Posts made by Thenomain

@Lithium said in RL Anger:

@Thenomain Then quit fucking defending that hostility Thenomain.

I'm not.

I am separating the discussion from the hostility, and addressing that.

What, do you want me to shun @Tyche because he's @Tyche? Sure, I can do that. Or I can use his comments as a jumping-off point for something that's not hostile, which is what I've been doing; removing the hostility and seeing what's left.

I think what's left is a critical part of investigating this current cultural phenomenon. Also pretty damn interesting.

EDIT: You're so focused on being /right/ that you don't seem to give any actual fucks as to the feelings of others

To the contrary, I'm often twisted in a knot of stress when I worry that I might hurt someone. I am not always good at determining when that's going to happen; this being a pretty strictly text environment, I think you can understand.

I may believe I'm right, but I'm always looking for evidence to challenge my understanding. Dissecting your viewpoint, I didn't see anything that looked like standing evidence beyond "someone might get hurt". Pain is worth avoiding, but who, and how likely? How can you determine as a reasonable human being what you should and should not do?

These are rhetorical questions right now. I'm still hoping that someone can tell me what situations make a response of "Not All Men" taboo, possibly via a web link toward an explanation that is even to both men and women. Probably best if it was in PM, at this point.

You're disingenuous to the extreme, I find it /amazing/ I ever once respected your opinion at this point... because I can't respect your opinions or modes of 'discussion' on this subject.

If this is what you strongly believe, I'm not going to argue it. I believe you're wrong, but in the cosmic scheme of abuse and hate, it's not worth adding to the stress that's causing you to lash out like this.

@Lithium said in RL Anger:

@Thenomain I have said why it is offensive, you are just choosing to disbelieve /why/ that would be offensive to someone else.

I can see how that might appear, but you have in the past said that you can't read the connotation in straight-up text. I disbelieve that "someone else thinks it's offensive" is worthy of outright stopping of any behavior. It's vague to the point of uselessness. I've already lived through one era of political correctness, and I'm not about to agree to living through it again.

I'll also note that what "someone else" thinks is offensive isn't the problem. It's never been the problem. Hense: Wora, Swofa, Soapbox. The problem is what the language and action does culturally, it's long-term and very real harmful social effects.

We don't see eye-to-eye because I'm not convinced you have an argument. I clearly think the argument is worth having else I wouldn't be giving you the time of day, and I don't think you're wrong just to say you're wrong but because I don't see you giving your opinion strong merit.

(In more blunt terms: You think the phrase is offensive because someone might think it's dismissive. Not good enough. )

I said Tyche was a /part/ of the problem. It's reading comprehension 101.

Are you sure you don't want hostility to be part of the conversation? Because this? Right here? This is hostile. It's minor, and I can put on my big boy pants, but it undermines the trust needed for such an emotionally charged discussion.

You can be a part of something without being the driving force behind it.

I'm being given a negative social condition by accident of my birth. How can you not see the outright irony of saying this is okay? I'm not parading Men's Rights here, I'm parading Human Rights. If you want everyone to be treated equal, then for fucks' sake, treat everyone equal.

That's my "social justice". That's my justification for my opinion having merit. What's yours?

For example: Not all skinheads are racist, but some skinheads are racist to the extreme. [...] It's the same thing by going with the 'Not /all/ men' defense.

W... wait. Are you saying the classification of "men", a genetic lottery draw, is the same as the classification of "skinhead", a philosophical choice? This is false equivalence, and I will have no part of it.

Firstly, I never said all men did this thing. So by doing that it is a deflection and misdirection to try and turn the fault onto the speaker by making them seem erroneous.

I have offered my defense. You chide me for failing reading comprehension, yet you make this statement in spite that I have already addressed it. I am not misdirecting, I am saying that your statement is erroneous. This is a straightforward accusation.

Let me state this in another way: "Women can't drive." Is this clear that I'm not talking about all women? No, it's not. You would be justified to call me out on this bullshit statement for being overgeneralized. This is the classification of statement that I'm arguing against.

"Men behave thusly". No, no, they don't. My objection is not opinion, it's cold, hard, logical fact. If you think "not all men" is dismissive, perhaps it is. It's dismissive to an overgeneralization that needs dismissed. Instead of getting offended, clarify. If you don't mean "all men", then what do you mean?

I personally find it downright idiotic to not consider the self as part of the problems in conversation, whatever that problem may be! You can bet your blue bippy that I've been doing heavy self-editing to make sure I'm as clear to you specifically as I can.

