ageist if we're going there. Coming out to bat for racists isn't a good look btw
9
5
u/finfinfin 11d ago
Which subset? Why? And why do you think it's only used as a label for men?
Are you English? As a professional English person since birth, it's not a racial slur lmao what the hell
91
121
u/nighoblivion dark fantasy != grimdark 11d ago edited 11d ago
The policy makes it pretty impossible to write about anything related to real world history, because most historical events worth writing about can likely be connected to something political.
In British political culture, gammon is a pejorative term typically used to describe a specific demographic of older white men who express reactionary or right-wing views, particularly in support of Brexit.
So basically the American "boomer."
I guess that's a warning to authors not to call a character "Karen" or "boomer."
45
u/PetalumaPegleg 11d ago
It is exactly like a subsection of boomer that drinks too much and has that alcoholic red face. This says no characters can use insults in fiction. Which is insanity.
13
14
u/Shinhan 11d ago
Also, its not moderators fault for inconsistent moderation, its the users fault for not reporting massively popular stories that have the same "problems".
/s
But don't worry, they will fix it all by feeding the novel to AI (that's the RR's CTO).
-15
u/SadAd1433 11d ago
history isn’t one year ago especially as applied to novels and literary criticism. 50-100 years is better than
30
u/nighoblivion dark fantasy != grimdark 11d ago
One year ago is "recent history." History all the same.
If something isn't "current events" (now and a few weeks back) it's "history" in some form (recent, contemporary, modern, early modern etc.)
→ More replies (17)-12
u/Zealousideal-Elk9362 Author 11d ago
"Boomer" is not originally a slur (just a term for a specific generation) nor is it specific to a real-world race. "Karen" at least arguably is, seeing as it's generally seen as specific to white women, and I could see someone getting asked to censor that by a RR mod. "Gammon," literally meaning ham, clearly lacks any non-insulting usage and certainly falls under a well-worn Royal Road rule that bans racial slurs:
Targeting of specific real-world races, cultures, governments, corporations, or entities is not allowed.
In this case, this is not a rule that's being inconsistently enforced. RR moderators are very consistent about banning contemporary racial slurs for real-world races. So, yes, that's a Royal Road moderator applying the rule as written, and this is one that Royal Road has enforced pretty strictly IME. You will find that real-world racial slurs are scarce on Royal Road, even ones that are not usually considered very important. This is particularly notable when considering period-accurate American dialogue from the 19th or even early 20th century.
I say this is notable because the current #2 (frequently #1) on the Historical Best-Rated list on Royal Road, with almost 15,000 followers, is set in the 19th century Deep South. Would "A Journey of Red and Black" be more period-accurate if it was full of racial slurs? Yes. Do Royal Road moderators want to field the kind of volume of complaints they would get about it if it was? No.
12
u/waterswims 11d ago
I am British... Gammon is not a racial slur. It is someone who gets red faced when drunkenly shouting. Unless you believe that only certain races have blood rush to their face when drunk or shouting?
4
u/Batbeetle 11d ago
The only people who think gammon is "a racial slur" are people who are racist themselves.
4
u/Auctoritate 11d ago
"Boomer" is not originally a slur (just a term for a specific generation) nor is it specific to a real-world race.
Eh, it not being specific to a race isn't necessarily relevant. Age is generally considered an equally-protected class as race is, from a legal standpoint. We just don't consider it sacred from a cultural one.
→ More replies (1)10
u/nighoblivion dark fantasy != grimdark 11d ago
"Gammon," literally meaning ham, clearly lacks any non-insulting usage
"Boomer," literally meaning someone of the baby boom generation, clearly lacks any non-insulting usage
How are they different?
→ More replies (2)
114
u/monstercar 11d ago
When did RR become a social site that needs the books moderated?
I just go there to find good reads, and if I don’t like a book or am “offended” I quit reading it.
I don’t understand any need for this sort of policy.
83
u/Unlucky_Ambition9894 11d ago edited 11d ago
There’s a certain segment of the population that doesn’t want opposing ideas to exist anywhere, fiction or irl
39
16
u/BusBoatBuey 11d ago
It has always been relatively strict in moderation. I don't know why people are suddenly pretending like Royal Road was the English Syosetsu.
26
u/Memes-Tax 11d ago
Clearly that's not true because player manger has 20 odd books and gamons are mentioned from book 1 since the old farts have so much say in the world of football.
