Posts made by wanderer

@Kanye-Qwest said in Do you believe in paranormal things?:

@wanderer I downvoted you because you're salty. Now you're double salty, so I'm double downvoting. Keep it up, it's pretty amusing!

People tend to misrepresent it when I write harshly, because if they were to write something like that, they'd have to be furiously frothing. I write such things with cold condemnation, after a life's worth of experiences to base it on.

I'm not going to be your amusement, don't worry. I've been gone for months before and I'm unlikely to return after this.

May the fucker who downvoted my post witness his children die painfully of cancer, thank you. Are you that closed off in your mind, that anything other than the comfortable, familiar status quo is unacceptable to you? You're not in the very least interested in something completely different than a crudely materialistic existence? Seriously?

This type of petty closed-mindedness is why I always regret writing anything here. And no, I'm not exaggerating in the first sentence. People like that have made my life hell, so I am fairly serious. If you're going to downvote this post, the same goes for you.

@Arkandel said in Do you believe in paranormal things?:

@wanderer said in Do you believe in paranormal things?:

It's not about what I believe in, it's about what I know to be true. I had to know for sure, so I got off my ass and found out.

I don't intend to insult or mock your beliefs,

Then don't. When you call it "beliefs" you're directly insulting me. You're calling my mental faculties deficient and my judgment worthless.

The difference - for some folks - can only be made up by being able to offer conclusive evidence for a belief to be transferable. If someone thinks something is true they must be able to conclusively demonstrate that somehow to others.

Transfer to me the conclusive evidence that man has walked on the Moon. Preferably you will be able to take me there so I can walk myself, or repeat the act where I can witness it.

Transfer to me the understanding of high-level mathematical proof. Make sure to explain all the silly squigglies.

Testimonies just aren't good enough. Not because they are false, intentionally or otherwise, but because our minds are simply not reliable witnesses - ask any cop. We think we see things all the time, we reconstruct what we perceive and memories are dynamically assembled together and not retrieved from a stable source.

Testimonies aren't good enough, so I'm not going to trust the astronauts who claim to have walked on the Moon. Pictures and videos don't count either, it could've all been doctored at that level, or simply shot in the studio.

That's why hard evidence is needed. It's not not because we're sceptics ready to cast down anything that doesn't fit our narrow definitions of the truth but because without a recreatable chain between observation ("...hey, that's weird...") to conclusion ("oh, so THAT's what happened") there must be steps in between someone else can follow from beginning to end and arrive at the same result.

Hard evidence? Ok, bring me a stone from the Moon and prove to me you didn't just pluck that off the side of the road. As with high level mathematics, some types of proof are not accessible to everyone, because they require certain prerequisites. Some of them are physical (getting access to the stone), some are mental (understanding mathematical proof) and some are psychological/evolutionary (developing the senses and abilities to observe supernatural phenomena). This is why I've said that I'm not interested in discussing the subject, and why convincing anyone is completely futile.

Hard evidence in physics isn't the same as hard evidence in history or psychology. Someone's state of mind and their subjective experience is valid proof within psychology.

I'd like to think I've an open mind. If someone can demonstrate precognition works by consistently beating, say, statistical expectations outside the margin of error in a double-blind experiment then I will believe the fuck out of it. But even though I can believe someone is telling the truth as they know it by stating they saw a guy predict outcomes in Vegas twenty times in a row it doesn't mean I am prepared to believe the same thing without that chain.

I also have an open mind when it comes to high-level mathematical proof but I haven't spent years studying and researching it. Should I conclude that it doesn't exist unless someone can prove it to me? Even though I barely remember arithmetic from school?

Talk to me about being open minded after you've spent over a decade researching this stuff in depth.

What's a good argument to loosen my requirements?

Having an actual experience that shakes you out of your worldview. Probably not even then, because you would be strongly motivated to rationalize it, regardless of the incongruities you'd have to ignore.

@surreality said in Do you believe in paranormal things?:

(Mainly, I note this because what you describe is much like the 'this was a different thing' experience I mentioned. The rest were more or less, 'gah, crap, wtf!!' which is not... the same.)