Second, it refuses to address the actual issue, turning the topic of conversation /away/ from the problem that needs to be discussed and addressed so that it can be lessened.

Yet you're not addressing the issue, either. You're debating the quality of the debate instead of having one. You're doing what you're objecting about, but I'm not going to be insulting to read your mind and say that you are being intentionally misdirecting. I think you're getting emotionally caught up in circles, or reciting talking-points, or otherwise lost in the rabbit warrens of conversation that we all get in.

That is, I trust you have some well-meaning, but you can't expect me to carry the responsibility of miscommunication. I will help, but it only goes so far.

Third, as @Tyche did by immediately jumping to rapes and such the topic is /again/ changed to only a small fragment.

Then as part of the discussion, it is just as much your job to inform as it is to debate. If a conversation has gone off the rails, you can either try to put it back on the rails or you can move on. It's pointless to try and lay blame as to who shoved it off the rails.

I'm personally kind of insulted that you think that I'm trying to derail your point, when I invited you to make it. If this is how low you consider my opinion, then I'd much rather you not try to engage me at all. Hell, I think talking about derailing itself is derailing! Why are you doing that! Why do you think this discussion is more important than the one you were having? Nobody, nobody forced you to reply that way.

Incidentally, this is my model of communcation: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Communication#/media/File:Transactional_comm_model.jpg

This is very simplified, but don't say that I'm not giving you feedback. We're both exchanging roles of the medium.

It's a bait and switch tactic to try and force discourse away from the subject matter that /can/ and /should/ be discussed.

Yes! Yes! This is why I find Anita Fucking Sarkeesian to be such a fraud! To be poison to the discussion we should be having! I find her methodology to be cultish, filled with pseudo-terminolgy, and steps away from Hate Speech.

And what are we talking about? Well, I thought we were talking about why "Not All Men" is or is not offensive, but we've both become emotionally wrapped up in the differing viewpoint that we're now pointing fingers and going "no you". Yes, you've been participating in this, in spite of your objection to same.

This /shouldn't/ be a conversation that is hostile, but certain individuals surely do their best to do that.

Yes.

Please stop.

Both please stop being hostile, and please stop giving the hostility of others importance.

@Thenomain got a -1! Achievement Unlocked: WTF?

Something you want to say, @Kanye-Qwest, or is this vague displeasure?

@tragedyjones said in I will design you a MUX:

The biggest problem with historical settings is that people such at research. You either care about historical accuracy and you stay a niche game, or you don't and you become a slightly larger niche game.

While I +1'd this, it used to be quite possible for people to find their game theme and then throw a historical veneer over it. The more fantasy or alt-history it is, the more people can click with it which is probably what you want.

@Misadventure said in RL Anger:

Is there anything we can do to change either of those things in the online RP hobby?

Don't put up with cockgobbling elitists, learn how to communicate displeasure without blame, and never assume that everyone is entitled to their own opinion because nothing can come from that kind of echo chamber.

And I'll agree with @Arkandel on this one: Learn when to walk away. Not everything demands your absolute devotion, and there's finite time in the world to get things done. Pick your battles.

@Lithium said in RL Anger:

Nobody is saying ALL Men are /anything/ just like nobody is saying all of any <insert subset here> is anything.

Then people need to stop saying things like, "Why do men...", because it's no less offensive than saying "why can't women drive". That is, it's pretty fucking insulting all around. If we fought this long and hard to strike this kind of question from our cultural vocabulary, then people aren't doing the world any favors by bringing it back in.

No, they are just propagating the underlying issue by turning it around on perceived aggressors. They need to fucking stop.

If they don't mean "everyone", then we need to stop seeing videos like "17 Questions for Men". Why not something more informative like "17 Questions for Bigots". If you can't make your message clear, then you need to change your message.

The reason it is so fucking offensive is because it is statements like that that are used as a shield against awareness. It's a response that serves no purpose because it deflects from the actual problem at hand, and that is that /some/ of these people /are/.

Yes, this is my complaint. Take what you're saying and now view it from all sides, ask yourself how you would act if the issue was pointed at your gender. (This was 100% of the point in the videos Tyche linked to.) Get out of whatever self-described label you're in and think. Otherwise, you are acting just like you're accusing Tyche of acting like.

The real answer needs to be:

How do we make this problem go away?

Yes, but as long as people--MRA, Militant Feminists, whomever--are mis-phrasing the issue, then coming to a consensus like this is going to be impossible.