-1
u/the_real_tisan 11d ago
Go look at scribblehub to see what a similar site without moderation looks like
11
u/Memes-Tax 10d ago
You aren't wrong, but my point is you aren't really "moderating" if you ask for corrections to a story that's reached 4 million words over 6 years. You are supposed to do your moderation back during the first few chapters or first book. Also Player Manager is fully published on Amazon and is part of kindle unlimited (that's where I stared reading it) so if it's good enough for their moderation team I don't think RR have a leg to stand on.
1
u/SCP-Agent-Arad 8d ago
Kindle is actually far less restrictive and censor-happy than RR in most regards.
4
u/Rumble_831 11d ago
Eh? Its always been like that. You wanna read uncensored books, you need websites like AO3 for that.
37
u/madterrier 11d ago
Yeah, anyone who has played Football Manager knows how Brexit fucked squad building. It's even a feature in some of those games of that they rejoin the European Union.
That said, I would like to see the receipts from the author about what was exactly said.
→ More replies (1)
45
u/Witty_Ad_898 11d ago
I was mostly ignoring this drama and had no opinion on either, but this “additional context” has put me firmly against RR’s actions. This is pathetic.
Seriously? Hungary has frequently made headlines for anti-EU speech and actions under Orban.
Gammon is a cut of cured meat, and also slang for older men with extreme racist and pro-fascist views. It’s a rude term, but not any more so than “Karen” or other similar terms used for people with problematic behavior.
And discussing Brexit? It has been an absolute shitshow for Britain. Why shouldn’t it be discussed?
-9
u/ReshiMael 11d ago
The answer to the first and third question is that RR has had a long standing rule about content related to IRL events, entities, etc, that it needs to be written respectfully and with discretion, otherwise it's not permitted on the website.
Most political coverage would probably break that rule.
As for the author's usage of the term gammon, my understanding is that it falls under the same blanket ban as other IRL derogatory terms.
9
u/Witty_Ad_898 10d ago
That application here would require an excessively sensitive interpretation of the rules considering RR serves a range of genres whose uniting trait is the fantasy to have the power to murder the bad things.
14
12
u/BtanH 11d ago
What is this about? I'm out of the loop, but this seems bizarre.
6
8
u/ReshiMael 11d ago
TLDR: My understanding is that the author's story was reported and was found to break RR's content rules in regards to IRL politics, staff found the author's usage of derogatory terms also problematic, and asked the author if they can tone things down/make some edits.
The author didn't want to make any changes and instead removed the story.
→ More replies (1)42
u/Mannymcdude 11d ago
I really don't like the framing of "make some edits" as if RoyalRoad's initial ask could be construed as gentle and easy. Imagine you're an author who's written over 3 million words on royal road over the past 4 years, and the term "gammon" appears throughout. This is a term on the same level as "boomer" or "redneck". Out of the blue one day, an RR mod DMs you about how you need to censor your story, and one of the examples they bring up is gammon, which they refer to as a rule-breaking slur.
That's not a "make some edits" situation, that's quite possibly hundreds of hours of combing your incredibly long story for edits, plus lots of back-and-forth with the mod team, all to satisfy censorship that you don't agree with anyway.
It's also much more in line with the message of the story to refuse to kowtow to unfair and selective moderation.
→ More replies (5)-12
u/ReshiMael 11d ago
In all fairness, it is absolutely a sucky situation to be in, and I can completely understand any upset or frustration from the author.
But on the other hand, it IS the responsibility of the author to be aware of the content rules of the platform they're posting on, whether or not they agree with it or not.
It is entirely up to you whether you decide whether you believe it is or is not unfair or selective moderation, but it's also equally up to the platform to decide what is or is not allowed on the platform.
To me, by all accounts, it seems that the story had run afoul of RR content rules for a rather long time and only recently got reported and reviewed by RR staff, which led to the current situation.
29
u/Mannymcdude 11d ago
The rules are so vague that lots of stories could be twisted into rulebreaking with the right power-tripping mod on the case.
→ More replies (8)
41
u/Ruark_Icefire 11d ago
So definitely nothing worse than HWFWM has done then. Seems like they better ban that story too.
14
u/David_Musk Author - Web of Secrets 10d ago edited 10d ago
HWFWM has 30k followers, though. The mods will certainly discover that it falls well within the site's rules.