That would be more what I described as some sort of misalignment of the spiritual body with the physical. Maybe there wasn't an entity involved, I don't know. But the mechanism is the same, it's because we undergo this process while sleeping, and all these aspects are completely ignored by any scientific approach. To be honest, I haven't had one, but I have done astral projection and I've heard horror stories about what it can attract (precisely because of how easily this inbetween state can be exploited). It's the same basic mechanism, except with non-spontaneous AP you're doing it voluntarily and have only yourself to blame.

When I was experimenting, I talked to two women who had a lot of experience with AP. The first one, her son asked her to please "make all these people leave, the house is full of them." She'd been doing a lot of AP and attracted so many entities that they started bothering her son. That's when she knew she had to stop. The other woman weakened the connection with her physical body, so she spontaneously projected while driving a car. She was watching her physical body from a few feet above, unable to do anything. Barely managed to regain control in time not to crash. Those experiences dissuaded me from going any further with the practice.

So, I'm using a bit of extrapolation from knowing the basic mechanism, and from having over a decade of gathered knowledge and related experiences.

@surreality said in Do you believe in paranormal things?:

Basically, there's room for both to exist: the scientific brain processes, and something else.

What I mean is, they do both exist. Concurrently. Science doesn't explain all the aspects of the phenomenon, they only grasp the crudest aspects that reflect on the material/physical plane, and fit safely within their paradigm. The actual experiences may vary in gradation, intensity, severity and so on, but they have both components.

It's not about what I believe in, it's about what I know to be true. I had to know for sure, so I got off my ass and found out.

@surreality I'm not saying sleep paralysis doesn't happen, I've just seen the term thrown about by skeptics as some way to disprove the experience. "Oh no, it's just sleep paralysis, that's a documented scientific phenomenon!" It's a bunch of materialistic rationalizations stuck within the limitations of the paradigm.

When we sleep, the connection between the physical and spiritual body is weakened. This same weakening is part of the process leading to an astral projection, which is why it can happen spontaneously. Precursors are sensation of floating, or when you lie down on your back and feel like you're sinking through the bed, and so on. Malicious entities made of crude emotional essence abuse this state in order to feed on the fear of the sleeper. They freeze this state and disrupt the natural return to the physical body, in order to cause fear in the sleeper and exert power over them. If the sleeper doesn't give them fear, they have nothing to feed on, especially if there are positive emotions. Those are like poison to them, because they are the antithesis of their being.

That's sleep paralysis, variations on this theme with a similar mechanism and purpose. It can also be a misalignment during reintegration with the physical body. It is a supernatural phenomenon, whatever the gradation. Sure you can find parallel effects in the material world, things that can be observed from a strictly material standpoint, but that doesn't mean they're the whole sum of the experience.

Even though it's misguided, the materialistic approach of "it's just sleep paralysis" might actually work to lessen the intensity of the experience. If you think you understand it and it's no big deal, you might disregard it and won't produce the fear the entity needs to feed on. So, ironically, the approach might work. If the entity is powerful enough, it might not.

I've long lost the desire to engage with this community, and I suppose this subject only confirms my decision. But here goes, for whatever that's worth.

The current materialistic paradigm is blind to the reality of the world. Materialistic science will never find answers unless it accepts that these areas of research require a radical shift in paradigm and approach.

I've had plenty of experiences with the paranormal or supernatural, enough to be convinced to a surety that these things not only exist, they're much closer to the foundation of reality outside of this material pocket of existence.

For me, that's 2+2=4, not something one should be "keeping one's minds open about" or "remaining skeptical." I feel no desire whatsoever to convince anyone of this; there's tons of proof out there, there's exercises you can do for yourself to check and see, it's actually fairly easy if you're motivated enough. Less effort than masturbating daily, if you try something like astral projection. So I have no understanding for those who choose not to. I pity them.

Convincing others is a fairly futile task, no matter how many credentials one has, because they'll be swallowed and spit out by the dominant materialistic paradigm. There was recently a neuroscientist who had an NDE experience, they ruined his career and completely discredited the guy instead of listening to what he's got to say. I'm disinclined to cast my pearls into such an atmosphere.

Those who truly have the proof of something existing on the other side, will shy away from the public eye, or from proving anything to the skeptics. It's almost an evolutionary survival trait, because that's the kind of people who were burned at the stake or crucified in the past.

Vampires, werewolves and fairies, those are obviously imaginary. Just so someone doesn't quote my post with "so you think vampires are real, you just said so!!!1"

Kundalini, though. Kundalini is some serious shit. Ghosts exist, life after death exists. Various types of non-corporeal entities exist. Sleep paralysis is only a fancy term for "we don't fucking know what's happening here but putting a name on it makes it all tidy and sciency." Astral projection is real. Existence beyond the material world is a vast, enormous spectrum of various degrees of subtlety and being. The material world is a tiny speck of shit somewhere at the bottom of it all. Knowing this, I pity those who are closed off from such knowledge.

I am not particularly interested in discussing any of this, but I thought someone should fucking say something that isn't "we all nicely agree, sensible chuckle." Especially when the view everyone's agreeing with is so closed-minded and shallow.

@Misadventure said:

More on sexual harassment in gaming/comicbook fandom.
https://medium.com/@ken.burnside/for-good-men-to-see-nothing-c1be3e65c52f#.wv54q0h70

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

We all remember the type of guy who was into tabletop in school, high school, or at uni. Nerdy, quirky, unattractive, fat, not into sports, just plain different. What do you think was their experience with women, in general? Did they have cheerleader girlfriends? What happened if they dared ask someone out? What did the women of the real world have for them? Disdain, disgust, distaste, plain disinterest.

Is it any wonder that the hobby became a hotbed for exaggerated male sexual fantasies? Is it any wonder that they have no idea how to approach a woman in real life, or that they've simply given up on trying to do it in appropriate ways? Because they've already lost. They're defeated. What you're witnessing isn't mysogyny or the male ego, it's the pulverized remains of self-worth.

Is that a justification? Of course not, but it is an explanation of the underlying problem.

Quite frankly, I would always be on guard if I was around male gamers, especially those of the earlier generations who never outgrew the hobby, never developed other life interests. What these unsuspecting girls should realize is that they're entering an unsafe hobby for women, and should be on guard and loud when problems arise. Yeah, they'll get dismissed but they'll also make enough of a fuss that the guy will probably give up. What girls are expecting is a normal environment in which they are safe, like they would be elsewhere. This isn't anything like that, there's way too much pent up frustration, and one should adjust expectations and behavior accordingly. You don't enter a night club expecting everyone to be your friend. You guard your drink and stay close to your group.

So what is the solution? Treating these men as villains, demonizing them and alienating them further?

A little bit of situational awareness is what I'd advise. I would also ask you for some empathy and kindness. Not when an incident arises but way, way before that. If we're responsible for the safety of women, we're equally responsible for how we treat the men in the hobby. Anyone will turn into an animal if they're surrounded with hostility all their lives, and at some point, it's too late to do anything constructive about it. I think that understanding the underlying cause is important.

I've had my own share of unpleasant experiences as a girl in the hobby. A game master told me after a session that he has ropes cut in my size. This after, somehow, in every game my female character would end up tied helplessly to an altar. He was a great game master with incredible stories... if you weren't female. After the comment with the ropes, I never went to another session. Eventually, I stopped playing tabletop altogether.

Another time, I went to a cafe/bar where roleplayers would sometimes have sessions. I saw a bunch of guys, vaguely familiar to me from roleplaying circles. They were playing a Game of Thrones card game, so I was intrigued and asked if I could join. They were pretty welcoming, and more than willing to show me the ropes. However, I was the only woman there, and... Well, I started feeling uncomfortable. Because of the way they were looking at me. There was a palpable atmosphere of thirst that I'm at a loss of words to describe. It felt like they would devour me with their eyes if they just could. I was a representation of something they really, really wanted and were on the verge of taking by force, that's how strong the desire was. I excused myself after a while and left.

The thing is, I don't think of any of them as bad people. When I think back to these events, I think of them with compassion. The GM with the ropes, he miscalculated his approach terribly. He didn't do anything wrong, he didn't touch me, or disrespect me. He just showed interest in a clumsy way. The guys playing the GoT game... I feel sad for them. They were older guys who kind of wasted their lives doing nothing but the hobby. You just don't know the story of every gamer guy out there. And no, not every male gamer is like this, there are plenty of those who managed to overcome the challenges of growing up different and became decent individuals. It can be done, so the gropers and the abusers have no justification whatsoever. Still, this is an unhealed rift within the hobby, and some awareness on both sides wouldn't hurt.

@silentsophia said:

I thought depressionquest was good as a look into what someone with depression could go through, for people without depression. It seemed more like a useful experience than a game.

