Quote from: PseudoephedrineMy main problem with most of the guys doing "RPG theory" is that they're mostly pseudo-intellectuals who are intellectually dishonest and pretentious (in the true sense of the word - pretending to be something better than one really is), starting with Ron Edwards and continuing through to TonyLB and Levi.

Enlighten me:

What is it that I'm pretending to be, exactly?

Quote from: Levi KornelsenEnlighten me:

What is it that I'm pretending to be, exactly?

A turtle?

Quote from: J ArcaneA turtle?

I'm guessing "An Authority", honestly.  Which I'm often actually guilty of, but not so terribly that it's truly abhorrent (I hope).

Someone who uses words in a straightforward way directed towards the speaking of true things, last I checked. See the "Social Contract" thread from last year on RPG.net. It's not the only example, but it's the key one, the one where I stopped taking anything you said too seriously.

I also didn't like your mealy-mouthed Creationist flake bullshit way back when you first started posting to RPG.net, but it's been a few years and I don't know if you still hold to that. It left a bad first impression, and it's only gotten worse over time.

I think you're a nice person, but not a careful, thoughtful or serious person. And I care more about those than being nice.

Has this seriously never come up before? I thought I'd said to you that I thought you were a flake before.

Quote from: PseudoephedrineSomeone who uses words in a straightforward way directed towards the speaking of true things, last I checked. See the "Social Contract" thread from last year on RPG.net. It's not the only example, but it's the key one, the one where I stopped taking anything you said too seriously.

So, do you think that I fail to say true things, that I do not use words straightforwardly, or a bit of both?

Quote from: PseudoephedrineI also didn't like your mealy-mouthed Creationist flake bullshit way back when you first started posting to RPG.net, but it's been a few years and I don't know if you still hold to that. It left a bad first impression, and it's only gotten worse over time.

:confused:

I'm agnostic-buddhist.  Have been for years, since I quit bible college / seminary.  But I can imagine myself playing apologist for creationism, so I don't doubt that I said something that twigged odd.

Quote from: PseudoephedrineI think you're a nice person, but not a careful, thoughtful or serious person. And I care more about those than being nice.

Has this seriously never come up before? I thought I'd said to you that I thought you were a flake before.

Nope, this is news to me.  Possibly you said as much, and I missed it, though.

I agree that I'm neither careful nor serious.  I don't see those as especially positive things.  So far as thoughtful goes...   Hm.  Not so much on forums.  Now and then, maybe.

I can live with being considered a flake.  To be honest, it's close enough to the mark to sting just a little, which tempted me to get defensive, but there'd be no real point.

Quote from: Erik BoielleWell, this right here implies you probably can't see a lot of the rudeness. Someone says FUCK D20! and you are thinking YEAH! instead of pondering how it might come across to someone who likes D20.

If the person who likes D20 takes it personal it says something about the person.

Quote from: Levi KornelsenSo, do you think that I fail to say true things, that I do not use words straightforwardly, or a bit of both?

Both. I think you do not use words straightforwardly or carefully, and I think you do not say true things. I think both things stem from the common root of carelessness.

QuoteI can live with being considered a flake.  To be honest, it's close enough to the mark to sting just a little, which tempted me to get defensive, but there'd be no real point.

You're not the worst of the lot. You're just a flake, after all. There are plenty of others who are flakes plus additional awful qualities. That's probably why I'm comparatively nicer to you than them.

Quote from: PseudoephedrineBoth. I think you do not use words straightforwardly or carefully, and I think you do not say true things. I think both things stem from the common root of carelessness.

You're not the worst of the lot. You're just a flake, after all. There are plenty of others who are flakes plus additional awful qualities. That's probably why I'm comparatively nicer to you than them.

*Shrug*

Okay.  Seems like a reasonable viewpoint, given your stated values.

Interesting [strokes chin, sips coffee, munches on Digestive biscuit]...