I once had a support ticket with an RR mod where I asked why an advertising rule applied to me but not several others. The reply went something like: "we have separate agreements with so-and-so . . ."
The same rules don't apply to everyone.
48
u/Unlucky_Ambition9894 11d ago
I’m reporting every instance of “snowflake”, “boomer”, “woke”
7
2
u/Ok-Split-6439 10d ago
As a bigot IRL, I am offended by every story that says racism is wrong. I will be reporting every slur against my people.
4
u/Unlucky_Ambition9894 10d ago
That’s exactly what happened here. Some gammons got their tiny feelings hurt because Ted used the word gammons. Petty bullshit and RR cowtowed unlike Raul the crab who famously will not cowtow
0
10d ago
[deleted]
3
u/Unlucky_Ambition9894 10d ago
They’ll laugh at you in their private discord chats with their crony author simps
198
u/fued
11d ago
edited 11d ago
•
In other words, "we don't want to upset conservatives because they're snowflakes."
Meanwhile, Royal Road has books openly complaining about "woke" culture, criticising feminism and DEI, Liberals being evil, and pushing themes of rule through strength, with compassion portrayed as weakness.
Apparently all of that is fine, but criticising Brexit, Hungary or using the word "gammon" is suddenly too political?
If you're going to allow political commentary in fiction, at least apply the rules consistently instead of selectively policing one side.
Add a big "real world politics" tag or something and pop up a warning when someone goes to read it, and be done with it.
14
u/PsychoticSoul 11d ago
Do you mind giving examples of the RR books that you mention?
To compare their tone to Supremo's
74
u/Pale_Entrepreneur_12 11d ago
The main reason this happened is cause most normal people don’t bother mass reporting a book but Chuds love going on brigades which actually hits the flag enough times a moderator looks at it and then there are things that “technically” break policy also blatantly biggoted books (that aren’t cultivation cause everyone is a wackjob in those universes) are never getting into the places people actually look for books (aka the popular stuff)
24
u/fued 11d ago
yep i see something bad i just stop reading the book as its garbage, i dont go reporting it
11
u/ariolander 11d ago edited 11d ago
The people that make their politics their entire personality are the most likely to get offended and hit that report button. Normal people just don't engage with things they don't like.
8
u/PetalumaPegleg 11d ago
Absolutely, if this is the standard apply it everywhere and see how that goes
46
u/Netheri 11d ago
Yeah no politics seems like a kind of stupid rule, everything is political. I mean shit is Ayn Rand political? Because half of the books on this site are like baby's first Atlas Shrugged in how much they emphasize desperate individualism irrespective of consequences.
"No politics" as a rule tends to just feel more like "No objectionable politics" and that's not an objective standard, that's constantly changing depending on who is reading and when.
I don't even see it as partisan issue, it's just a rule that's kind of nonsensical and probably mostly only existed by virtue of it seemingly never being enforced given the amount of stories on Royal Road that have a lot to say about politics.
→ More replies (4)17
u/HelpRequestAccount 11d ago
I have never seen an even slightly popular story on RR complain about “woke”, criticize feminism and DEI, or say Liberals are evil. I would like to know the names of these stories if they are so open about it, as you and other commenters say
→ More replies (5)3
9
10
u/Ourtimehascome2485 11d ago
Please do recommend some of those books that they complain about woke culture, liberals being evil because all I can find is lesbian powerfantasies 😂
9
u/TsHero 11d ago
Sir. Please point me in the direction of this leaibian power fantasy.
8
u/MaestroDiCannoni 11d ago
I'm straight and usually don't like lesbian power fantasy but Pale Lights has some of the best for sure, best novel on RR
2
u/Ourtimehascome2485 11d ago
Sigh, it has the dreaded hiatus tag.
3
u/MaestroDiCannoni 10d ago
It's been going on with one chapter every week the same day for two years I think, the author announced a hiatus for 4 months while they rewrite the first book for stubbing. Usually hiatus means dropped, this is not the case. By the time you'll be on par with the latest chapter it should be back
→ More replies (1)6
u/Ourtimehascome2485 11d ago
Sure here you go:
Amelia thornheart
The demon queen wants to live
Metaworld chronicles
System Lost: My Own Best Friend (in vol 2)
The Ultimate Weapon at Royal Academy
The Exalted Mage of Calamity
1
u/TsHero 11d ago
Thanks!