It seemed preachy and pointless to me. It didn't give me new insight into depression, it was condescending and patronizing, especially to anyone who's suffered from it. The medium is interesting, but the writing would have to be much better, the underlying concept better developed, for it to work. Also, I've made games like this as a kid in QBASIC, but I wouldn't think that merits being called a game developer. It's a glorified "choose your own adventure" story.

What it all reminds me of, is socrealist art and literature in communism. Art had to serve a purpose, and that purpose was extolling the values that the ruling regime approved of. In modern democracy, it seems that people have decided to do this of their own free will.

Most people are stupid, this forum included. The mainstream is filled with poison for intellect, with emotional knee-jerk responses based on a hypersensitive, liberal, postmodernist agenda. It's disgusting and frustrating, but that's the nature of humanity. The majority will be convinced they're right, and steamroll over any opposition. The herd is safe.

Most people just soak in whatever is served by the mainstream culture, all the while thinking they're a proud independent thinker on the side of good. You'd be surprised at the things that are plain wrong, but you assume it's good info.

There's a much more complex picture underneath all the whining, but everybody's too busy with their knee-jerks to think about it. The catastrophe is that while the mainstream is singing liberal lullabyes, the USA and Western Europe are headed towards being fascist surveillance-heavy dystopias.

But no, it's super important that nobody says anything that could hurt someone's feelings. There's this hyperfocus on insignificant minutiae when there's so many more important things going on.

With regards to GamerGate, I think they're all idiots. I only recently looked into it, but have you guys checked out the output of these attacked women? What they've accomplished with their lives? Why they call themselves "game developers?" Dude, I felt second-hand embarrassment for being a woman. Holy shit, so much entitlement over so little worth. I won't stand for online abuse, and I'm especially leery of internet mobs on either side. But wow.

Did you guys know that if you've ever made a MUSH you could call yourselves "game developers"? Because if you've done that, you've accomplished considerably, vastly more than the women in GamerGate.

Examples:
https://www.kickstarter.com/projects/crowgirl/hackers-versus-banksters-a-visual-novel-about-reve
http://www.depressionquest.com/
Super embarrassing stuff, if you ask me.

So why are we wasting our time on this? There's a kicked puppy we all need to soothe, allegedly. What if it's not a puppy at all. What if it's gangrene? Because that's what it looks like, from my perspective. Everything is gangrene. Everything is insane.

Also, zombies are lame and so overdone. Come up with your own apocalyptic bad guy. Alien infestation. Triffids. Monsters from a secret government laboratory... well, okay, the horror of zombies is that they were once human, so you have to kill a decayed former-person. That's pretty cool. But the way they've been overplayed, especially in computer games like L4D, it's just gratuitous slaying of hordes. Zombies work best when it's not strangers, when the zombies are humanized. When they are family and close friends that the protagonist has to confront/kill. I guess ease of infection is a significant factor in this regard.

It'd be super cool if there were metaplot-like hooks through which players could eventually find out what caused the zombie outbreak. Not something over-arching, just nice juicy theme-dumps that can be discovered if the character makes an effort to search for it. Ideally, this info would also help figure out better ways to deal with them. So, even if you have zombies, figure out a cool origin story for them, so that they're not just mindless hordes.

I think you're all imagining the various settlements as being miles and miles away. Instead, it's probably better to envision them as various city quarters within the same city. So in a mundane situation, you'd easily go to a cafe and meet up with someone. I think @Misadventure was on the right track with comparing it to different spheres or factions within one game. On one hand, spheres are insular by theme, but they're not separated by distance. A mage can physically meet a vampire within the same city, we see no problem with that.

I'd envision the settlements as being within walking distance, say half an hour walk. No cars. So, meeting up is, distance-wise, as much of an investment as walking to a cafe in a city. Or from one address to another.

The world becomes much smaller after a disaster. Distances that can't be reached within half a day, they might as well not exist anymore. Unless someone's mounting a special expedition for some reason. But for everyday life, nah. If it's not within walking distance, it's out of reach. At least that's how I see it, dunno about the OP.

If there are cars, then that's different and settlements reachable by car would be more insular than what I'm imagining. Then you'd have the problem of fuel supply, more danger on longer trips, etc. I wouldn't advise that.