If the answer to the issue is "not me", there's more evidence that the issue is being phrased poorly. That this has been the statement/response for a decade means that people are having a time approaching it critically. It's kind of creepy to me, and smacks of cultish behavior. Super creepy.

In summary, if even you can't explain why "Not All Men" is offensive (you haven't, really), then I invoke my right to call you out on promoting propaganda. If your objection is that it means that whatever is Not My Problem, then welcome to the real world. Support your thesis. Stop relying on a movement which makes enemies out of reasonable people.

@Kanye-Qwest said in RL Anger:

@Thenomain
What are you upset about?

I'm upset when what I think of important issues are undermined. This is a general peeve, suitable to this thread, but not at anyone in particular unless named. (Anita.)

Who isn't funny?

Thunderf00t, but he's not trying to be funny. He's trying to be satirical. I think he fails there, as well as failing in effectively pointing out the irony in the responses to his satire video. He comes off to me as a troll, though I believe he's only half-trolling. You've got to be stupid careful when you're trolling for a purpose, since most people will lose the purpose for the troll. Pointing out people losing the purpose for the troll just makes him look stupid, worse since that's pretty clearly not his intention.

Shoe0nHead (got it right that time) is pretty anti-feminism, but her videos are short, comedic, and mostly treat the target material—when people are denied basic human rights—with some respect. You might have to tilt your head to the right and suppress any own knee-jerk emotional responses, but it's there.

Same can be said for Thunderf00t, but damn he is so ... boring.

@Ganymede said in RL Anger:

Not that men have helped themselves in that arena by being generally misogynistic and bigoted.

Yeah, us guys.

i mean, I agree with the core idea from Tyche that bigotry is not good and that people should be called out on it, but I've never been labeled an MRA. Maybe it's because I identify my own faults? Maybe it's because I'm not trying to start a fight? Or that I'm not belittling the issues? (Satire and sarcasm don't have to belittle the issue, just the idiots misappropriating it.)

Yeah, the more that I think about it, the more that I have to wonder how people getting pissed off over a contentious and emotional issue is noteworthy. It's a pretty basic psychology tactic. I'm going back to watch Sh0eonhead. At least she's funny.

@somasatori said in I will design you a MUX:

If I had time to create a MU*, I've got an idea for an original horror setting. Unfortunately, I'm not sure when I'll actually have time to do anything that labor-intensive.

I'd call it something foreboding, yet believable. Perhaps a part of the world on the precipice of disaster that calls itself The Reach.

@Lithium said in RL Anger:

@Thenomain For my part, abuse is abuse. Are some abuses worse than others? Hell yes, but, that /does not mean we let any of it slide/.

Which is Mercedes' complaint, that Anita is letting the worse abuses slide.

She is justifiably pissed about what happened, and about the lack of support but that doesn't mean you support harassment and abuse of others.

Good, because she wasn't saying that it did. She was calling Anita a fraud for ... well, letting the worse abuses slide, for taking income and fame while not addressing the core issues of sexually motivated abuse.

Because ... y'know, Anita's a fraud.

@Tyche said in RL Anger:

IF men acted like FEMINISTS
IF men acted like FEMINISTS - Hate Mail

Irony and satire have their place, but I don't think this guy was very good at it. It was cute, and his point was made, but it was bland and way too long, undermining the satire. 2 out of 5 stars; would not recommend. Hate Videos are not a thing I go out to explore, but I bet there's someone who does a far better job of deconstructing the problem with Anitian Feminism.

This porn star, for instance. (Don't worry, she's dressed, but she is discussing rape.) To summarize for people who are too tired to watch more of the back-and-forth name-calling, the short and succinct point she is making is that the deeper problem isn't being addressed by Anita et al.

Also, is a video of someone who is actually RL angry.

---

While I have my high horse out: damn, @Coin, I read that as if it was also satire. I didn't believe for a minute that this was serious. I can't figure out what else it would possibly be, so I'll believe it.

Hello, Renoites!

The Thenomain nWoD/Chronicles of Darkness (aka the Storytelling System) Stat System Deluxe Overworking Code System ... thing ...

Let me start over. Thenomain's nWoD/CoD Stat System now can handle identifying and rolling multiple substats. What's a substat? It's a skill's specialty. It's also a specific ally in Allies, but nobody rolls that.

No, they type: roll/extended crafts.fabric.clothing.dress. And now you can too.

