@Lithium said in Do you believe in paranormal things?:
Maybe one day we'll discover a piece of tech that allows us to measure this energy, track it as it leaves the body, figure out what's going on there. Right now we don't have it, but that doesn't mean we just say: It cannot exist, and stop looking.
I felt the same way about ST:TNG PADDs, and, lo, we have the iPad.
Despite being a lawyerbot, I hedge on the side of: wait and see.
"Youth ages, immaturity is outgrown, ignorance can be educated, drunkenness sobered, but stupid lasts forever. " -- The Emperor's Club (2002).
"If I could offer one piece of advice to the planet, it would be this: Don't marry for looks alone, and I'll tell you why. In a few years, when Barbara's boobs start sagging, she can get plastic surgery, have them lifted, move the nipple wherever. You can actually go to a titty bar, pick out a set of titties and say, "I want those titties on that woman." If her belly gets too big, she can get a tummy tuck and have a belly like a cheerleader. If her vision goes bad, you can have LASIK surgery and have 20/20 vision. If her hearing goes bad, they can install a device in her ear that will give you hearing as clear as it was the day you were born. But let me tell you something, folks: You can't fix stupid. There's not a pill you can take; there's not a class you can go to. Stupid is forever." -- Ron White
My PC on Arx is quite openly bisexual, and literally no one fucks with her shit.
And I’m happy with this so much.
@Vorpal said in Do you believe in paranormal things?:
In this instance, it would be those who consistently insist that something exists despite proof to the contrary that would be ‘cramming their beliefs’ down someone’s throat, by your definition of it.
This is a conclusion based on nothing I've written yet.
If I had a personal belief in God, and you were to ask me how I became successful, I might, in my brief wit, say that I was blessed. I don't consider this proselytizing; I consider this a statement of personal opinion based on knowledge you likely don't have (non-mystical, non-spiritual knowledge).
Now, if you came up to me and told me that there could not possibly be any evidence that I was blessed because I cannot have any evidence of any Divine Being with the capability of having any measurable relevance to my life, I would consider that "cramming your belief set down my throat." You may be, in your educated opinion, completely correct, but you are still "cramming your belief set down my throat." You are not criticizing or examining my opinion; you cannot do so without being informed of the knowledge that I possess, on which I've based my conclusion. Rather, you're belittling it based on your educated-and-probably-correct conclusions.
The original poster asked a simple question: "do you believe in paranormal things?" This isn't a complex question, and yet somehow, for some reason, we have witnessed 170+ posts of responses, acerbic and not, grandiloquent or not, for a question which begs only a "yes or no" answer.
It is not unreasonable from the sheer volume of discourse produced, that not only criticizes but, in many ways, demeans the idea that someone could believe in something for which no evidence has yet been discovered, to conclude that this is no longer a discussion or civil argument, but instead a concerted, if unconscious, effort to browbeat one or many perspectives.
So what I'm criticizing, in my roundabout way, is my observation that one group has effectively silenced another, for reasons I cannot quite fathom. If it is true that science evolves over time, as does reason, then it is not unreasonable to conclude that the "paranormal" things we observe now will be quite rational in the far future, and it is not unreasonable for someone to be defensive or offended by what appears to be academic intimidation.
Some people just want to believe in something that isn't fully explainable. And if they aren't harming anyone else by it, so be it.
@Sunny said in Why no Star Trek games?:
There are PLENTY of people for whom the roleplay IS actually the point.
I think this is why cosplay is successful too.
I think that Star Trek games are not popular these days because Star Trek doesn't seem to be as popular as it was back in the 90s. Although there are two current series, one is a throwback using old characters.
I think Star Trek requires a certain mindset which is difficult to hold onto right now. The idea of an ideal society for humanity seems a far-cry from what we have now. The idea of exploring the unknown and appreciating cultures is wonderful, but I think it lacks the same luster yester-years had.
@surreality said in RL Anger:
Fair! I just tend to point that one out because it can harm you (but really, I'm a smoker -- I am not so much a hypocrite as to tell someone they can't do something they know can harm themselves), too, and... really, a lot of people genuinely believe it's totally OK to use that to try to shame people with permanent injuries or actual physical problems into pushing it way, way more than they should.
Also fair.
I've been doing the workout thing long enough to know when to pull back. While I'm not making the same gains I did when I was in my 20s, I'm not fucking in my 20s anymore. I know what I need to do to get even better, but I just don't do it -- sorry, but I like my Chinese and Mexican food.
@Derp said in MU Things I Love:
Like, would they say somethimg? Would /I/ day something? Are either of us just too polite?
Everyone knows who I play.
