Quote from: Mistwell;1078681.. I mean seriously, please, NOBODY believes you're anything other than an act. We might LIKE your act, but you're definitely an act. Much more an act than these guys...

I keep seeing people trying to equate Pundit's Shtick with what CR does...

That's like saying I have a cold, and you have cancer, but really, we're both just kinda sick.

Quote from: Mistwell;1078684You are correct. I believe we are observing envy. It's kinda ugly to watch.

LOL. Then the Lady who wrote this article must be riven with envy:

Quote from: Paige Leitman-Editorial...
https://gnomestew.com/dd-adventurers-league-and-a-more-narrative-style-of-play/

"...Find a way to have some of the more popular streamers talk .... Let audiences know that the D&D people play at home/in game stores/at conventions is different than in streaming shows. ..."[/I]

Wait, did she actually just say that these "live streams" are different than home games?

WTF could she possibly be basing this on!?

I want Proof!

She needs to prove such a bold accusation to me, according to my standards, or she's just trying to hide her Ugly Envy of live Streamers like CR behind her little "I'm just writing an Editorial" act.

Quote from: Motorskills;1079202So one thing these tyrannical SJWs have done in times past is push (successfully?) for building codes to require wheelchair access. So that has helped some.

Typical SJW fashion you think that automatically works in all cases. The smart owner who wants to avoid legal issues and fines with the city will ensure wheelchair access. Most could care less as unless they get a huge influx of disabled people living in a building they are not spending the necessary money to do so. Not unless they are fined and forced and even then they drag their feet about it. Personally I consider such people scum. Yet it's not like waving a magic wand and suddenly every building has wheelchair access

Quote from: Motorskills;1079202But if they are hosting a convention in an old building, it might be exempt. Okay, but that doesn't prevent the organizers from considering solutions to the problem, and ideally do that in advance, rather than being called out for it later.

Easier said than do imo. As I said above many will refuse to do it and maybe forced by the city do so and even then drag out the process.

Quote from: Motorskills;1079202Actually you can.

"We welcome everyone, not least people in wheelchairs"

"But you haven't actually made it possible for me to get my wheelchair inside the building!"

So one thing these tyrannical SJWs have done in times past is push (successfully?) for building codes to require wheelchair access. So that has helped some.

But if they are hosting a convention in an old building, it might be exempt. Okay, but that doesn't prevent the organizers from considering solutions to the problem, and ideally do that in advance, rather than being called out for it later.

I agree with you that disability is an area I champion in terms of inclusivity, and F anyone who calls me an SJW for doing it. I certainly have never even vaguely impied that it's easy or that it just automatically works and happens because I wish for it, but I've actively worked for it. It's hard work, but it's worth doing, and it doesn't make someone a snowflake or SJW for actively pushing for it and working hard to make it happen where you can.

Quote from: Jaeger;1079206I keep seeing people trying to equate Pundit's Shtick with what CR does...

That's like saying I have a cold, and you have cancer, but really, we're both just kinda sick.

Nope, that's bullshit. I personally know one of the people in Critical Role. His personality in the game is virtually identical to his personality outside the game. I say again, I think RPGPundit's personality outside of "The RPGPundit" is likely more different from his regular personality than the guy from Critical Role. I don't know RPGPundit in real life so I can't be sure, but his obsessive protection of his real name for non-privacy reasons (he lives in Uruguay), and his long history of edgelore posts, and his blocking out his identity on video, and his saying it's all part of his RPGPundit persona in an interview, adds up to an act. It's a good act. It's an act which has lots of genuine passion and belief behind it, but it's still an act. And that act is at least as different from his regular personality I suspect as the guy from Critical Role is different in the CR videos vs his regular life.

So no, it's not like a cold vs cancer. I am in fact saying they're both roughly equal in terms of who is "acting".

And the only reasons people here don't hold Pundit to the standards they're trying to hold the CR guys to are I suspect envy over their high level of success, and they're not here posting while Pundit is.

Quote from: Mistwell;1079226And the only reasons people here don't hold Pundit to the standards they're trying to hold the CR guys to are I suspect envy over their high level of success, and they're not here posting while Pundit is.

