Cancel culture in board games

On February 9th 2021 one of my favorite board game designers, Phil Eklund, was banned from Board Game Geek, permanently. Eklund for reference designed High Frontier, the Bios Series and the PAX series that I have written about previously. Given that BGG is such a centralized hub for the hobby, this was pretty disappointing news. When you start to get into the hobby you discover this fantastic community on the site, and while it can be a bit confusing to navigate at times this is more than made up for by interactions with designers themselves. Got a rules question? There’s a chance the designer will pipe in and give you a definitive answer right there on the site. They often respond to reviews and other questions and directly engage with their audience. I remember early in my board gaming days I wrote a pretty negative review and the designer reached out to me privately to understand where I was coming from. I was blown away, and also considered maybe toning down any future negativity because heck, the people involved may be reading my review.

Eklund was active on the forums in the same way. Often helpful and always interested in engaging with the people who play and write about his games. But while there is no better place to discuss board games on the internet, other kinds of discussion are not as welcome, and for good reason. You see, while Phil Eklund designs some of the most fascinating games on the market, he is also a bit like a crazy Libertarian uncle. His view on the world today in addition to the science and history his games are about is often challenging. So for a while he could be found on the forums for his upcoming game Bios Mesofauna arguing about whether climate change was man made. In the original edition of Pax Pamir he wrote a now infamous essay about the advantages of English colonialism and occupation of India vs being a border state like Afghanistan. And in his final blaze of glory on the site he was arguing about the importance of mechanics in his games that capture historical events where women were captured and forcibly integrated into other tribes. Most of the discussion, if it can be called that, has been deleted from the site entirely. So like the big bang the exact spark point is hard to find, but while it is interesting to tackle challenging subjects like this in a game, being insensitive in any way to the fact that this gameplay mechanic essentially depicts rape is not ok.

Board Game Geek is not the only place Phil has come under fire. Eklund game rulebooks are well known for being 25% footnotes about the various scientific and historical reasons for how the game works. This is fascinating in a way, but presenting all of it as fact when some of it is definitely subjective is not so great. His publisher Ion Games has pledged to peer review his footnotes.

Both of these actions have caused a lot of Eklund defenders to come out of the woodwork, claiming this is all a violation of free speech. But the reality is, neither BGG nor his rulebooks are truly open platforms where anything is open for debate and discussion. BGG for their part have been trying to broaden what has in the past been an incredibly insular hobby. There is a reason why I can count my women gaming friends on one hand, and having a public debate about these sorts of topics is not about to broaden that audience. The moderators on the site have deferred to having a safe space vs. a completely open platform, and that makes a lot of sense. And for the publisher’s part, they want to keep the focus on the games themselves vs the footnotes. It is not in their interest to alienate players before they even play the game.

We live in challenging times where opinions and views about the world are more public than ever before and shared in more places than ever before because of all of the platforms that exist to share that opinion. And maybe that’s a good thing, with sunlight being the best disinfectant after all. But it certainly makes it difficult when someone you admire turns out to be shitty. I feel for all of my Harry Potter fanatic friends who have to wrestle with the fact that the author of their favorite books may have views that are radically different from their own worldview. And here I can relate as I look at a shelf full of Eklund games and wonder how to reconcile things. It is even more personal because Eklund is the only board game designer I ever interviewed for the blog, and I found him goofy and charming and brilliant in a way that mirrored his games. 

The conclusion that I’ve ultimately come to is that I will continue to play his games. Eklund’s designs are ultimately sandboxes where there is history and science driving the rules of the game. Just like his libertarian ideals they are wide open systems where the interplay of rules creates a narrative and chance can change how history or science plays out vs the real world. I do not agree with his world views about many things, and I don’t plan to engage him in a debate about any of them on Facebook anytime soon. But in the space of the games, there is nothing else out there like his designs. To boycott or abandon those games because of the designer’s flawed views would be a loss. And given the publisher is taking these concerns seriously, I am not overly concerned with financially supporting the games either. It comes down to a separation of art and artist and ultimately Eklund’s designs have expanded my horizons and made me ask more questions. I cannot view that as a bad thing.