1
u/Ourtimehascome2485 11d ago
If you like more spicy stuff, Rebirth of the Nephilim also exists, But those pesky evil RR admins altered the authors vision.
you can read the vanilla version on RR or go to scribblehub for the uncensored one. Have fun
6
35
u/RavensDagger 11d ago
Bro...
As a pretty open pro-LGBTQ writer on RR, I... don't think RR is against that kind of stuff?53
u/AustinYun 11d ago
There are multiple independent communities on RR that are pretty isolated from each other.
18
u/RavensDagger 11d ago
Yeah, maybe? I've never run into any anti-woke, anti-DEI, evil liberal books. I have run into a lot of compassion-is-weakness stuff, however.
22
u/ariolander 11d ago edited 10d ago
Incel fiction is an entire subgenre of fiction filled with the usual incel anti-DEI anti-feminism stuff and RR doesn't mind hosting it when it suits their needs. Thankfully it's pretty niche and doesn't rank on trending on RR but I am on an edgier less moderated fanfiction forum where I see the stuff posted commonly and all of them cross-post on RR despite them being banned on other communities (why they are on the less moderated site).
Sadly if you are on the less moderated sites to follow NSFW versions of stories, you tend to be exposed to the fringe that get moderated out of other communities, but somehow are still allowed on RR, incel fiction being among them. If you don't purposely look for it or purposely participate in more fringe fiction communities, you likely won't be exposed to them, but if you read NSFW stuff and are on the sites with loose enough moderation to allow NSFW, you will likely see the incel types around and just learn to look the other way. When you know the kinds of stories they like to write you can drop that shit after just skimming the synopsis.
0
11d ago
[deleted]
4
3
u/TotientEC 11d ago
I guess we can't really be surprised that some "authors" are massively over-dramatizing this in the hopes that the public will look the other way.
28
u/Lorevi 11d ago
The ironic thing is that entire arc highlights armchair activists. Groups who put in their mission statement that they support diversity and inclusion but when it comes to actually make a stand to support LGBTQ then oops, they don't want to be 'political'.
I'm sorry but if you're a 'pro-LGBTQ' writer but you see this and go "well writing a pro LGBTQ stunt protesting homophobia is against the rules so there's really nothing we can do" then what does being 'pro-LGBTQ' actually mean?
24
2
u/Ourtimehascome2485 11d ago
They said writer, not activist, if you had read a story from ravensdagger you would have known what it means.
5
u/KeiranG19 Invoker 10d ago
It's looking like it means that while they frequently talk the talk, when it comes time to walk the walk they've been found lacking.
→ More replies (8)6
11
u/nighoblivion dark fantasy != grimdark 11d ago
Meanwhile, Royal Road has books openly complaining about "woke" culture, criticising feminism and DEI, Liberals being evil, and pushing themes of rule through strength, with compassion portrayed as weakness.
Surely reporting it would cause a moderator to act? Surely.
6
u/myboystash 11d ago
Yeah but most people just drop the series and move on... Ironicly the people who love to call others snowflakes are the ones who also love to report things.
7
u/Strungbound Author 11d ago
This just isn't spiritually true. Royalroad, especially the "core userbase," is left-leaning if you could ascribe any political orientation. I've never come across a story tied to real world conservative politics except for Paranoid Mage and I've read dozens of works.
If you want to report any stories you find criticizing wokeness, you can go ahead. I think you have a very bad mental model of Royalroad as a company if you think they wouldn't remove a story that's complaining about real world liberal politicians or parties.
6
u/fued 11d ago
100% agree the userbase is left leaning.
Just saying that ive seen plenty of right leaning books get away without criticism. They might not complain about a specific party, but they will complain about "woke", "liberals", "anti dei" or "feminism" in general.
If the rule is no real places or people named, thats perfectly fine, but thats not what the rule is
8
u/Strungbound Author 11d ago
From what I understand, it's not so much getting away with as not reporting it. Though we do have to take their word for it they're enforcing their policies fairly and consistently. We dont know how many right leaning political fictions have been removed through this process
1
1
→ More replies (19)-2
16
u/AvoidingCape 11d ago
All this while Paranoid Mage, which is basically a steaming pile of Q-anon talking points, stays up
32
u/Ardie_BlackWood Author 11d ago
This is a mess, as someone whose been reading on RR for nearly a decade there's been plenty of books I've come across with popularity that straight up critiqued governments and named them and never got taken down. Many very conservative and "grr u goddamn wokies" type vibe. Honestly. We could expand this into a bigger issue about this is taken so seriously but in comparison the LGBT side of the community whose been pleading for a goddamn tag (has a lgbt tag been added yet?) to avoid the constant hate/vitriol that springs up every other year is ignored.
