Best posts made by insomniac7809

@Quinn said in Real World Peeves, Disgruntlement, and Irks.:

I think a lot of people don't take tooth infections seriously and let me tell you IT IS SUPER SERIOUS! That is an infection NEAR YOUR BRAIN!

On top of that... if you wanted to design an ideal place for bacteria, a microbal Shangri-La, you want a moist, dark space around 100* F that constantly has organic matter coming through.

If the many biological defenses your body employs to keep you from decomposing from the mouth back aren't working, you need to get on that.

@ganymede ...is that Cyborg beating his meat? Is that a joke they did in the show?

I voted 'no' b/c my MU* experience is the RP sort, where the game is typing words at people who type words back at me.

If the game is typing commands at a system to go through a map grinding MOBs for loot drops, that's a vidya game.

Gonna guess... JCVD for the first one, Jaden for the second and third.

***=Edit after looking***

@too-old-for-this

I figure that establishing Jon as a dragon-rider might be an important plot point, if the last scene throws a wrench into the gears of puppy and snookums' relationship.

French nobles were paid to post guards at potato fields and let peasants 'steal' them, to convince the French to adopt tubers as a foodstuff.

US courts used to limit the amount of lobster prisoners could be fed, based on the 'cruel and unusual punishment' clause.

Gotta be Smith.

***=checked***

@SG Could do it as Fiasco?

@TNP said in RL Anger:

Wearing a yarmulke is a sign of respect to those who do. If one attends an Orthodox wedding, for instance, yarmulkes are in a box by the door of the synagogue for those who don't normally wear one. I don't see having Trump in one as a dog whistle, merely a sign of Netanyahu's influence over him and no more significant than if it were Putin and he was wearing a cossack's hat.

The yarmulke is a sign of respect to the Jewish faith, not to the nation of Israel.

Even Netanyahu isn't wearing a yarmulke in the given image. Criticizing the President for being lead around by Israel is one thing. Making part of the criticism a connection with Judaism in general makes pushes the image into antisemitic territory.

Oh, and for what staff should be doing:

@Thenomain has a good bit of it, "mak(ing) sure everyone is playing the same game." 90%+ of actual interactions are going to be between PCs. If you're, say, running a game set in a small rural town, maybe... gently suggest that a PC who owns a hopping nightclub is a great PC for a different game.

Restrictions aren't a bad thing.

@Testament said in Game of Thrones:

@insomniac7809

Right there with you.

I still can't decide if I hate all the main characters or like them. For all my hand-wringing on it, it's as if one day Joe Abercrombie decided 'hey, what if I wrote a book series about really horrible people with only the slightest hint of likability'

Except Three-Trees. He's the best.

There was an AMA where someone asked Abercrombie "why are all of your characters horrible people with no redeeming features?" He answered "I think of my characters as horrible people with many redeeming features."

@Arkandel I'm not saying that you can't have a dungeon crawl with RP elements.

I'm putting forward that a rust monster is a thing that exists to fuck with the players, and expecting this fuckery to be met with 'well, my character might not know how to respond to this!' seems a bit disingenuous.

@Too-Old-For-This said in Game of Thrones:

He's made his mark and is here to stay.

Peter Dinklage was here before S1E1 hit the air, although it definitely did a lot to boost his profile.

He got a SAG nomination in '03 for The Station Agent, the same year he appeared in the (baffling) Tiptoes with Paula Arquette, Matthew McConaughey, Kate Beckinsale, and Gary Oldman. (Gary Oldman plays a dwarf. Who is McConaughey's twin brother. Kate Beckinsale struggles with the decision of whether to keep McConaughey's baby when she learns his entire family are dwarves seriously you have to see this shit)

@bored said in How can everyone play the same game?:

Arx has many such knots of players, and while some might do screwy things, many do valid things that nonetheless will never affect the big picture metaplot outside their family/clique/etc. Presumably you do not discount that as 'not playing.'

Arx has several knots of players. In my experience, most of these knots interact with other knots, intersecting other knots, and so on. Which gets you to a sort of... widespread... collective... thing.