Right now, only Reno and Bump in the Night have this feature. Reno because someone there coded it once, and BitN because it's my current test game.

@wanderer said:

Here's a question to think about: why are male gamers like that?

I don't know, why am I like that?

I thought I had more to support this point, but my mind is fractured and I am sticking to my point about labels.

@Misadventure

My problem with this is still that labels are being thrown around without consideration. I am not a "one of you"; I am a "one of me". Even with this article, I believe this bit of knowledge is still escaping the discussion, just as it escaped the GamerGate discussion (tho there I believe it was mostly trolling and therefore on purpose).

This would probably stay personal, except that this is the American social default, the us-vs-them mentality that was whipped into a frenzy around 9/11 and the "Mission Accomplished!" era of our recent history, tho the histrionics have probably been there since day one of humanity. That is, I think it's important as a society that we recognize this trend, so that it may be pulled out into the light and mocked.

Anyhow, people need to stop abusing one another for trivial shit, please. Thanks.

So tired. Why am I up at 3:30 am? Why does alcohol do this to me?

https://github.com/thenomain/GMCCG/tree/master/Z - Game Lines/Beast the Primordial

So far, so untested. Stats look solid. Chargen isn't in. Sheet isn't in. Ngh.

Oh yeah, why didn't Onyx Path include the Merit categories like they have been? Is 'Guilty Pleasure' a mental or supernatural merit? Thanks guys.

@Derp

Because the system I've created considers '(...)' to mean a very specific thing. In code lingo, it indicates an instance of a stat. In player-lingo, it's what 'type' of thing you're using.

The easiest explanation is Language. You can take the Language merit multiple times, indicating learning a different language each time. In the system, this is identified as 'Language (<type>)' where <type> is which language you've picked.

Not all Advanced or Epic Merits have Types. More than that, not all Merits with types are directly related to their Advanced counterpart.

For example, Library. Library's types are all Mental skills. Library (Occcult) 2, Library (Science) 3, and so on. It's a value of 1 to 3.

Advanced Library does not have a Type. Advanced Library has a value of 1 to 5. Advanced Library is linked to Safe Place, NOT Library! And if you take the rules as they are written or even as implied, there is no ability to take it more than once. Therefore, "Library (Occult - Advanced) 2" does not make sense.

The same goes for Striking Looks, but for one less reason (it's a different Merit). One of these Merits, Advanced Iron Skin, doesn't even require having the basic Iron Skin to take it.

In other words, no, the stuff in parens is not just "any text". Even when the system says it can be 'Any', you still want to follow the game's rules.

---

(I'm just calling it Advanced Library because it's easier to type. In the system, it's entered as 'Library Advanced'.)

@somasatori

nginx, the web service, is notoriously touchy. It's incredibly powerful when it works and it doesn't fall over out of spite, but when it panics it gives up entirely and needs to be spoon-fed Haagen-Daas (vanilla, of course) and given a shoulder-rub and encouraging words for it to work again. It's like many geeks that way.

@Groth

Sure, but the player still ends up typing more for what essentially looks like Onyx Path faffery. I am extremely underwhelmed by the book and how it tries to tie its concepts together, though I like the core conceits it's building on. I understand why people are summarizing this as "Superfriends: The RPG", and I don't see it as a good fit for a large Mu*. Ah well.

Here's my final list of new (or non-core) merits from Beast: The Primordial Ooze:

danger sense advanced
direction sense advanced
direction sense epic
double jointed advanced
eidetic memory advanced
epic potential
fame advanced
fast reflexes advanced
fist of nightmares
giant advanced
guilty pleasure (<pleasure>)
hunger management
iron skin advanced
iron skin epic
killer instinct
killer instinct advanced
library advanced (<safe place name>)
relentless assault
spoor - did not say it was Beast-only but it obviously is
striking looks advanced (<striking looks adjective>)

@Ganymede

As written, you only need to get one Library to 3 to buy Library (Advanced), which is the older nWoD 'specialty areas', but using the new Conditions system.

It is tied to that Library, tho, so if anything happens to that Library, you lose the Library Advanced. I'm not tracking that.

@Kanye-Qwest said:

"Advanced Trigonometry" refers to a class, not a skill.

And 'Journeyman Blacksmith' does, so ptht on your logic.

Anyway, I'm the one coding this and I remain unconvinced, so I'm going to ... well, do it that way, but I feel like it should be done better, could be done better, if only someone would do it better. Today, that person is not me; I bow to the book as written.