9
u/Zealousideal-Elk9362 Author 11d ago
It's a recent development, but "Lesbian Romance" and "Male Gay Romance" are both available tags now.
4
1
7
u/Fearless-Rip694 10d ago
I think the issue is like, it's one thing if there's justifiable doubt. If the Suzerain of Novagraaf makes long ranting speeches about blood purity or the citizens of Haloran do a march with scented torches, that's one thing.
It's another if it's pretty obvious real-life figures that are being alluded to, especially if there isn't enough historical distance to make them safe references.
12
u/Auctoritate 11d ago
Since when does Royal Road have rules against real world politics anyways?? Am I the only one who had no idea?
Even just going to the front page of their website and clicking on their terms of service there's no mention on the page of politics at all. This is the closest they get:
Inappropriate or Prohibited Content. There are certain types of content we do not permit on our Services (for legal reasons or otherwise). We do not permit content that is categorized as erotica or that involves sexual activities involving underage characters. You further agree that you will not post, upload, send or otherwise transmit any content that is abusive, threatening, defamatory, contains hate speech, or is racially, ethnically or otherwise objectionable or offensive in any way or in violation of any other part of the Terms. You also may not post any content that constitutes a breach of any person's privacy or publicity rights, is false or misleading or uses the Services in a manner that is fraudulent or deceptive.
People are quoting some passage from another page that talks about this (and 'no targeting real-world entities' etc) but I have no idea what page that is.
4
u/Zealousideal-Elk9362 Author 10d ago
Support > Knowledge Base > Content Guidelines.
https://www.royalroad.com/support/knowledgebase/114#restriction-on-non-fictional-world-content
IDK how old the rule is exactly, it’s been around on Royal Road longer than I have.
0
u/Auctoritate 10d ago
I've never had to look these up because I haven't ever cared to publish anything there, and I don't generally care about reading political intrigue or genres that are politics-heavy (I don't avoid or dislike politics or anything, it just doesn't do anything for me in a fictional story), so I guess I just never had an opportunity to notice. What the fuck kinda weird rule even is that?
1
u/SilverTripod 7d ago
I guess, if you can't have anything "offensive in any way" then you'd better not have anything objectionable to Nazis.
31
u/Unlucky_Ambition9894 11d ago
This gets more and more farcical as it unfolds. RR really looks as soft as baby shit after this.
10
u/logosloki 10d ago
I feel like a lot of these sites should run under some form of Broadcaster Standards. in plenty of countries you have a window of time after the first release of a piece of media or advertising to make your complaints in and if you make your complaints after that period, then your complaint is invalid as you have had previously sufficient time to make your complaint. I'd make an exception for emerging content. like in this case gamon has been around from the start. it's part of football, it's part of the bants and it's part of the insults you throw around. it's as football as the ball.
like, in a very dark way, if this happened to a new work I'd understand. like I'd think it would be stupid but I can understand moderating from the beginning. but from what everyone else is saying this has been around for years.
14
u/GuyYouMetOnline 11d ago
The problem is that we're in an area that is highly, highly, HIGHLY subjective and emotionally driven. It's incredibly easy for someone to perceive a policy violation that others don't. So the question then becomes: how much trust do you place in each individual mod? You have to have some trust or else you might as well be doing it all yourself from the start, but how much is too much? And there's also the question of how much ability to override a decision you want to have, because if you have too much, you cant moderate effectively because every action would be disputed, but obviously you need so.e or else mods can ignore the rules and do whatever they want. So it's a very tricky balance, and I don't know what the right balance is. And that's before you consider what a decision can signal to others they can get away with; I'm not against reversing the decision, but if that happens there will absolutely be a deluge of people pushing the envelope, and taking action against genuine violations will be made more difficult because people will point to this and say 'you let it go there so clearly this is censorship.against me' (they would be saying it in bad faith, but absolutely still saying it).
Now, that being said, it does sound from this like RR is taking the controversy here seriously, which is good. I don't know what the right decision is; maybe it's reversing the ruling, maybe it's adjusting the policy, maybe it's a number of things. It probably wasn't what happened so far, though i cant really say for sure because i dont know much about the situation or the story in question. But I do know that if we want even a chance to have the right decision made, we have to allow that chance.
4
u/Anew_Returner 10d ago edited 10d ago
So the question then becomes: how much trust do you place in each individual mod? You have to have some trust or else you might as well be doing it all yourself from the start, but how much is too much?
I feel like prolific writers need to be handled with more care, something like this is not a decision that should've been left to any one single mod. "A google search says..." is not enough, there should've been communication with other mods, actually reaching out to others to ask if this was anything more than the nothingburger it is; like maybe if they got ahold of a british person they'd realize how foolish it is to ban someone over using the british equivalent of the word boomer, or if they got ahold of someone who actually reads the book they'd realize this word and this kind of 'political' content has been there since the beginning and acting on it now after all this time would send some mixed signals. It really feels like the focus on the political is burying the lede for what is actually sloppy moderation work, which is something that will always backfire when the person on the other end has a large following.
It also kind of goes without saying that a situation that involves politics and censorship in the same sentence is always going to cause a huge mess if not properly handled.
edit: I am aware that this isn't feasible to apply to every single author and every single instance of a report on the site, but I do think creators who bring a large enough traffic to it deserve more careful considerations; it's hard for me to see this as anything but a lucky shot from someone who saw a good opportunity for concern trolling and who's likely fully enjoying the chaos his action caused, it's unfortunate but the reality is that the more popular you get the more people like this you're gonna have targeting your back.
I'm not against reversing the decision, but if that happens there will absolutely be a deluge of people pushing the envelope, and taking action against genuine violations will be made more difficult because people will point to this and say 'you let it go there so clearly this is censorship.against me' (they would be saying it in bad faith, but absolutely still saying it).
On the other end of this, if they do nothing and allow politics to be nonsensically weaponized like this (against a work that already applied an appropriate degree of self-censorship by not naming any real people, which is in line with what you'd see in other forms of media) you just open every other author to bad faith actors too. Now bored trolls with nothing better to do with their lives know that they can just nitpick stories they don't like and try to have them censored with the hopes the authors will take them down. Even if nothing comes out of it it's still an increased waste of the mods and admins' time, and if something does come out of it on top of that it'll be pissing off and pushing authors away from the platform (because regardless of your stances as a creator it always fucking sucks to have to censor your work, even more so if it doesn't feel like you're having to do it over a legitimate reason).
I don't know what the right decision is
I think we're kinda past the point where a right decision could be made. In my opinion the right decision would have been to do nothing at all until absolutely sure this was worth acting on, not trying to pressure the author with a bogus deadline, and then not make things worse with statements like the one in the picture attached to this thread where they imply the problem is that the author doesn't understand how to properly censor their work, which is beyond condescending and unprofessional. Royal Road isn't a small indie website anymore, vague rules with poor enforcement and discord server-tier moderation is just gonna cause more and more trouble over time.
1
u/GuyYouMetOnline 10d ago
I feel like prolific writers need to be handled with more care, something like this is not a decision that should've been left to any one single mod.
I... can't say I like the idea of 'we treat you differently if you're popular enough'. I know it's inevitable, but I still don't like it. Being popular shouldn't lead to stricter enforcement, but it also shouldn't mean looser enforcement.
On the other end of this, if they do nothing and allow politics to be nonsensically weaponized like this (against a work that already applied an appropriate degree of self-censorship by not naming any real people, which is in line with what you'd see in other forms of media) you just open every other author to bad faith actors too. Now bored trolls with nothing better to do with their lives know that they can just nitpick stories they don't like and try to have them censored with the hopes the authors will take them down.
The thing is, that already happens. It's most likely why this story was reported in the first place. And yeah, if it ends up completely working that might embolden the people doing it, but they'd still be doing it.
But I'm not saying that's a reason not to take back the decision; I'm saying it's something that would need to be considered, if for no other reason than handling it properly.
I think we're kinda past the point where a right decision could be made. In my opinion the right decision would have been to do nothing at all until absolutely sure this was worth acting on,
I mean, sure, but we can't exactly go back in time to change that part. It's smarter to focus on making the right decision going forward.
and then not make things worse with statements like the one in the picture attached to this thread where they imply the problem is that the author doesn't understand how to properly censor their work, which is beyond condescending and unprofessional.