Everyone knows that I RP even the most boring of discussions.
Like trade agreements and naval strategy.
Sorry, not sorry, if you're RPing with me you may be dragged into a political matter.
@Sunny said in Pokemon Go:
It's just aggravating to see people who are usually decent people running around doing their best to spoil fun for others.
I should probably stop intentionally sticking my foot out when people try to walk past me to get to their Pokémon target. I should probably also do the same for people staring at their phones and not paying attention to their surroundings.
But I probably won't. Others hate the fun I like to have.
@Chet said in Vietnam War MUSH:
I don't know, none of my professors at UMass-Amherst or SNHU ever had a problem with me, besides a single history professor at a 300 level saying I wrote a biased paper by not explaining the German side of propaganda, in justification, in WW2, on a class in European childhood studies, as a history major.
I'll be more blunt than my colleague.
Stop it. I'm not buying it. Back off the line.
@Thenomain said in RL Anger:
What about the laws we have in place to protect people with allergies?
Which laws are those?
Or non-smoking regulations?
You mean, those blatantly unconstitutional regulations that have had no demonstrable effect on smoking or related-cancer rates?
@Derp said:
See, I think it should be applied to PvP situations. It's a neutral way to resolve a social situation that doesn't end in 'nuh uh because I said so, my person would never do that' which gets applied to just about every social roll ever. Which is lame as fuck.
Yes, it is. And that player is lame as fuck too.
But I don't think GMC's Doors system is great for what you're suggesting. The Danse Macabre's social combat system, in my opinion, was a better approach; it's quick, it's dirty, and it's about who looks better in the end, ultimately. It's not about making someone suck your dick as much as it is convincing everyone else around that the eschewing of your penis makes that person looks totes ridic. That's kind of better for PvP conflict.
@Three-Eyed-Crow said in RL Anger:
I have friends I love but will not loan money to anymore, because it's a never-ending cycle.
I do not lend money to friends. I pay for them sometimes, but I will not loan them money. None of them ask me to loan them money because they know I won't; not because I'm a skin-flint, but because I know I'm a bastard of a collector.
I am, after all, Chinese.
@ Bennie
What Glitch said, although direct blocks can be employed:
Don't allow many alts.
Even a minimal-requirement approval system obstructs the ability of a player to generate a PC to take revenge in 24 hours. Were this to happen, I would probably @boot the player for abusing the system. Abuse is a good reason to evict a player.
@il-volpe said:
Being able to advance a PC is part of the fun.
No, being able to advance a PC is part of your fun. I prefer being able to make the PC that I want to play. Regardless, whether I do this over time or immediately out of the gate is immaterial to my enjoyment of the game.
As a player, I've found that a lot of policies designed to reduce 'stat inflation' are simply making my XP meaningless.
Nothing renders XP more meaningless than having it doled out so freely that everyone can, across the board, destroy any reasonable opposition. In my opinion, The Reach makes XP gain meaningless because there's so damned much of it.
I find it much, much less annoying to earn XP very very very slowly yet be able to spend it freely. Then the XP is scarce, yes, but it's mine, and I don't feel conned.
That's fine. That's your preference. It's not everyone's preference.
If The Reach has shown anything, it is that an alternative XP system can be employed to great success. Remember that The Reach opened when Haunted Memories and St. Petersburg were operational; those games used an activity-based XP system.
@Insomnia said in No Man's Sky Thread:
You aren't the only one who wants it, but given that sales droped 81% in the second week?
Given that the game was mostly sold and downloaded electronically, this cannot really surprise anyone given the negative publicity that the game has gotten.
I think the best retort to the criticism is "what the fuck did you expect"? Games always over-promise. And gamers will always have a reason to complain. Eventually, the people that enjoy sandbox-y space exploration will find and adore the game.
@Cobaltasaurus said in No Man's Sky Thread:
I don't love NMS. I've pretty much lost interest in it already.
The old adage applies: one can't please everyone. Even in a genre.
I don't really consider TES a "sandbox-y exploration" game. There's still a coherent story in there, so I tend to think of it as an open-world RPG.
@lordbelh said in No Man's Sky Thread:
More, I prefer to wait a couple of years for the expansion/the DLCs too. Game becomes way cheaper by then, and most importantly all the fucking bugs are gone.
I do this by default now; I have too many games to play and complete. I'm still in Dragon Age: Inquisition, for fuck's sake, but mostly because I had The Witcher 3, which is a hellofalot better.
@Sunny said in Is this hobby on it's last legs?:
Like clockwork. It's September, of course we're having this conversation again. It literally happens every single September on this board and all previous mush tabloids.