I remember a story about someone meeting Alton Brown and being disappointed. They said never meet your heroes, and I can see how that would be tragic if you admired his public persona and then realized he wasn’t who you thought he was. But does that make his cookbooks suck? At some point if he made the best recipe for cornbread and that was what you took away from his contribution to the world, then maybe that’s ok. Then again, you can find a good cornbread recipe on the back of the Jiffy box in the grocery store. 

Eklund’s voice on a major board game website has been silenced, and while that will prevent the toxicity that has driven people out of the hobby, it is a loss in terms of the direct connection from designer to player. I respect BGG’s decision to make sure the dialog on the site is about games first and foremost. The games then will have to stand on their own. They are flawed, challenging, confusing but ultimately fascinating and open for the player to experience and decide for themselves.

9 thoughts on “Cancel culture in board games

  1. It’s a one-way street with BGG. They allow a lot of politically charged and inappropriate discussion to transpire when it dovetails with their extreme leftist agenda. They have no qualms about BGG not being a “safe space” for anyone with differeing viewpoints. Sadly, I stopped using the forums long ago, because I hate hypocrisy.

    • Withheld is exactly right about the Admins and moderation on BGG. They allow much toxic and hateful accusations and opinions because they agree with their admins woke SJW narrative, but delete and ban civil thoughtful posts presenting other viewpoints contrary to theirs. The tyranny of their bias has so consumed them that they will.actually demand you apologize for having a different view of an issue, otherwise they will ban you permenantly from their forums and even the entire site. I strongly reccomend you find another board game community like boardgameatlas, only when we vote with our feet can we put an end to SJW cancel culture.

  2. BGG moderation has reached ridiculous levels. To the point that its useless for anything not specifically about a particular game, cheerleading for a particular upcoming game, or kowtowing to PC/SJW opinion (the only political leaning allowed there). Questioning or pointing out hypocrisy in anything in the latter category is removed and the user is possibly banned. BGG is going to reap the downsides of this if they aren’t already. When a user vacates BGG, all of their contributions are removed as well. Files, images, videos, threads, replies… all gone. Leaving giant holes all over the site, magnified by how long and how active that poster was.

  3. Hello Friends
    I don’t know if you have heard, but Board Game Geek has canceled culture me because, I said to a response of a person saying that with COV-19, he didn’t know when he would be able to play “Wingspan” with his girlfriend. “I said wear a mask, get you shots, do not play if you are sick, you should be alright to play, unless you are a demorcate, you will have to wait until 2024.” They have banded me from posting. I said I was sorry; I didn’t think this was offensive to anyone and they still will not let me post.
    I am sending this letter to all my gaming friends to with hold any yearly donations to them until they let me post again. I told them that I would do this because their response was to my post was overboard. They didn’t even warn me and yet I have seen posts with pictures of player flipping the bird which is more offensive to more people.
    If you do not want to help, I understand this is my cross to bare.
    Thanks gaming friends
    Mike George

  4. First of all, you are trying to give an honest take on the subject and that is to be commended.

    However, when you talk about BGG trying to broaden the audience you are falling into their fallacy. They are creating a friend versus enemy mindset. They are assuming that which is White (or “West”), male, or heteronormative in sex is oppressive over its counterpart. Simply put, it is manufactured and destructive of social bounds.

    Also destructive of social bonds is cancelling speech. If you want to create an uncivil society, that is the prescription. As has been pointed out, the way that you solve problems is through speech. BGG by deciding who can speak and what can be spoken is not only creating friction but they are also preventing truth telling. (Isn’t it wonderfully convenient to cancel your opponents’ speech in the name of safety.)

    Now, we could talk about how BGG has a legal right to moderate – as it does. But the moment it violates its terms of contract, is self-contradictory, subject to showing favoritism, or simply immoral in its application of its authority, critics are right to condemn and demand change. And it has done thise things in spades if you bother to do your research.

    I hope you will join me and recognize that allowing BGG to destroy the unity that board gaming could foster by bringing together individuals from amazingly diverse customs, worldviews, and backgrounds is an affront to the principle that all have the spark of the divine in them.

    Thanks for taking the time to read this.

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *