I think he finally gets it, or at least is finally seeing that something is Wrong at TBP:
http://forum.rpg.net/showthread.php?t=347610
His "pale humanoids" analogy is particularly apt.
QuoteIf you wanted me to paint an approximate picture of what I imagine these threads look like, imagine a bunch of naked, pale humanoids sitting in a concrete room. At irregular intervals, somebody flashes an image on the far wall of something horrible, and the humanoids all moan desparingly and wish that they were dead, occasionally pausing to flap their hands against another humanoid's shoulder in an attempt to comfort them or to join in an apathetic trampling of one of their number who decided that maybe the image wasn't so bad after all. There's always Joy Division playing in the background, just to top off the misery quotient.
If McLennan is feeling it, it MUST be bad.
Darren: The problem is that over the last few years, Tangecites and their enablers, the Mods, have driven off anyone who disagrees with their hive-mind world-view. That's what happens when anyone who dares disagree with the Gestalt is hounded and slandered and banned when they try to defend their contrary point of view. No life, no spirit, no debate, just "Man, look at this - dosn't it suck?" and 45 pages of "Yep, sure does!" replies.
I have read Tangency for a couple of weeks now, and the funny thing is - I don't even have the urge to participate anymore. Wheras before, a certain topic might have had my blood boiling, now I just smirk and roll my eyes.
Enjoy the misery!
A place that cannot offend lacks the depth of discussion to hold any value at all.
Quote from: David JohansenA place that cannot offend lacks the depth of discussion to hold any value at all.
Profoundly true. Consider yourself quoted.
Quote from: Werekoala...now I just smirk and roll my eyes.
Cut the snark -- eye-rollies have been explicitly forbidden on this forum. Consider yourself warned.
!i!
Quote from: WerekoalaI have read Tangency for a couple of weeks now, and the funny thing is - I don't even have the urge to participate anymore. Wheras before, a certain topic might have had my blood boiling, now I just smirk and roll my eyes.
I agree with the sentiment in your OP wholeheartedly. But I have to say that reading Tangency for a couple of weeks is, in a sense, participating. I get that you meant posting to the board and such, but if you really want to cut ties with it, then don't even read it -- even if its just to point and laugh.
Personally I think the problem with rpg.net's poor quality of discourse isn't just the particular topics, be they negative or positive, but that everyone tries so fucking hard to be the "clever one". RPG.net is a large, inbred community of mostly one-liners, tired jokes, cliches, "have a laugh point", dittoes and metoos. All that shit just sucks. I could be overgeneralizing, but I'm not going to waste my time of day finding out.
Well, it was morbid curiosity got the better of me. I'm reading the RPG threads that strike my fancy as well. But I'm really surprised at what's changed in Tangency since I was an outted member of the board. It was bad back then, but now - may as well be reading MySpace or DailyKos for god's sake.
Must be Monday.
Quote from: One Horse TownMust be Monday.
True - who's starting the Porn thread?
How 'bout we have Gorn Monday?
(http://www.homestead.com/flowstate/files/kirkgorn.jpg)
!i!
Uh ... that looks plenty pornographic to me. :(
:D
Quote from: TonyLBUh ... that looks plenty pornographic to me. :(
I will never understand why that sit eis moderated so 'vigourously'. They take anything and everything so personally.
Actrually its more of a GORNagraphic.
That thread is 11 plus pages now . Oy Vey!!
Its strange that he is surprised by the monster that he helped to create.
- Ed C.
Quote from: KoltarIts strange that he is surprised by the monster that he helped to create.
Doctor Frankenstein was too, although he'd probably have been quicker to kill his creation if all it did was run around spouting the same tired jokes day-in-day-out and yelling "KEETOM!" as a stock answer to lifes woes.
Pushing a child down a well is fairly benign, comparitively.
I wonder if Darren will receive a warning for a group attack on Tangency Open.
Hey, any other poster, and it'd happen.
Does it not occur to them that they can just... dump Tangency, and talk about rpgs? It is rpg.net, after all.
Quote from: Kyle AaronDoes it not occur to them that they can just... dump Tangency, and talk about rpgs? It is rpg.net, after all.
Presumably Tangency generates money. Get rid of Tangency and some of those funds would disappear.
Whether Tangency generates enough funds through increased advertising rates and subscriptions to offset the cost of it (ie, additional server capacity, and the number of users turned off by the site
because of Tangency)... well, we will probably never know.
RPG.What? Tangenwho? Vague -- vague memories, indefinite...cloudy...
Quote from: Dr Rotwang!RPG.What? Tangenwho? Vague -- vague memories, indefinite...cloudy...
Podcast...when? Sequel soon? Vaguer still... diminishing... faith... Update?
:D
Quote from: DrewPodcast...when? Sequel soon? Vaguer still... diminishing... faith... Update?
:D
CLICK HERE ALREADY (http://xbowvsbuddha.blogspot.com/2007/08/second-episode-with-better-dialogue.html)
Quote from: Dr Rotwang!CLICK HERE ALREADY (http://xbowvsbuddha.blogspot.com/2007/08/second-episode-with-better-dialogue.html)
Wahey! I'll listen to it later!
it's too big!
well, 25 MB with my dial-up connection means hours of download time.
tried to download it from work, but it just started playing, instead! no good, again. grrr
Quote from: Tyberious FunkPresumably Tangency generates money. Get rid of Tangency and some of those funds would disappear.
Sorry, I was unclear. I meant "dump Tangency" as individual posters, ie stop looking at the vile thing. Darren can't do that because he's a mod, but he can fix that with a quick PM to the admins. Other mods have in the past been "Tangency-only" or "Roleplaying-only", restricting their modding to just one forum and ignoring others. And other mods have got sick of it all and quit. As a former mod, they also get cut an impressive amount of slack as posters, so it's a pretty good position to be in, nothing to complain about.
Of course rpg.net could always dump Tangency entirely, or at the least ditch any threads more than a year old - since they killed their search function, and since Tangency's hidden from Google by its registration thing, nobody can find any specific old threads anyway.
They won't do that, of course. But still, individual posters can pay it no mind. The traditional mod response to someone complaining about Tangency is to say, "not our problem, yours - don't go there", and then to lock the thread. I assume old Dazza isn't getting the same treatment, just lots of posters telling him how marvellous Tangency can be, it's so funny, "it's a community!" etc.
Quote from: beeberit's too big!
I get that a lot.
Goodnight, everybody!
you know, i was expecting that, as soon as i typed it. why it's taken so long to actually come up
oop, did it again
that's it, back to schoolwork. or VCS distractions.
Quote from: beeberyou know, i was expecting that, as soon as i typed it. why it's taken so long to actually come up
oop, did it again
that's it, back to schoolwork. or VCS distractions.
'cuz things that "big" take a while to come up ?
if. you. dont. like. what. a. thread. is. about. don't. read. it.
why is the internet full of twats who deliberately read threads they know will get up their noses and then waste their time trolling by making complaints that do nothing but provoke the OP and everyone else.
And why aer they all on RPG.net?
I would have expectedbetter of the gaming community, but I can see it's no wonder that people laugh at gamers given how sad their behaviour is on the net. It's fucking pathetic. Some of these cunts are just oxygen thieves of the worst kind. All they do is troll other people's threads and criticise you for making a comment that AT BEST could be seen is mildly perjorative and not in any way offensive.
While themselves not remotely bothered by things that are really offensive.
THe people who moderate that site are just fucking beyond my comprehension.
Quote from: signoftheserpentoxygen thieves
excellent! must use that one more often.
I wish i could take credit for the phrase.
i usually use "waste of genetic material" or senseless waste of resources" but that's so much more succinct. another i've heard recently: "she's so marginal"
Quote from: beeberi usually use "waste of genetic material" or senseless waste of resources" but that's so much more succinct. another i've heard recently: "she's so marginal"
"Misappropriation of Water"
"Untapped Resource"
"Taboo Dinner"
"Motard"
"Contributor to the heat-death of the Universe"
Quote from: WerekoalaWell, it was morbid curiosity got the better of me. I'm reading the RPG threads that strike my fancy as well. But I'm really surprised at what's changed in Tangency since I was an outted member of the board. It was bad back then, but now - may as well be reading MySpace or DailyKos for god's sake.
It's sorta like that bar in The Blues Brothers.
"We've got BOTH kinds of viewpoints! Liberal AND Left Wing!"
Quote from: ThornhammerIt's sorta like that bar in The Blues Brothers.
"We've got BOTH kinds of viewpoints! Liberal AND Left Wing!"
Oh gawd!! That made me laugh!!
Thanks man.
- Ed C.
Quote from: ThornhammerIt's sorta like that bar in The Blues Brothers.
"We've got BOTH kinds of viewpoints! Liberal AND Left Wing!"
Quoted For Mutherfuckin' Truth.
Its especially kooky and fun today, with Rove resigning.
"Its a distraction!" "Its to protect him!" "Its a coverup!" "Well, I'd rather he were indicted, but its a good start!"
Dance, little monkies, dance...
Quote from: WerekoalaDance, little monkies, dance...
Bush Derangement Syndrome:
the acute onset of paranoia in otherwise normal people in reaction to the policies, the presidency -- nay -- the very existence of George W. Bush. [source: Charles Krauthammer]
QuoteBush becomes the "criminal mastermind", so devious, so evil, that everything he says is a "lie", everything he does is part of a vast global consipiracy. His family has intimate ties to Bin Laden and the Saudis; He is trying to enrich his oil business friends; He is trying to avenge the insult to his father by getting rid of Saddam; He plans world domination etc. etc. I could go on an on, but you get the point.
What is most funny is that these psychologically naiive individuals simultaneously think of Bush as this "criminal mastermind"--a genius of evil; and also as a complete moron who isn't capable of uttering a sentence without making a hash of it; or that his brain is controlled by the equally evil Karl Rove.
The cognitive dissonance required to have all these contradictory beliefs swirling around in one's brain is astonishing. But besides the primary function it serves to erase from consciousness what is happening in the world today, it is serving a secondary purpose--it makes them feel in control of what might come.
They can predict with the complete accuracy of the delusional mind that whatever happens--whatever horror is unleased by Al Qaeda or Hamas or Islamic Jihad--was caused by President Bush's actions/inactions/intentions (take your pick).
They can conduct a brave protest march against the evil Bush...but clearly they don't dare protest real terror or terrorist acts the way that the Jordanians or the Lebanese did, for example. The terrorists are simply poor, misunderstood individuals who have been oppressed by...Bush. Get rid of Bush (or America; or Israel) and voila! Problem solved!
-- from http://drsanity.blogspot.com/2005/11/lets-discuss-bush-derangement-syndrome.html
Quote from: John MorrowBush Derangement Syndrome: the acute onset of paranoia in otherwise normal people in reaction to the policies, the presidency -- nay -- the very existence of George W. Bush. [Charles Krauthammer]
Charles Krauthammer?
Seriously?
Quote from: BrantaiCharles Krauthammer? Seriously?
That's Charles Krauthammer definition of the term. (I clarified my earlier message to hopefully make it more clear that he's the source of the term.)
See: http://www.townhall.com/columnists/CharlesKrauthammer/2003/12/05/bush_derangement_syndrome
Quote from: John MorrowThat's Charles Krauthammer definition of the term. (I clarified my earlier message to hopefully make it more clear that he's the source of the term.)
See: http://www.townhall.com/columnists/CharlesKrauthammer/2003/12/05/bush_derangement_syndrome
I didn't doubt he was the source, I was just expressing shock that anyone would actually quote him in a serious manner. It would be like someone mocking the right by quoting Michael Moore.
Edit: I know we're being all hardcore and conservative in this thread, but c'mon. There are right wing columnists you could be quoting that
have credibility.
Why does Charles Krauthammer not have credibility?
More to the point, why is credibility required to coin a phrase, especially an accurate one?
Quote from: BrantaiI didn't doubt he was the source, I was just expressing shock that anyone would actually quote him in a serious manner. It would be like someone mocking the right by quoting Michael Moore.
Nothing wrong with that if Michael Moore is making sense.
Quote from: BrantaiEdit: I know we're being all hardcore and conservative in this thread, but c'mon. There are right wing columnists you could be quoting that have credibility.
OK. I'll bite. Give me a list of right-wing columnists that you think have credibility.
Quote from: WerekoalaWhy does Charles Krauthammer not have credibility?
I'm guessing because he's immodestly right-wing. But I'll be pleased if I'm proved wrong.
Quote from: WerekoalaMore to the point, why is credibility required to coin a phrase, especially an accurate one?
Exactly.
Quote from: John MorrowOK. I'll bite. Give me a list of right-wing columnists that you think have credibility.
I think George Will and William Buckley have a certain amount of credibility.
Quote from: WerekoalaWhy does Charles Krauthammer not have credibility?
More to the point, why is credibility required to coin a phrase, especially an accurate one?
Because the man doesn't have a single goddamn opinion of his own. Being conservative is one thing, being an unrepentant parrot is another.
And in the case of "Bush Derangement Syndrome", I'd refrain from scoffing if it was coined by someone who didn't have the bizarro-world version of it.
I don't think we're being "all conservative" in this thread - its just that Thirnhammer really hit the nail on the head with what he posted.
This past Saturday at lunch, a friend told me she is kind of shocked that perople thiunk of me as right-wing. Told me that friends of hers that know both of us sometuimes thought I was a democrat or they couldn't peg how I vote or lean.
Thornhammer does have Tangency pegged ...big time.
- Ed C.
Quote from: BrantaiBecause the man doesn't have a single goddamn opinion of his own. Being conservative is one thing, being an unrepentant parrot is another.
And in the case of "Bush Derangement Syndrome", I'd refrain from scoffing if it was coined by someone who didn't have the bizarro-world version of it.
How did you form your opinion of Krauthammer that he has no opinions of his own? Is that your own unique opinion, not shared by anyone else whom you might be parrotting? Or do you have facts to back up that opinion? Are people not allowed to have an opinion if there's a chance it might be shared by someone else?
As to BDS - do you deny that there are people out there who are so unhinged by the mere thought of Bush that it sends them into paroxysims of anger? I direct your attention to Tangency for prime examples of people fitting that definition. Therefore, his "bizarro-world" version of it is completly on the mark, in the "bizarro-world" inhabited by people suffering from BDS.
In my opinion, of course. Which no doubt is not my own.
So while we're talking about the TBP , I browse over there and try to make a post and see the dreaded (cheered?):
Database Error screen.
Anyone else seeing that?
Did they fall down and go boom again?
- Ed C.
Quote from: BrantaiI think George Will and William Buckley have a certain amount of credibility.
I was expecting George Will and possibly David Gergen because neither is really "right-wing" (any more than Cokie Roberts or Sam Donaldson is really "left-wing", which is why This Week used to have some credibility before the partisan man-boy took over and started inviting loons like Katrina vanden Heuvel to the table) and William Buckley is largely retired. Anyone else?
Quote from: BrantaiBecause the man doesn't have a single goddamn opinion of his own. Being conservative is one thing, being an unrepentant parrot is another.
Unrepentant parrot of who or what?
Quote from: BrantaiAnd in the case of "Bush Derangement Syndrome", I'd refrain from scoffing if it was coined by someone who didn't have the bizarro-world version of it.
Please note that the longer quote that I added isn't from Krauthammer.
What's so strange about his (the short) version and the article I provided a link to?
Quote from: KoltarThis past Saturday at lunch, a friend told me she is kind of shocked that perople thiunk of me as right-wing.
When standing on the Pacific Coast of San Francisco, even Oakland, California seems to be out East.
Quote from: KoltarTold me that friends of hers that know both of us sometuimes thought I was a democrat or they couldn't peg how I vote or lean.
And the truth is that there is a spectrum of nuanced ideas and beliefs on both the right and left that rarely gets noticed by the other side. How many on the left actually read National Review or American Spectator and how many on the right actually read The New Republic or The Nation to learn what the other side really says instead of simply uncritically accepting the caricatures of those ideas that come from the partisans on their own side? It's much easier to just sit in an echo chamber of like-minded people who agree with you and laugh at caricatures of those who don't.
Quote from: WerekoalaHow did you form your opinion of Krauthammer that he has no opinions of his own? Is that your own unique opinion, not shared by anyone else whom you might be parrotting? Or do you have facts to back up that opinion? Are people not allowed to have an opinion if there's a chance it might be shared by someone else?
You're not going to agree with me that Krauthammer shills for the administration at every opportunity, but I'm not really sure why. Read more than three of his articles and it's plain as day.
Quote from: WerekoalaAs to BDS - do you deny that there are people out there who are so unhinged by the mere thought of Bush that it sends them into paroxysims of anger? I direct your attention to Tangency for prime examples of people fitting that definition. Therefore, his "bizarro-world" version of it is completly on the mark, in the "bizarro-world" inhabited by people suffering from BDS.
Oh, no I'm certainly not denying it. And I think we have a miscommunication here - I'm using bizarro-world in the superman sense, sort of an indirect way of saying that Krauthammer has the exact reverse of BDS so it's a bit ridiculous for him to point out the existence BDS.
Quote from: John MorrowWilliam Buckley is largely retired. Anyone else?
Not off the top of my head, but it's easier to notice the ones that aren't, you know? And just because Buckley's retired doesn't mean he isn't quotable.
Quote from: John MorrowUnrepentant parrot of who or what?
Whoever happens to be leading the GOP at the moment.
Quote from: BrantaiYou're not going to agree with me that Krauthammer shills for the administration at every opportunity, but I'm not really sure why. Read more than three of his articles and it's plain as day.
I do read Krauthammer, pretty much every chance I get. Most of the time, he does side with the Administration. Could it be because he agrees with them, or is anyone who agrees with them just a shill?
I ask because its important to know - how do you differentiate between being a shill with no opinions of his own, and just disagreeing with YOU?
In short, is your issue with Krauthammer an issue with him, or the Administration you disagree with?
When you can dismiss anyone who's opinion you don't agree with by calling them a shill or a puppet, you can't have a discussion. Now we're back to what started this thread originally - Tangency's echo chamber of bland, repetitive "Bush is t3h debbil!" "I can haz hugz?" "Keetoom!" crap.
Quote from: BrantaiYou're not going to agree with me that Krauthammer shills for the administration at every opportunity, but I'm not really sure why. Read more than three of his articles and it's plain as day.
I think that's generally true, but that could simply mean that his own opinions agree with those of the administration (and for a variety of reasons, I think that's likely). I don't think he's as bad as Tony Blankley, who does actually sound like a shill on The McLaughlin Group.
Quote from: BrantaiOh, no I'm certainly not denying it. And I think we have a miscommunication here - I'm using bizarro-world in the superman sense, sort of an indirect way of saying that Krauthammer has the exact reverse of BDS so it's a bit ridiculous for him to point out the existence BDS.
The right-wing equivalent was Clinton Derangement Syndrome and I don't remember Krauthammer suffering from it.
Quote from: BrantaiNot off the top of my head, but it's easier to notice the ones that aren't, you know? And just because Buckley's retired doesn't mean he isn't quotable.
It does mean that it's hard to find quotes from him about current events.
Quote from: BrantaiWhoever happens to be leading the GOP at the moment.
Was Krauthammer a shill for Bush, Sr.? For Dole in 1996?
Quote from: WerekoalaI do read Krauthammer, pretty much every chance I get. Most of the time, he does side with the Administration. Could it be because he agrees with them, or is anyone who agrees with them just a shill?
I ask because its important to know - how do you differentiate between being a shill with no opinions of his own, and just disagreeing with YOU?
In short, is your issue with Krauthammer an issue with him, or the Administration you disagree with?
When you can dismiss anyone who's opinion you don't agree with by calling them a shill or a puppet, you can't have a discussion. Now we're back to what started this thread originally - Tangency's echo chamber of bland, repetitive "Bush is t3h debbil!" "I can haz hugz?" "Keetoom!" crap.
I understand what you're saying here, and I know you won't be satisfied that I'm going to pull a Potter Stewart but I know it when I see it. I'm just going to have to ask you to take that in as good a faith as you can.
And for the record, I'm with you on the state of Tangency.
Who is this John Morrow guy ? and where has he been hiding?
- Ed C.
Quote from: John MorrowI think that's generally true, but that could simply mean that his own opinions agree with those of the administration (and for a variety of reasons, I think that's likely). I don't think he's as bad as Tony Blankley, who does actually sound like a shill on The McLaughlin Group.
Okay, that's fair.
Quote from: John MorrowThe right-wing equivalent was Clinton Derangement Syndrome and I don't remember Krauthammer suffering from it.
I couldn't comment on that, except to further clarify that while CDS may be the equivalent, the opposite would be Bush Love-In Syndrome, where the mere existence of our Glorious Leader serves to push the country forward into a bold new age, and all who question him should move to Iran or something. I mean, I have seen it and it's as real as the other two. Perhaps we'd be better served to come up with some sort of term for this category of affliction that can be applied no matter whom the object of unswerving hatred/love is. Sure, it wouldn't serve to get under the skin of the Other Side (whoever that may be) quite as well but since intense, irrational emotions towards particular political figures seem to be universal it would be more useful in the long run.
Quote from: John MorrowIt does mean that it's hard to find quotes from him about current events.
Okay, yes, that is true.
Quote from: John MorrowWas Krauthammer a shill for Bush, Sr.? For Dole in 1996?
I was 10 in 1996. But even if he wasn't then, it doesn't mean he isn't now.
Quote from: BrantaiI understand what you're saying here, and I know you won't be satisfied that I'm going to pull a Potter Stewart but I know it when I see it. I'm just going to have to ask you to take that in as good a faith as you can.
And for the record, I'm with you on the state of Tangency.
That's fair enough. Most people are the same, in my experience. But there are those with whom "agreement with those they despise = shill/puppet/dupe" - in every case, and they infest TBP. And for the record, its not always political in nature, it can be about anything.
There are very few people in human history that it can be said EVERY idea they had or action they took was indisputably wrong/evil/harmful to keetooms an' chilluns, and claiming it is so, in spite of any evidence presented to the contrary, is a sign of (Name) Derangement Syndrome.
How about *DS for short?
Quote from: Werekoalahere are very few people in human history that it can be said EVERY idea they had or action they took was indisputably wrong/evil/harmful to keetooms an' chilluns.
I'm not even sure if there's any at all that can be said about, to be honest.
Quote from: WerekoalaHow about *DS for short?
That or PDS (the "P" is for "Political!") could work.
Quote from: BrantaiI couldn't comment on that, except to further clarify that while CDS may be the equivalent, the opposite would be Bush Love-In Syndrome, where the mere existence of our Glorious Leader serves to push the country forward into a bold new age, and all who question him should move to Iran or something.
Oh, there was the Clinton equivalent of that, too, even with some female columnists volunteering to get down on kneepads to service their Glorous Leader so long as he'd protect abortion rights for them. While the there is both a love and hate side to this sort of partisanship, it's the hate site where the derangement really shows itself. So let's compare apples and apples here.
To put this another way, I've rolled my eyes at the things that Tony Blankley says on The McLaughlin Group to support Bush just as I've rolled my eyes at the things Eleanor Clift said to support Clinton, but none of that was as nutty as the conspiracy theory lunacy that the far-left and far-right believe about their enemies. Shilling isn't derangement in the same way that blaming everything and anything on one's enemies is.
Quote from: BrantaiI was 10 in 1996. But even if he wasn't then, it doesn't mean he isn't now.
You said, "Whoever happens to be leading the GOP at the moment." If you are going to make that sort of blanket statement, I expect you to look beyond the most recent head of the GOP for a pattern of behavior fitting this accusation.
Quote from: BrantaiThat or PDS (the "P" is for "Political!") could work.
I would focus more on opposition. This goes beyond simple partisanship. Perhaps something like "Enemy Derangement Syndrome".
Quote from: John MorrowYou said, "Whoever happens to be leading the GOP at the moment." If you are going to make that sort of blanket statement, I expect you to look beyond the most recent head of the GOP for a pattern of behavior fitting this accusation.
But if I'd said "Bush" you'd have written me off as a sufferer of BDS, no? It's what I assumed, anyway.
Edit: To expand on this, within my era of political awareness, the neoconservative faction has been the party leadership for the GOP. Prior to that I really had no political awareness to speak of, being young and stupid. If you have a resource where I can read his articles from that long ago, I'm willing to check it out and re-evaluate my opinion on this matter. If not, I'm not sure my knowledge of his stances can reasonably be expected to extend that far back.
Quote from: John MorrowI would focus more on opposition. This goes beyond simple partisanship. Perhaps something like "Enemy Derangement Syndrome".
I like that! EDS could be mistaken for something having to do with erectile dysfunction, however, which could be good or bad (I suppose) depending on how you look at it.
Quote from: BrantaiBut if I'd said "Bush" you'd have written me off as a sufferer of BDS, no? It's what I assumed, anyway.
Both of the people here who disagreed with your original characterization of Krauthammer have agreed that he does side with the Bush Administration. We just disagree over why he does.
Quote from: BrantaiEdit: To expand on this, within my era of political awareness, the neoconservative faction has been the party leadership for the GOP.
What does "neoconservative" mean to you? Do you know where that name comes from?
Quote from: BrantaiPrior to that I really had no political awareness to speak of, being young and stupid.
Then it's best to scope your statements to cover what you know.
Quote from: BrantaiI like that! EDS could be mistaken for something having to do with erectile dysfunction, however, which could be good or bad (I suppose) depending on how you look at it.
It's also the name of the company Ross Perot founded.
I want to take bets on Brantai's response being: "Who is Ross Perot?"
OK..sorry...cheap shot. But if he was 10 in 1996, that would have made him 6 in 1992. See how quickly I did the maths?
Quote from: WerekoalaThat's fair enough. Most people are the same, in my experience. But there are those with whom "agreement with those they despise = shill/puppet/dupe" - in every case, and they infest TBP. And for the record, its not always political in nature, it can be about anything.
It's not just confined to RPGnet.
Just look at the petty accusations and recriminations that get spat out regarding "Swine," "Story Games" and "Indie" over here.
It's the same syndrome, and no less hilarious for being about something as ephemeral and ultimately disposable as RPG's.
Quote from: James J SkachI want to take bets on Brantai's response being: "Who is Ross Perot?"
OK..sorry...cheap shot. But if he was 10 in 1996, that would have made him 6 in 1992. See how quickly I did the maths?
I know who Ross Perot is, but that's about the extent of my knowledge of him.
Quote from: DrewIt's not just confined to RPGnet.
Just look at the petty accusations and recriminations that get spat out regarding "Swine," "Story Games" and "Indie" over here.
It's the same syndrome, and no less hilarious for being about something as ephemeral and ultimately disposable as RPG's.
To be fair, I never said they were confined to RPG.net, I merely said they infested it.
Quote from: WerekoalaTo be fair, I never said they were confined to RPG.net, I merely said they infested it.
Yup, I wasn't really singling you out other than as a quote source.
It's just that my irony meter blew a gasket when I heard that particular criticism of RPGnet. :)
Poor guy. Can't help but wonder if he was expressing some view that went against the group-think grain. 17,000+ posts and he cant find open support for his point of view on TBP? Wonder why.
http://forum.rpg.net/showthread.php?t=349124
Quote from: WerekoalaPoor guy. Can't help but wonder if he was expressing some view that went against the group-think grain. 17,000+ posts and he cant find open support for his point of view on TBP? Wonder why.
http://forum.rpg.net/showthread.php?t=349124
What the hell was he going on about anyway ? It was pretty vague and pleading.
- Ed C.
If you've got something substantive to add, then you should do so. All you seem to have, though, is unfunny snark. I don't know if you'll get banned, but if you do it'll be because you shit in every thread you post in, not because you are some brave warrior fighting the group think.
And you're vipergirrl obsession creeps me the fuck out.
Ned
Did you mean the above comment for the other thread on here about TBP?
Seems more relevant there.
- Ed C.
Yeah. It pretty much applies to everything you say, so no harm done.
Ned
Quote from: KoltarWhat the hell was he going on about anyway ? It was pretty vague and pleading.
- Ed C.
Ah, the irony.