While We Wait: Part 2

[Symphony D.]

I don't see that we're off topic. We're discussing NESing, even if its the operation of it rather than the specifics. I don't see people calling names. I don't see people going off on wild tangents. I don't see people stroking their egos excessively. I really fail to see the immaturity other than people repeatedly countering what I say with "Get a life!" and the equivalents thereof.

But I'm done, so I'm willing to stop here if everyone else is willing to stop questioning me, or simply repeating things I've already said (thanks Cathy).

I'm rather amused that it's silver complaining that it's like OT though, given some of his own alcohol/chemical-fueled posts in this forum, but I digress.

Have fun talking about acronyms or whatever it was you were doing previously.

 

[Kal'thzar]

Anyway; Symph as I mentioned, and Birdjaguar went into further detail (well generalised as well), the most effective method has been to start a NES with the relevant innovations, and from my memory of the NES you modded, you had some different rules (specifically the economic) and you seemed a fair mod from the ever brief (1 turn?) we got.

So why not start a NES? Pool your thoughts and present them and get some empirical evidence on how the rules play out. I'm still fairly attached to my stability rule, but it still needs work.

 

[Symphony D.]

So why not start a NES? Pool your thoughts and present them and get some empirical evidence on how the rules play out. I'm still fairly attached to my stability rule, but it still needs work.

Didn't take the hint? Please reread both the end of the second set of remarks he commented on, and my response to his comments on them. I hate continuously repeating myself, particularly when it's just because people weren't paying attention to what was said the first go around.

[EDIT] Oh, yeah, parting shot: would you all rather listen to Perfection again? I'm sure a PM sent his way could induce him into coming back. Surely that must be better than the current fare you're being subjected to because his "topics" don't reek of OT, but lord knows this one certainly does!

 

[Lord_Iggy]

I think the intention of their statement was that While We Wait debates were getting off topic. The aforementioned OTer is so clearly OT that there's no point in even saying it, IMHO.

 

[Kal'thzar]

No symph its because your not specific enough in this case.

 

[~Darkening~]

Correct me if I'm wrong, but wasn't the While We Wait space created for the chit-chat that arrives while waiting?

 

[North King]

[EDIT] Oh, yeah, parting shot: would you all rather listen to Perfection again? I'm sure a PM sent his way could induce him into coming back. Surely that must be better than the current fare you're being subjected to because his "topics" don't reek of OT, but lord knows this one certainly does!

Symphony, I was referring to people posting long diatribes aimed at each other that weren't even addressing the issue at hand. Debating realism in NESes is all right. I agreed with you. I still do. Nor am I suggesting that the discussion stop. I'd just like it if things were more civil, from everyone involved.

 

[Birdjaguar]

Correct me if I'm wrong, but wasn't the While We Wait space created for the chit-chat that arrives while waiting?

That was my intention when I created it. The caveat was to keep the discussion somewhat relevant to NESing and not become a spam thread. The discussion with Symph was certainly NES related.

 

[Symphony D.]

I think the intention of their statement was that While We Wait debates were getting off topic. The aforementioned OTer is so clearly OT that there's no point in even saying it, IMHO.

As Birdjaguar has stated there is no topic to this thread other than discussion of NESing. I am talking about NESing--NESers in fact--and in a sufficiently general way that I cannot be accused of talking about "specific posters." I'm not violating any forum rules, written or unwritten. As I point out below, I'm also being none too harsh about it either.

No symph its because your not specific enough in this case.

Well Cathy, you're not specific enough about how I'm not specific, so I don't know what you're talking about. Oh my, look how easily I can dismiss your points in the same way you can dismiss mine. Ever hear that saying "Say what you mean, mean what you say?"

I'd just like it if things were more civil, from everyone involved.