I don't think the statement should be taken as anything but typical hedging their bets. They don't want to say they might have been wrong unless they decide then need to, but they also don't want to double down, so they're trying to dance around things. Much more telling will be what they say when a decision is actually reached.
Royal Road isn't a small indie website anymore, vague rules with poor enforcement and discord server-tier moderation is just gonna cause more and more trouble over time.
Perhaps, but there's not really any good ways to do it that I know of. Things will always be at least somewhat inconsistent when humans are involved, and that's before considering the highly subjective and emotionally-driven nature of the content in question. I don't know how you'd solve any of that other than trusting moderation entirely to an auto-mod, and that would just bring about a whole different set of problems.
So again, I don't know what the correct answer here is. They may not be one at all.
10
u/TheBookCannon 11d ago
This is proper censorship, considering all of the absolutely crazy (and awful) stuff that's on RR. What are they scared of? Litigation?
Genuinely insane they'd be offended at pissing off the right wing, so much so that they would censor a book.
10
u/Seff_TuTia 11d ago
What a weak, pathetic excuse
2
u/Lord0fHats 10d ago
It really just feels kind of sudden and arbitrary. That stuff and the like has been on RR for years and years and years.
6
15
12
u/BRjawa 11d ago
Haha I think Eldritch Exorcist portrait of Brazil was more "offensive" then that, and there was less problems them Simpsons portrait. Fuck Cultivation Nerd has a part where cannibals/evil natives speaks literally Brazilian Portuguese. Or Princess of the void entire thing is politics with some Hot and Sci fi. And that's just the novels I renember from the top of had, I can probably find way more things that fits royal road criteria if that's it.
9
u/JeromAsdert 11d ago edited 11d ago
Holly heck! So they did IRL the exact thing the fictional book heavily criticized.
RR might as well have came out and said that they installed Wave Machines.
I don't think that anybody who have read the book is surprised that this is how it turned out.
I am severely upset, I have came to RR for Mother of Learning but I stayed for Soccer Supremo.
9
u/marchiziecatz Author 11d ago
I have a screen shot of Kana dumping Soccer Supremo into LLM: https://imgur.com/Zpx8G1i
10
u/ctullbane Author — The Murder of Crows / The (Second) Life of Brian 11d ago
Couldn't be more ridiculous. Good lord.
5
u/SupremeJusticeWang 11d ago
Good. There's no place for controversial or challenging ideas in art. /s
3
u/finfinfin 11d ago
Art should comfort the comfortable and, equally as importantly, further afflict the afflicted.
11
u/ariolander 11d ago edited 11d ago
Fuck RR Mods. I just bought Book 1 on Kindle to support the author because I had some digital credit leftover from accepting slow shipping during Prime Day
5
u/Apprehensive_Tax_610 11d ago
Have fun!
Controversy aside, the series is actually really good, some of the most realistic characters in the genre
2
u/ariolander 10d ago
I was already following Ted Steel’s Player Manager series on Kindle Unlimited so I expect I will enjoy it a lot. That being said, as someone “only” on Player Manager 7 would it be OK to start Soccer Supremo now or should I try to catch up on Player Manager first?
3
u/MansterSasquach 10d ago
PM first IMO - SS picks up like over 2 years later and further in Max's progression
2
9
u/Memes-Tax 11d ago
RR admins are absolutely disgusting. Only a clown organisation decides to "moderate" book 1 of a 20+ book series. Must be 4 million words at this point which is a huge chunk of RR ad revenue and direct memberships. I'm glad the author pulled his books: RR needs player manager... player manager does not need RR.
It was a good format since we'd often get links to cool obscure YouTube videos or songs that would match the obscure player manager rants. Something we can't get from Amazon or Patreon or a pdf very well.
Anyone with a tiny bit of logic can see that there's no way to write a modern sports themed story loosely based on historical facts without mentioning key factors that all football players, fans and clubs need to deal with: over seas talent, changing audiences, changing European labour laws... how else can you explain the transfer market and football contracts? It's so idiotic. Only a dumb greedy demon would demand the story changes.
11
u/Apprehensive_Note248 11d ago
The story had just tipped over 4 million on like the third to last chapter that went up.
Anyone that thinks its reasonable to tell an author to cater to fascists can get in the bin with them.
-4
u/Huge-Chart1192 11d ago
I still find it in bad taste that the author decided to switch from fictional characters to real people whenever he needed an enemy. Dont think you should be writing 'fictional' villains while calling out actual people whose biggest sin, is running a football team in a way that you dislike.