And I wasn't saying that two PCs who play exclusively with each other aren't playing. I was wondering if they can be said to be playing the same game. If we're going to be calling the overall collective collaborative fictional space the 'game' (wank wank wank wank wank).

@Too-Old-For-This said in Game of Thrones:

Knights of Badassdom in 2013. I'm just saying, he's hit massive mainstream audiences by being in a Marvel movie.

Oh, that movie was so bad and I love it...

@Rinel said in TS - Danger zone:

@insomniac7809 said in TS - Danger zone:

If we're talking, like, magical timeline duplicates... now, that's a question that gets into the teleporter paradox. If I go into a machine, Scotty vaporizes me, and then I come back together on the other side, am I still me? If yes, what if he saves the data and pops out another of me? If no, that implies either I stop existing when my component atoms are replaced--which happens every few years--or when my consciousness stops functioning--which implies I did die during my appendectomy (or, rather, he died, I started existing when the anaesthesia wore off.) Do "I", in a discrete sense, actually exist, or am I just a collection of processes that shuffle around in the same general vicinity for a few decades, and if so, isn't a second identical bundle of processes just "more" of me?

Did you seriously just take a smut thread and turn it into a discourse on the problem of personal identity?

Fucking hell. Go read some Parfit and get out of here, nerd.

If you can answer whether duplicate sex is masturbation or incest without defining the self, then go ahead.

Maybe considering the ethical and philosophical implications of weird sex scenarios is my fetish. Ever think of that?

@Ghost said in Fandom and entitlement:

Not that I think it's entirely right, but when you're attempting to finance a movie that costs over 170 million to make + 100 million in advertising, and you're told that not digging too deeply into any subject matter in the movie could be the difference between losing 10 million or profiting 50+ million...it may not be the entitlement answer people want, but for the super high budget money making projects these movies are, it makes sense.

There are movies where it's wrong to avoid the content, and movies where it's more reasonable to downplay it. In the end you've got to understand that the huge budget movie companies that fund these movies are less concerned about whether or not specific wishes are met and more about the investment.

I really don't think the Harry Potter films are at risk of losing $10mil unless the premier is literally shown on a rapidly-sinking raft made entirely out of $100 bills that is also on fire, and even then they'd probably break even.

I stand by my assertion that "we might lose potential profit from people who think gay people openly existing is controversial, so we're going to write around the gay ex-couple at the heart of the narrative" qualifies as "chickenshit."

Especially when the movie is supposedly commenting on social issues.

No, I don't expect Hollywood creatives to do the right thing--no, scratch that, "meet the basic standards of behavior"--if it might cost them money, but I don't feel any compunctions over calling them cowards for it.

@Rinel said in TS - Danger zone:

@insomniac7809 said in TS - Danger zone:

@Rinel said in TS - Danger zone:

@insomniac7809 said in TS - Danger zone:

If we're talking, like, magical timeline duplicates... now, that's a question that gets into the teleporter paradox. If I go into a machine, Scotty vaporizes me, and then I come back together on the other side, am I still me? If yes, what if he saves the data and pops out another of me? If no, that implies either I stop existing when my component atoms are replaced--which happens every few years--or when my consciousness stops functioning--which implies I did die during my appendectomy (or, rather, he died, I started existing when the anaesthesia wore off.) Do "I", in a discrete sense, actually exist, or am I just a collection of processes that shuffle around in the same general vicinity for a few decades, and if so, isn't a second identical bundle of processes just "more" of me?

Did you seriously just take a smut thread and turn it into a discourse on the problem of personal identity?

Fucking hell. Go read some Parfit and get out of here, nerd.

If you can answer whether duplicate sex is masturbation or incest without defining the self, then go ahead.

Maybe considering the ethical and philosophical implications of weird sex scenarios is my fetish. Ever think of that?

I'm kinkshaming you right now.

During a body swap scenario, to what extent is consent held by the body's current inhabitant vs the original owner?