I don't have a problem with that. I have two practical objections, though:

1) As I said, I like reciprocity. I also have been neither terribly condescending or mean to any given person, either measured against my own capabilities, the general voice of the Internet, or even the general tone of this forum, which tends to be riddled with incisive or mocking comments. Judged by pretty much any reasonable standard, this is civil. Is it because I'm using big words and technical syntax and being generally disinterested in the crap permutations on three-word, dismissive responses I'm given, and unafraid to say so?
2) It's really kind of hard to be civil with people when they repeatedly ignore things you say, even after you point them out, to the point where they must be willfully ignoring you.

I'm going to continue using this tone until people either cease trying to discuss the idea without thinking, or cease asking or replying with things already long since covered. You're not kids, you're at the very least teenagers. Think critically and respond or don't think and don't respond. Choice is yours. Keep taking the middle route and I will keep generally considering what's said trash.

Now, is anyone going to challenge what I said, or add something to it, or do they have a question on the viewpoint that hasn't been addressed? No? Good, then don't quote me and say something otherwise, as here forward, you're going to be ignored. If you can't be bothered to have a serious conversation (and by the way, yes, it's an argument on the Internet; of course, the activity occurs wholly on the Internet, making that tired little witticism particularly asinine when applied here), you should just cognitively dissipate all these posts and stay on your little playground of discussing how to pronounce "NES." It really is that simple.

 

[North King]

Is it because I'm using big words and technical syntax and being generally disinterested in the crap permutations on three-word, dismissive responses I'm given, and unafraid to say so?

No, it's because of the tone.

2) It's really kind of hard to be civil with people when they repeatedly ignore things you say, even after you point them out, to the point where they must be willfully ignoring you.

Then ignore them. There are some battles which were long since lost.

 

[Symphony D.]

No, it's because of the tone.

Ah. Well, that's how I talk. Too bad.

Then ignore them. There are some battles which were long since lost.

I did not just waltz into this thread and start shouting like a preacher in pulpit. I offered a short opinion to a subject. For some reason somebody had to open up a can of worms, somebody had to pretend they could read my mind, somebody had to ask me to explain what somebody else said I thought, and that same last somebody demanded an explanation.

I should ignore them? I believe you have it somewhat backwards. They shouldn't ask me questions unless they want answers. And then the bystanders to that shouldn't instantly think "OMG tl;dr, disturbed manz on teh looze!11" when they see them. But that isn't a quick fix to the problem, is it?

 

[North King]

I did not just waltz into this thread and start shouting like a preacher in pulpit. I offered a short opinion to a subject. For some reason somebody had to open up a can of worms, somebody had to pretend they could read my mind, somebody had to ask me to explain what somebody else said I thought, and that same last somebody demanded an explanation.

I should ignore them? I believe you have it somewhat backwards. They shouldn't ask me questions unless they want answers. And then the bystanders to that shouldn't instantly think "OMG tl;dr, disturbed manz on teh looze!11" when they see them. But that isn't a quick fix to the problem, is it?

You should ignore the ones that have no relevance to the discussion; that is, everything in the "exploiting" streak of comments. It is pointless to carry out some arguments.

 

[Symphony D.]

I did.

I focused on stopping stupid actions in NESing ("madness"). And I stated it required having both the willpower to do bad things to players and stand by them, and the knowledge to identify what a stupid action is. I then laid out my theory this will not tend to happen because most of the people on this forum aren't motivated to bother (for whatever reason) learning most of the things necessary to do that effectively under wide operating conditions. I then stated under what conditions I believed change was possible.

That's all I've done. It's related to NESing. We all have the information required to have this discussion. It's not as if some stranger walked up to you on the street and babbled about quantum mechanics or molecular biology. Since we all presumably share that interest, and we are all here because we're share at least that interest, theoretically anyone here can dispute that theory, or actually follow along with it and mentally digest it. But then they would have to consider its implications and if it was in fact a fairly solid argument, they would have to consider changing their own personal behavior and beliefs, which by statistical probability, they would have to do to avoid the theory's conclusions. And that might be hard. Instead, they do exactly what it predicts they will: nothing of value.

It's rather unique for a theory to provide almost all the evidence required to prove itself simply by being stated. I suppose I should be proud. I'm checking its accuracy. See, if there was some competent counterargument, it might disprove it, or it could be a statistical outlier; but there's really been no counter at all, so I suppose it must stand.