I'd view the settlements more like factions diversified in resources and worldview, rather than groups separated by distance. Farmers have food, ex-mil has guns but no food production. So they have to cooperate, and bam, there you have it, reasons to RP that aren't just zombie-flavored bar RP.

@ThatGuyThere said:

Now and games where things are separated by location travel can be an issue, both with time and with theme. Time can be hand waved to a certain extant but for a zombie theme I think travel should be dangerous, but If I am +meetme'd to the neutral area every couple of days for rp then travel is not really dangerous on an IC level. Since ICly my character would be traveling back and forth fairly willy nilly.

Just like they clean up major settlements, you could say that people cleaned up a major safe path towards that neutral zone or resource point. Veering off that path would still be dangerous, and even the path itself could still pose relative danger that you could RP about. But it would be believable that it's being maintained by the survivors who need that trail to the neutral zone. Major nests around the road would be eradicated, etc. You could RP about maintaining the path, or about an outbreak, or some danger gathering nearby. You'd still be able to handwave safety for the good of RP, when needed. The road was clear enough that day to get through, but who knows what will happen tomorrow? In itself it could be great RP fodder, the fact that the road isn't too safe.

There are so many possibilities if you just think about it.

In fact, if you ask me, I don't see the point of having one settlement. Sounds boring, incestuous, and soon it'd turn into a TS dramafest (ok, that's any game). If you have the drive to meet those other people there, and if there's danger involved in this, that's so much more interesting. The survivors would have to overextend, travel, they'd be able to reach out to these other people to exchange stories, resources, and just plain socialize. Especially if they're specialized communities - if one has more food and the other has tech stuff, and the third has weapons. So yeah, the idea of more than one settlement is way more interesting in this context.

You could even seed each settlement with just one person + important resource, and have the others trickle in ICly as the apps come. The seed character could be an NPC, just to keep the continuity and theme going. A curmudgeon in his fortress with a shitload of weapons, some hippy guy with a hidden grow facility who used it for weed but now it's for food, a religious end-of-times enclave... It's writing itself.

(Edit: I probably should've read the opening post before commenting, but I skimmed over it now, and I see I wasn't too far off the mark. Haha. :D)

It'd be something different.

Maybe that kind of concept failed elsewhere, but it doesn't mean it can't be implemented in a better way.

If we cut out all the concepts that have at one point failed, we'll be left with the same old shit.

It's lame if someone proposes a different idea and all the feedback they get is "that won't work." It's more productive to try and figure out how to counteract the reason it failed before.

For instance, Serenity MUSH had people separated in small crews on ships, but they all met on the Eavesdown docks. So it's not necessarily a bad idea, you just have to build the theme to make it work. Maybe make a large resource that they all have to visit, but can't stay there. I wouldn't use alts to counteract the separation. Imagine getting to meet people from a group you don't even know OOCly. You don't know how the characters breathe, how they function, who's their leader.

As players we also have to give a chance to different concepts.

Lately I've watched The Man in the High Castle and it was excellent! Can't wait for the second season. The Booth at the End is also good, reminds me of changelings and their deals.

I've also had it on several occasions, but usually refresh worked. However, on one occasion it seemed to block the site entirely, and only got restored after a few minutes.

I might like to see a forum group here, just for chatting about writerly stuff, sharing experiences, maybe have a thread with prompts just to write a paragraph or so. We could share inspiration, advice, resources, etc. I am not sure if there'd be enough interest and activity to warrant that, though.

Anyway, people could spin off from there into google docs, hangouts, or whatever. For me, what works is having one friend for mutual support. I tried groups IRL and that doesn't work for me. With just one person, it's much more private and focused.

...I kind of feel like a fraud just posting this and even remotely considering myself a writer. XD

@Lithium said:

The bad book thing, that's just a narcissism thing, I know I can do better than the drivel I am reading, so I do it.

Yeahhhhh, I'm guilty of this too. At one point I went and read all the urban fantasy books I could find. Most of them were terrible. Some of them were kinda bad, but catchy and fun. I appreciated those. One book, I swear it must've been written by a musher because she used the common desc tropes. But the biggest surprise was when I opened a book without reading the title first. I started reading through the beginning, and was laughing my ass off. I thought how my vampire RP was so much less cringeworthy than that.

Turns out that was Anne Rice. >.<