I see the terms "intellectual dishonesty", "pretentious" and so forth used with great frequency in many discussions here on the RPGsite. However, how do you know if someone is being intellectually dishonest? My understanding of the first term is that you act as an advocate of a fallacy (or fallacious POV) using various tricks and styles to make others believe your point. In many, many cases, I just don't see that. Yes, a theory is a theory and may not amount to a hill of beans in this world, but just because someone believes in a theory and advocates it, does not mean they are being intellectually dishonest. If they do genuinely see that theory as valuable and applicable to them and wish to discuss how it might apply to others, fair play. Of course, in any walk of life, you have people going "But this must apply to you! Believe! Believe!". Shouting never really gets you anywhere.

As for being pretentious, is that not sometimes and easy out? Just say someone is pretentious and be done with it, not really bothering to see what it is they are talking about and where they are coming from? Hell, I could easily be called pretentious because in games I've played in recently, we've taken lessons from the techniques of film noir, talked about jazz influenced hiphop as background music for games set in 1950s Germany and had in-depth discussions about the different forms of authority inherent in a game (oh boy, did that cause a few furrowed brows and debates). But none of this is pretentious. We're not pretending that any of this is important in any wider sense, it's only important to us, at that point in time, in that game we are playing. Does it make our game better? Yes. For us. Others might look and go "Well, there's no way that would help my game!" and fair play to them.

Anyway, the point is, I feel these terms are suffering from severe over-use and risk (or have already lost) any impact and meaning they might have.

I look forward to seeing this post in shreds, sometime, on a forum near you.

Cheers
Malcolm

Quote from: MelanHere is more swinery than you can shake a stick at. Especially when you go to the comment threads. Really, I'm not even sure swine exist, but if they do, Lev should be a prime example. Intellectualising mixed with intellectual dishonesty, yay. Get him up against the wall! :pundit:

See, I guess I'm missing the secret code.  I skim Lev's reviews of old school modules from time to time because I've played a few of them and am curious to see how they stand today (I still collect Gamma World modules; awesome material there).  His reviews always seemed pretty straightforward.  Is there an agenda buried in there?  What am I missing?

QuoteWhat am I missing?

Same as Lev: the point of D&D.

Quote from: SettembriniThey are valuable in shorthandingly dismissing the ideological enemy. And they are in a smart way rooted in reality, harken back to exoperiences the audience has made. That´s why asking for explanation of Swine is pretty "swinish" itself. Because if you don´t get what is meant by swine, chances are high you are from a different political grouping, have a different pedigree and view of the world. most likely you are too stupid to read betweeen the lines of the Swine. It´s all about contexct, tone and between the lines, most of the time.

You sound paranoid.  Don't sign me up for your ideological war.  

Quote from: SettembriniBut you can show it, you can highlight it, you can underline the pedigree of their thinking.

Well then show it!  There is a ton of frothing and ranting going on here about some ideological enemy and so far I have gotten one real, current example of it, from Erik.  And we're on page 7.  It's funny because you spent most of your post carefully finding reasons for why you can't find it and why looking for it actually makes you a swine.  It's got a nice Ministry of Information ring to it, your reasoning.

When it comes to "swinery", this bit is usually presented as a pretty hardcore example, I imagine just because of how pretentious and "We are Artists" it comes off as. Unfortunate and easily-mocked choice, comparing the Forge to the Beat Poets.

Quote from: SettembriniSame as Lev: the point of D&D.

Explain.

Quote from: Zachary The FirstWhen it comes to "swinery", this bit is usually presented as a pretty hardcore example, I imagine just because of how pretentious and "We are Artists" it comes off as.  Unfortunate and easily-mocked choice, compared the Forge to the Beat Poets.

Ah yes, that's the blog I had seen.  That is embarrassing, as I had said.  But why does it make everyone so mad?  I mean shit, that stuff is up on the internet forever!  That seems like punishment enough for that guy.  He is going to be doing some serious cringing in 5 years.