Thanks everybody, your input on this social experiment has been invaluable!

 

[stalin006]

what are u guys talking about?

 

[Birdjaguar]

1) As I said, I like reciprocity. I also have been neither terribly condescending or mean to any given person, either measured against my own capabilities, the general voice of the Internet, or even the general tone of this forum, which tends to be riddled with incisive or mocking comments. Judged by pretty much any reasonable standard, this is civil. Is it because I'm using big words and technical syntax and being generally disinterested in the crap permutations on three-word, dismissive responses I'm given, and unafraid to say so?
2) It's really kind of hard to be civil with people when they repeatedly ignore things you say, even after you point them out, to the point where they must be willfully ignoring you.

I'm going to continue using this tone until people either cease trying to discuss the idea without thinking, or cease asking or replying with things already long since covered. You're not kids, you're at the very least teenagers. Think critically and respond or don't think and don't respond. Choice is yours. Keep taking the middle route and I will keep generally considering what's said trash.

Now, is anyone going to challenge what I said, or add something to it, or do they have a question on the viewpoint that hasn't been addressed? No? Good, then don't quote me and say something otherwise, as here forward, you're going to be ignored. If you can't be bothered to have a serious conversation (and by the way, yes, it's an argument on the Internet; of course, the activity occurs wholly on the Internet, making that tired little witticism particularly asinine when applied here), you should just cognitively dissipate all these posts and stay on your little playground of discussing how to pronounce "NES." It really is that simple.

But I know that you can do hard things. It is all about choosing to do them. Just like you have challenged other NESers to stand up and challenge you (a hard thing) NK has quietly challenged you to do the hard thing and be gentler with those less passionate and perhaps less skilled than you in rigorous debate.

There is ample opportunity for all to "rise to the occassion".

I do not disagree with your position on realism and how mods manage their games. What is nice is that their is variety among our choices here and I do think that rules are improving, if slowly, and greeater realism is creeping into some games. Positive change, what more could we ask for?

 

[Symphony D.]

But I know that you can do hard things. It is all about choosing to do them. Just like you have challenged other NESers to stand up and challenge you (a hard thing) NK has quietly challenged you to do the hard thing and be gentler with those less passionate and perhaps less skilled than you in rigorous debate.

There is ample opportunity for all to "rise to the occassion".

Ah, but as I laid out in my initial argument, the tone of my efforts has no bearing on the willingness of others to contemplate their content; if no net difference is achieved from additional input of effort, then any additional effort input is automatically wasted. I could make all of this nice and sweet and understanding and it wouldn't do a damn thing to make people take it more seriously or genuinely internalize it--it would just take more time. I say work smarter, not harder, unless intelligence fails you.

Positive change, what more could we ask for?

Faster rate of change. Genuine widespread desire for change. That 80% you spoke of to get off their collective asses help the 20% wanting to affect change. Maybe a puppy. I could ask for a lot more, personally.

 

[North King]

Ah, but as I laid out in my initial argument, the tone of my efforts has no bearing on the willingness of others to contemplate their content; if no net difference is achieved from additional input of effort, then any additional effort input is automatically wasted. I could make all of this nice and sweet and understanding and it wouldn't do a damn thing to make people take it more seriously or genuinely internalize it--it would just take more time.

Symphony, I can say from experience, having blown my top many times on these forums, that it takes much less effort to be kind than not.

 

[Swissempire]

So, what's everybody heres opinion on cussing in stories or in general?

 

[North King]

So, what's everybody heres opinion on cussing in stories or in general?

I don't mind it, but it's usually blown way out of proportion. I'm no Victorian, but I sincerely doubt that Emperors constantly blathered on about their sexual relations.

 

[Lord_Iggy]

I thought your story might have been a bit on the obscene side, but these are stereotypical high-school students, not Emperors of any sort of importance. It probably would have worked to a vastly better effect if you had only used excessive obscenity in the characters thoughts. Just to get a real look in what people think.