While We Wait: Boredom Strikes Back

[Thlayli]

That's an odd characterization of the place that's been doing more recruiting for NESes than, um, pretty much anywhere or anyone else.

The only kind of person who isn't welcome at #nes is a total dick, which is why pasi is the only one on permban. If Kraz and I just got rid of people we disagreed with, then LightFang wouldn't have founder, Thlayli and Northen Wolf wouldn't have halfops, and people like Luckymoose would have been permbanned long ago.

rasist

Seriously though, #nes is a valuable institution for humankind.

 

[Kraznaya]

rasist

papist

 

[Luckymoose]

That's an odd characterization of the place that's been doing more recruiting for NESes than, um, pretty much anywhere or anyone else.

The only kind of person who isn't welcome at #nes is a total dick, which is why pasi is the only one on permban. If Kraz and I just got rid of people we disagreed with, then LightFang wouldn't have founder, Thlayli and Northen Wolf wouldn't have halfops, and people like Luckymoose would have been permbanned long ago.

You can retract this statement or not get a Jasmine Dragon shirt.

 

[Kraznaya]

You can retract this statement or not get a Jasmine Dragon shirt.

His statement doesn't pertain to just himself you know

 

[Kentharu]

I think #nes sucks. Its full of stupid heads

Kraz's face looks funny.

*Struts about*

 

[Adrogans]

mmm tequila.

 

[Birdjaguar]

That's an odd characterization of the place that's been doing more recruiting for NESes than, um, pretty much anywhere or anyone else.

The only kind of person who isn't welcome at #nes is a total dick, which is why pasi is the only one on permban. If Kraz and I just got rid of people we disagreed with, then LightFang wouldn't have founder, Thlayli and Northen Wolf wouldn't have halfops, and people like Luckymoose would have been permbanned long ago.

Well, you fail to consider the source and have to keep my perspective in mind. I only go there occasionally mostly to talk about my game, and my views on civility, appropriateness and "clubbliness" are archaic and not very well synced with those of you who are between 16 and 30. My opinion is one from a distance and using a lens better suited to a world that has been rather than one for a world that will be.

 

[das]

For what's it's worth, Birdjaguar, I'd probably agree if I ever went there. Probably.

 

[North King]

It is a strawman because you pulled out a sentance from the larger point I was trying to make. You knew what I am trying to say with that sentence, but instead choose to misunderstand, misdirect, and generally fuddle about. Are you Mobboss' DL?

Yes, I am a bastion of conservative principles everywhere. And I certainly have no reading comprehension.

Let's see, apparently I "know" what you are trying to say. And what you are trying to say, or so you seem to imply now,* is not that a principled and realistic historical NES would be rigid and limiting. But somehow I inferred that. Let's see why:

Well it really seemed like it! You all fluffed about, shouting at me for not agreeing that Nations should be limited by their history. We then argued about the initiation of the NES, and superflous arguments about what a historical NES is. I was asking how things can be fixed NOW. It seems to me the only answer is for us to close our eyes as Beej changes the stats to a historically happy level, and then we play on within a rigid limits of history/economics. Now that might suit some, personally i'd rather not play a NES like that. So again, it comes back round to the endless argument about how the NES should be run.. which when it comes down to it is Beej's choice. "Put-up or shut-up in a nutshell..

Gosh, I wonder how I could have come to that impression.



Until you provide evidence to the contrary, we'll have to assume you don't understand what "realism" means in the context of this discussion.

* Far be it from me to try and pin down what another person is saying to try and understand it.

I have not yet read the discussion in the BirdNES discussion thread, but i can comment on the #NES comments and banning folks from there. My impression from the time I've spent there is that it is a free-wheeling place of interesting discussion, bad taste, inappropriate remarks and petty squabbling. Those who are banned tend to be for short periods for reasons that are never quite clear to me. To keep any NESer out permanently is just vindictive and personal and the pot calling the kettle black. It seems to be somewhat of a private club that does let some guests join in if they don't offend the sensibilities of the regulars.

I enjoy #NES as an alternative to pms or posting, but is much more of a private playground than a "Welcome NESers" arena.

...I don't really understand how you can think a chat channel is so uniform. There are as many different types of discussion there as there are people, and while occasionally you'll get mudslinging, normally it's civilized discussion. Just like in the normal fora.

Well, I say "normally". I mean when you only have about three people talking. After that it reaches critical mass normally.

 

[Abaddon]

@ Kraz, did you miss my post? Or have you walked away?

@ NK, it would save us time if you simply tell me what Realism is.

I would have thought the statements akin to "England CANNOT have a larger economy than France" is why I said "rigid limits of history/economics"

 

[North King]

How is that limiting? Look for a minute not into the past, but the could-have-beens: Sure, the island of Great Britain is still producing a lot less wealth than the region-formerly known as Gaul. But that doesn't mean you always have a poor Kingdom of England, or a rich Kingdom of France. Why do you think there will be an England or a France at all? Or if there are, why do you think England has only the island of Great Britain, or France even has all of mainland France?

 

[Abaddon]

Have we moved into Geography? That the region of England is the limiting factor?

If so, you complained elsewhere about Beej turning it into a war game... surely if the only way to advance your nation is to claim more land.. you are encouraging a war game even more?

 

[North King]

We didn't move into that. That was the argument since the very beginning.

Thank you for understanding!

 

[Kraznaya]

 

[Adrogans]

Yes I got that from the get go. I simply would have thought English could be building a trade empire and getting subsidized as a proxy.

 

[Abaddon]

We didn't move into that. That was the argument since the very beginning.

Thank you for understanding!

Why is encouraging a war game a positive

 

[spryllino]

...I don't really understand how you can think a chat channel is so uniform. There are as many different types of discussion there as there are people, and while occasionally you'll get mudslinging, normally it's civilized discussion. Just like in the normal fora.

Well, I say "normally". I mean when you only have about three people talking. After that it reaches critical mass normally.

This is true. It also depends not only on how many people are talking but on who they are and what effects they are having on the discussion. That is partly why bans are sometimes necessary.

Why is encouraging a war game a positive

Encouraging people to declare war, when it's actually a good idea for their nation to do so (i.e. within the bounds of sense and plausibility), is no bad thing at all. Encouraging a game where everyone spends the entire time declaring war willy-nilly on everybody else is a bad idea.

 

[Dreadnought]

Perhaps a more thorough investigation into why these nations didn't declare war all the time is a reasonable task to undertake.

 

[flyingchicken]

Well, with the faction system and whatnot you really should be able to focus on other things, and declaring war all around will be an exercise in making your factions and conquered peoples see things your way, so it's encouraging not just war but domestic maneuverings -- you know, politics!

Actually, it would encourage more politicking and scheming if you can't just "ok I invest everything into ECONOMY," and what's international geopolitics without the politic part of geopolitics.

 

[Dreadnought]

"If there be any in this assembly, any dear friend of Caesar's, to him I say, that Brutus' love to Caesar was no less than his. If then that friend demand why Brutus rose against Caesar, this is my answer: Not that I loved Caesar less, but that I loved Rome more."