Has Pundit ever explicitly denied that his act is an act?  He has mentioned familiarity with acting/improv techniques several times, so perhaps that's where he's employing them, and why he recognizes them in the Critical Role pigshit?

Quote from: S'mon;1079141ENW does a lot of Banning for Inclusivity these days. I recall I once told them they were a lot more inclusive before they were Inclusive.

Saying things like that could get you Banned.

Quote from: Mistwell;1079226Nope, that's bullshit.

Ahhh, sweet eloquent profanity.

The cornerstone of all well reasoned rebuttals on internet fora.

Quote from: Mistwell;1079226I personally know one of the people in Critical Role. His personality in the game is virtually identical to his personality outside the game. I say again, I think RPGPundit's personality outside of "The RPGPundit" is likely more different from his regular personality than the guy from Critical Role. I don't know RPGPundit in real life so I can't be sure, ... (More pure speculation)...

I'm talking of Critical Role as a whole vs Pundit. Which is evident in my post.

You've done a 1v1 individual comparison contrasting someone you know, with someone you don't, to try and prove your point.

Your own evident biases/ideas about who Pundit is cannot hope to make that even a remotely fair comparison.

But attacking Pundit personally, rather than the points he makes in his video, is a good way to try and deflect the subject of the debate.

In your favor, at least you seem to realize that CR is an act/Staged to some degree.

It's amazing how many posted here saying it's not staged at all, totally real, just like some games they know, only better!

I expect to see their challenges to Ms. Leitman's assertion that Live Streams are different to home games in her comments section shortly.

Quote from: Mistwell;1079226And the only reasons people here don't hold Pundit to the standards they're trying to hold the CR guys to are I suspect  envy over their high level of success, and they're not here posting while Pundit is.

So this is what he is trying to do here everyone:

Labeling all criticism of CR as envy, is a classic debate tactic to try and shut down critics by putting them on the defensive, thereby controlling the direction of the debate.

If you are spending time trying to explain how not envious you are - then that is less time your opponent spends having to actually address an issue, or argue points on merit.

By attacking Pundit, and the posters with similar views directly, (hopefully getting them to react and defend themselves) they do not have to actually address any points made by those they disagree with.

Quote from: kythri;1079229Has Pundit ever explicitly denied that his act is an act?  He has mentioned familiarity with acting/improv techniques several times, so perhaps that's where he's employing them, and why he recognizes them in the Critical Role pigshit?

He has not denied it yet in those terms, but he's danced around it in his reply in this thread.

Quote from: sureshot;1079172I know meritocracy is more of a dream than anything else. I would still prefer that over " treat me better than everyone else because of my race, gender, sexual identity" garbage. All due respect you want me to hire you to fix a roof make a good case without using race, gender or sexual identity politics. Try any of those three with me and you are shown the door immediately.

I agree but I at the same time see the danger. Aren't people who feel marginalized (or who see themselves having a competetive disadvantage) more likely to stick together when competition heats up? After all, it's only fair compensation to some of them? In sports, it's the people who feel they can't win without doping who resort to that. And then the second step is that at some point the majority will feel threatened by minorities sticking together (especially when those become big enough) and they will cover each other's back. Same in sports: you've been the reigning champion, you got beaten or you see the competition catching up fast and feel they're cheating (whether justified or not!). That's when these athletes resort to doping too and thus everybody ends up doing it.

What I am saying is: people will try to get any edge they can on their competition if they feel they have to. Sometimes even mere paranoia can drive us human beings there. That's why I am as skeptical about a functioning meritocracy as I am about doping-free endurance sports: unlikely to happen without a totalitarian supervision regime. It'd be nice to have it though.

Quote from: Jaeger;1079237Ahhh, sweet eloquent profanity.

The cornerstone of all well reasoned rebuttals on internet fora.

Calling something bullshit is not profanity. I suspect you appreciate the difference.

QuoteI'm talking of Critical Role as a whole vs Pundit. Which is evident in my post.

You've done a 1v1 individual comparison contrasting someone you know, with someone you don't, to try and prove your point.

Your own evident biases/ideas about who Pundit is cannot hope to make that even a remotely fair comparison.

