Quote from: droogDoes anybody but JB think there's any value in discussing this, beyond disturbing the dialogue we're building up on this site?

Is it too peaceful for you, JB? Thought you'd better go hunting for trouble?

I was just considering the irony in my posting a lengthy comment on how it wasn't worth talking about.

Nah, no value at all, you're correct.  Besides, as far as I'm concerned people can say whatever they like on their blogs, that's what blogs are for.

I'm out.

Quote from: droogDoes anybody but JB think there's any value in discussing this, beyond disturbing the dialogue we're building up on this site?

Since I cannot find a copy of Macho Women With Guns' vehicle damage chart on the internet, I do not think there is any value, no.

Quote from: droogDoes anybody but JB think there's any value in discussing this, beyond disturbing the dialogue we're building up on this site?

Which dialogue is that? There are a few going on.

Quote from: droogIs it too peaceful for you, JB? Thought you'd better go hunting for trouble?

We're here to inform and entertain one another. And I always like to point out surprising, absurd and amusing shit. It just so happens that the Forgers produce a lot of that

If you think it'll stir up "trouble", then you must think there are people on this forum who consider it quite legitimate and reasonable. I think it's good to know who these people are, since these sorts of attitudes inform their theories and discussions.

Rightyo, step on up, who thinks bankuei's got it right? Where's TonyLB to say, "wait, I don't think he means what you think he means"?

TonyLB has not once tried to correct me on my interpretation of how I play or what I enjoy.  He's asked questions sometimes, sometimes rather good ones, but I've never been patronised by him.  He also shows every sign of being interested in and listening to the answers, while many theorists in my experience ask questions but don't listen to the answers.

Hell, if more of the theory crowd were like Tony I'd be a lot happier.

That's true about TonyLB and the way he talks about gaming, in himself quite respectful and questioning - full credit to him for that. But it's also true that he tends to be an apologist for some of the more absurd theory-types, with, "wait, I don't think he means what you think he means..." That's the flipside to the respect - he even respects the loons.

Well, it is worth talking about, because it's worth being aware of.

When I talk about the forgies being shitty people, a menace to the dialog of roleplaying, and a poisonous, cancerous boil on the ass of the hobby-- this is the exact sort of thing I am talking about.

Also, read the comments.

There's one from Ron himself in there:

"Chris, I suggest that this diagram should include a feedback loop of revised memory which permits play to continue and for the group to remain loyal.

"That was the most awesome Werewolf game ever. We are the best group ever. You are the best GM ever. This is the right way to role-play."

Best, Ron "

In other words, even for those groups who think they are having a good time, they were just lying to themselves. No actual positive experience is considered possible. You can either admit you were having a bad time (if you were), or you can think you had a good time, (which would be in denial). Unless of course you do it Ron's way. Once your'e in the cult, you can report positive experiences for games you haven't even played, and it will all be cool.

Note also in the comments of swine-favorite Troy Costisick: "Mental revision of what actually happened also plays a big role, IMO, in keeping crappy groups together.

Peace,

-Troy"

That's pretty much an endorsement. He endorses it again a few posts later "The chart has been updated".. followed by "I like it"

Also, follow the comments thread through to the end. Like Ron, he tends to shut down the dialog once he is seriously challenged with any disagreement.

This is the beauty of truth. Confronting these guys with any substantive reasoning pretty much kills their arguments. At that point they have to either engage (and lose), or withdraw to a place where they control the access.  

So it is extremely important that we talk about these things here, where the access isn't controlled.

I thought that Julian chap made some good points in a very polite fashion, although of course he got told to shut up for his troubles.  

Over the Edge has a section on abusive players, Heroquest has a section of advice on how to punish players for in-character behaviour you dislike.  Not sure how if at all that supports the hypothesis.  Runequest has neither, nor Gurps, nor any version of D&D that I'm familiar with though I suppose 3.5e may, I've not read it.