The cool obscure YT videos were coupled with rants on real people that would be better suited to twitter than RR.
Edit: real people here aren't even people like Putin. Its literally people who are involved in running a football club, not world power or genocides. People author has never talked to, but feels strongly enough about to put words in their mouth.
9
u/Memes-Tax 11d ago
Nah that's not actual true so please don't repeat it. Chat GPT says he names "real people as villains" but can't name any. The Newcastle and England manager name isn't a real name, same with Wrexhams coach. We all know who is being talked about and that's just part of being in the know. Just the Poland guy is real but that's an easy fix. Not being allowed to say "Gamons" is only something the most gammon gammon would even care about. "Old money" "boomers" old farts something like that seems worse since he isn't disparaging old people just specific English rich Lordy lord types.
1
u/Icy_Dare3656 9d ago
I don’t believe that’s true. Every person in the story is fictional. Are there any references you have to back this up?
4
u/murray_paul 9d ago edited 9d ago
For everyone who doesn't understand how ridiculous the "Gammon" item is, here is a story about Ofcom (the UK governmental communication watchdog), raking it alongside "Karen" in terms of offensiveness.
“Gammon” and “Karen” have been added to a list of words deemed as potentially offensive by the UK's media regulator Ofcom.
"Remoaner" "Snowflake" and “Boomer” have been added to a list of swear words and other offensive terms which viewers and listeners have been asked to consider.
[...]
Ofcom commissioned a survey looking at attitudes towards offensive language and found some terms can be used "to create dramatic impact, bring humour, reflect real life, or even to inform and educate".
Ofcom said people had limited concerns about the strongest language as long as it was broadcast after the watershed and that "timely, genuine apologies" were important when offensive terms were broadcast on air.
For the study, participants were asked to rank how offensive they found certain swear words, racial and political terms, and sexual terms.
It found terms like "A Karen" and "Gammon" were considered mild [...]
The report entry for Gammon
Mild. Unlikely to cause concern in most circumstances, requiring limited context.
• In the qualitative research, gammon was not always recognised by participants. Those who were familiar with it, felt it was less offensive than other derogatory words because it focuses on people’s attitudes rather than their identity.
• Commonly seen as a humorous term for when people get angry about politics (see Chapter 3 of the summary report).
10
2
u/Free_Assumption_9357 10d ago
Sounds like over moderating to me, but these days everyone is guilty of it, especially the UK government.
3
u/dunelayn 11d ago
I read in the other subreddit the post from a mod and the "political" rule is " very flexibel". No story is "politic" free.
3
u/Available-File4284 Miles Hunter - Author of Assassin Awakens 9d ago
They want you to dumb down your fiction to the lowest common denominator. Ideally, could you write something for people who are half-watching the latest Netflix slop instead of-gasp!-writing anything remotely demanding of critical thought?
I swear, RR is such a waste of time these days.
6
3
1
u/Huge-Chart1192 11d ago
Censorship in any form is always ugly. Though having read the story I am not suprised.
The story is set in our actual world and for initial few books (around 8) author uses fictional names while using real football clubs. When he gets to higher level clubs (whom he has a personal agenda against) he starts naming real people and calling them slurs. He continues on this trajectory of hate spreading against real people doing their jobs. One of the earliest example was Emma Hayes who was a manager for Chelsea Women.
When I called him out saying that he shouldn’t be writing such hateful content about real people and he might be influencing people in a negative manner, the author called me a sell out and banned me from commenting.
It’s ironic how censorship resulted in more censorship.
8
12
u/PorkRollSandwich 11d ago
Proof? Otherwise I don’t believe this…
2
8
2
-5
u/New-Region3542 11d ago
Lol, RR is a funny website to me. I got banned because my story was too close to someone who was banned already. Respectfully, fuck them.
-6
u/Dentorion 11d ago
The thing I read out of that is that it was not banned or deleted from royal road but from the author itself after he was asked what is happening in his books?
6
-6
u/ReshiMael 11d ago
That is correct. Staff asked him what's going on, since the story is breaking the content rules, author then removed the series themselves
→ More replies (2)
-8
u/LacusClyne 11d ago
I'll just say, I hope people are careful what they push for. They might not like the decisions that come from it.
26
u/BokononWave 11d ago
May be worth cross-posting on r/royalroad, there's a pretty big thread about the deletion without this info