So, who is winning, and who is getting solidly trounced?

Here's my impression of RPGPundit in that thread

Quote from: Name LipsSo, who is winning, and who is getting solidly trounced?

RPGPundit threw the contest before it even began.


Edit: fixed typo

Not seeing it as a win-lose contest, so I didn't vote.

C) It ain't a win-lose contest.

thread renamed for less moderator confusion.

I saw the title in the main forums view and thought "aaah crap, someone who shouldn't be posting in there just did..."

thankfully, that was not the case.

Last few posts split off to leave the main debate intact - however I'm sure Pundit loses a few points for derailing the thread via invocation of strawman.

Quote from: PookaLast few posts split off to leave the main debate intact - however I'm sure Pundit loses a few points for derailing the thread via invocation of strawman.

Pity, it could have been on of his strongest assertions.

If he had developed the argument right. He didn't, so it's no loss.

Quote from: Xavier LangNot seeing it as a win-lose contest, so I didn't vote.

I see it as a win-win contest, really.  We get the joy of airing our opinions and smacking them around, and everyone else gets to watch us toss each other around, and maybe spots stuff they like in our opinions.

A few points:

1. Levi, as a stand-in for all swine/theorists (in the pundit's terms) isn't a particuarly indicative target. He doesn't (AFAIK) believe in White-Wolf brain-damage. He isn't posting that the majority of gamers don't enjoy gaming and find some kind of psuedo gaming instead to enjoy (remembered gaming).

Most importantly (and you can correct me if I have you wrong on these points, Levi), he isn't claiming that RPGs that aren't art are crap (I'm not sure who actually *is* on the record as saying that--no one who posts here regularly that I'm aware of)

2. RPGPundit, as a, well, pundit, has a pretty definite PoV and, IMO, is sticking to it. The idea that RPGs are "games first" and either not art (?) or at very best "art second" isn't easy to debate away: most of these things are pretty darn game-like. Most of what is considered art is not especially game-like.

Even without a debate, anything that would sit on a shelf with things that call themselves RPGs has a ways to go before it is clearly more art than game.

So basically I don't see a conflict on any of the important points.

That said:
I do want to know what Brian thinks the pundit did wrong and I'm foggy on what, specifically, the straw-man is.

-Marco

I agree with Levi. I also agree with marco, that Levi is not a particularly typical candidate for the "Swine" point of view. Then again the typical Swine would be incapable of putting together an argument long enough to last for a 10-post argument, much less a 100-post disputation.

No one is going to convince anyone of anything here. The claim of "winning or losing" comes down to a popularity contest, which I note that most of the Swine rushed to vote in, and most of the non-Swine made a point of avoiding.

I mean, shit, I could be arguing with a mental defective and reduce him to a broken-down puddle of tears and guys like Maddman and Nikchick would still claim the other guy won.

RPGPundit

Persecution complex much?

Quote from: MarcoI do want to know what Brian thinks the pundit did wrong and I'm foggy on what, specifically, the straw-man is.

His biggest error was that he didn't insist on a real debate.

Such a debate should have a specific subject- Examples "Resolved: The Forge is bad for the rpg hobby", "Resolved: GNS is a elitist theory without merit" or "The movement to make RPGs Art is good for the hobby".

Further one side or the other should have taken the Affirmative with both first word (to frame the debate) and last word.

A limit of 20 posts would have been better.


As it went:

The subject is too wide, the exchange too long. That means RPGPundit has to deal with too much and his best points will be lost to the mass of the thread.

Further he let Levi get away with framing the debate. Thus Levi avoided all of his strongest anti-swine talking points by just agreeing with them (GNS) or refusing to engage. Levi was allowed to set up tastes in gaming as defensive stances- thus making certain he couldn't lose on logic or envidence.


I was very disappointed.

I'm winning because I'm not reading it.  :win:

Quote from: gleichmanHis biggest error was that he didn't insist on a real debate.

Such a debate should have a specific subject- Examples "Resolved: The Forge is bad for the rpg hobby", "Resolved: GNS is a elitist theory without merit" or "The movement to make RPGs Art is good for the hobby".

Further one side or the other should have taken the Affirmative with both first word (to frame the debate) and last word.

A limit of 20 posts would have been better.

These are all points I intend to use in later debates with others; this is the first time I've even seen something like this done, much less attempted it.

Quote from: gleichmanThe subject is too wide, the exchange too long. That means RPGPundit has to deal with too much and his best points will be lost to the mass of the thread.

The same could be said on my side as well.

Quote from: gleichmanFurther he let Levi get away with framing the debate. Thus Levi avoided all of his strongest anti-swine talking points by just agreeing with them (GNS) or refusing to engage. Levi was allowed to set up tastes in gaming as defensive stances- thus making certain he couldn't lose on logic or envidence.

I said I'd argue for my more "swinish" opinions, not on behalf of all persons that the Pundit objects to.

That said, I'd like to see someone that does have positive opinions on those topics, and the necessary fortitude, engage him on those specific topics.