They're basically ranting about White Wolf of the 1990s again aren't they?  That's really what they're talking about, their entire view of the hobby is based on some shitty vampire games played under a ruleset that is now out of print.

Well, I'm not sure, but he (and by extension, his several endorsers) are certainly extending this sort of stupidity to cover everyone.

Quote from: Abyssal MawWell, I'm not sure, but he (and by extension, his several endorsers) are certainly extending this sort of stupidity to cover everyone.

Of course they're extending it, they're extrapolating from shitty WoD games they played in the 1990s to the hobby generally, because they're idiots with self esteem issues.

I'm going to point out a couple of things:

1. JB has conflated two different posts. The diagram is from a post titled 'When it all falls down', which is also where the comments quoted above have been taken (there are 27 comments). This post concerns dysfunctional play.

2. The 'Incoherence' post, from which JB took his quotes, is separate, with 6 comments. Chris there claims that 'incoherence' will lead to substandard games, but he does not talk about 'abuse' or anything like it.

3. Thus, JB, through either malice or stupidity, has made it appear that 'incoherence' is the same as 'dysfunction' in Chris's thinking. My guess is malice, but I'm not ruling out stupidity.

I have my own thoughts about 'incoherence', which are not relevant at this point. I think Chris goes overboard on that post as well. But it is only JB placing them together in this way that makes it appear that Chris claims that incoherence leads automatically to dysfunction.

Balbinus: Exactly true. Thank you for pointing this out so clearly.

My point is:

you know, some of us could possibly get behind the idea of independently published games. But when you have people doing shit like this, there's simply no way.  You know why I don't buy or play anything associated with any known forgies? Because fuck those guys. Thats why.

Associating people as dishonest and hateful as Chris Chinn with the forge discredits and damages all of independent gaming as a movement. This guy shut his blog down in October and theyr'e still getting the shockwaves from the "broken play" chart. Heck, Ron Edwards himself discredits independent publishing, because he's so emblematic of the weird bigotry that characterizes the forgies.

Droog: Bullshit. I think it's fairly clear that Chris Chinn throws around words like incoherence and dysfunction all the time, clonflates the two and has a vested interst in doing so, because at the time he had nothing much to contribute to the cult.

Quote from: droogI'm going to point out a couple of things:

1. JB has conflated two different posts. The diagram is from a post titled 'When it all falls down', which is also where the comments quoted above have been taken (there are 27 comments). This post concerns dysfunctional play.

2. The 'Incoherence' post, from which JB took his quotes, is separate, with 6 comments. Chris there claims that 'incoherence' will lead to substandard games, but he does not talk about 'abuse' or anything like it.

3. Thus, JB, through either malice or stupidity, has made it appear that 'incoherence' is the same as 'dysfunction' in Chris's thinking. My guess is malice, but I'm not ruling out stupidity.

I have my own thoughts about 'incoherence', which are not relevant at this point. I think Chris goes overboard on that post as well. But it is only JB placing them together in this way that makes it appear that Chris claims that incoherence leads automatically to dysfunction.

My comments are based on the chart and the comments that accompanied it, not JB's summary.

Is this a dead blog though as Abyssal says?  If so, why resurrect it now?

JB is being just as dishonest and hateful. More so, in my opinion.

Quote from: BalbinusIs this a dead blog though as Abyssal says?  If so, why resurrect it now?

Because JB craves attention.

Who was it that said, and I parapharse, "Don't try to tell me that your way of pretending to be a gay-ass elf is any better than my way of pretending to be a gay-ass elf"?

Because that's EXACTLY how I feel about it.  Seriously.

From Ron Edwards to American Badass, I don't give a shit what they think of my game.  It's MY game, and my FRIENDS' game, and we're gonna do it our way.  It's OUR fun.  

AB and Ron can have their fun.  I WANT them to have fun.  I want them to get down and rock.  But I don't give a shit for anyone's vision of fun but my players' and mine.