Let me see if I get this straight. None of you know anyone in CR, and none of the CR people have said anything much about this topic, but dismissing it all as actors and not real gamers without knowing them (though I know with 100% direct certainty they were all gamers before there was a camera, most before they were even actors). And that's acceptable to you. But my judging Pundit not knowing him but at least by his own words on the topic is somehow unacceptable to you?

QuoteBut attacking Pundit personally, rather than the points he makes in his video, is a good way to try and deflect the subject of the debate.

I am defintely not attacking him personally, and that odd reply of yours shows you're not grokking this topic. I am juding the act he portrays. He not only does not deny it's an act, but said in an interview it's an act. I am judging his acting, not him personally. And the only judgement I make about his acting is that it's roughly the equivelent of any acting done by the CR guys. I'd love to hear how that's some personal topic.

QuoteIn your favor, at least you seem to realize that CR is an act/Staged to some degree.

They have acting backgrounds. It's not staged in that it is not in any way scripted, it's not edited, it's done live, they're role playing. I know from direct personal experience at least one member behaves exactly like that when not on camera - that's just him. And I am saying that Pundit is doing a rough equivelent of that with his RPG Pundit persona.  

QuoteLabeling all criticism of CR as envy, is a classic debate tactic to try and shut down critics by putting them on the defensive, thereby controlling the direction of the debate.

First of all I am classically trained to debate. Second, it's never been to shut down critics, it's always been to engage with critics. Nobody is trying to shut anyone down here. However, playing the victim like you're doing right now and whining, bitching, moaning, and complaining that someone is trying to squelch your right to free speech merely for saying thety think you're behaving with envy? That really IS a classic means of shutting down discussion. Man up. You can handle someone calling you envious without crying about it. If you disagree, then make an argument about why it's not envy.

QuoteIf you are spending time trying to explain how not envious you are - then that is less time your opponent spends having to actually address an issue, or argue points on merit.

There IS merit to the envy argument. I am saying Pundit is as much an act as members of CR and he gets treated differently than the members of CR, and one reason is envy. That's a plenty meritorious argument if true, and so far you've done nothing to refute it other than whine that someone dares say it. Go ahead, play the victim some more without addressing the point being made. But don't be surprised if you fail to impress the crowd here. People here don't tend to like those who play the victim card to get out of addressing hard truths.

Quote from: Mistwell;1079245He has not denied it yet in those terms, but he's danced around it in his reply in this thread.

And he definitely thought it.  Just read between the lines people.

Quote from: Motorskills;1079202So one thing these tyrannical SJWs have done in times past is push (successfully?) for building codes to require wheelchair access.

No, you are confusing preening about something with getting something done.  The people who did the heavy lifting on the wheelchair access were not notably SJWs.  

But that is a great example of something SJWs do all the time:  Take credit for something they had little to nothing to do with.  It's kind of like socialism more broadly in that respect--any success anywhere is ripe for being claimed, and any failure was because it "wasn't tried properly".  

With SJW and real life, it's "Post Turtles" all the way down.  You see a turtle on a fence post.  He didn't get there on his own merits.  He doesn't know what to do now that he is there.  But what you really want to know is who was the asshole that put him there?

Quote from: Steven Mitchell;1079256But that is a great example of something SJWs do all the time:  Take credit for something they had little to nothing to do with.

Good point.

@Jaeger

I've been watching this entire thread.  As far as debate goes, not a single shred of actual evidence has been provided to indicate that CR is acting.  The ONLY claim to evidence is that people seem to be enjoying themselves far more than is actually POSSIBLE and therefore it MUST be acting.

You should probably read that sentence a few times before you go off half-cocked because it really does imply that some people are having more fun than the people here are - more fun than apparently people here can IMAGINE.  

Which is pretty sad when you think about it for any length of time.

Quote from: deadDMwalking;1079273The ONLY claim to evidence is that people seem to be enjoying themselves far more than is actually POSSIBLE and therefore it MUST be acting.

I'm one who thinks CR is, outright, pre-scripted fluff.  And, quite frankly, I don't for a second believe those people are enjoying themselves.  Certainly, they're acting as if they're enjoying themselves.