Quote from: Ancientgamer1970;499839Links???   Show me the money...

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ON-7v4qnHP8&feature=player_embedded#!

Quote from: Ancientgamer1970;499836I have a keen mind for specifics and facts.  I do not engage in generalities based on assumption, personal opinion, or fictionalized comments based on how one feels especially with casual friends.

So what you're saying is that you don't have any friends?

Because frankly, everyone finds that shit annoying. Pedantry is next to pederasty both in the dictionary and in morality.

Nobody has a casual conversation in which they give references. Not even academics. They save it for the papers they write.

It's okay if you'd rather be right than have friends. Your life is yours to do with as you please. Just don't be surprised when we point and laugh.

Quote from: Kyle Aaron;499847Because frankly, everyone finds that shit annoying. Pedantry is next to pederasty both in the dictionary and in morality.

I'd rather say "Pedantry is worse then fascism". Or at least that's a rough translation of ancient Polish proverb .

"Better a real Nazi than a grammar nazi!"

I dunno if that's true, though. Maybe monarchists are better than grammar nazis.

A psychologist would want to know what shit game ancientgamer1970 subscribes to.

Quote from: Kyle Aaron;499847Nobody has a casual conversation in which they give references.

I like to carry footnotes on small pieces of folded paper in my pockets, to hand out when necessary.

Quote from: Kyle Aaron;499828When you're sitting having a casual chat with friends, do you ask for references?

Over the years, I've only ever came across three individuals in person who always asked for references/proof for literally everything.

Essentially these individuals were hardcore skeptic types.  Literally it was a form of "machismo" amongst their other hardcore skeptic friends/peers.

Quote from: Ancientgamer1970;499836Hmmmm, as usual, all responses given lack any semblance of intelligence or constructivity.  It is the usual insults and nonsense.

Perhaps the response would be more positive if the thread was about RPGs and not about those who discuss RPGs.

Quote from: Ancientgamer1970;499836I have a keen mind for specifics and facts.  I do not engage in generalities based on assumption, personal opinion, or fictionalized comments based on how one feels especially with casual friends.  I will not use terms such as "Everyone", "all", "the majority", "the minority" " a few", " a lot", and so on without some type of statistical data to strengthen my argument.

Kyle only got it half right. You are a pretentious wanker.

Quote from: ggroy;499854Over the years, I've only ever came across three individuals in person who always asked for references/proof for literally everything.

Essentially these individuals were hardcore skeptic types.  Literally it was a form of "machismo" amongst their other hardcore skeptic friends/peers.

We've got a guy at the bar who is a Welsh chemical engineer and he never has a conversation without pulling out his iphone a googling some obscure fact. He often wonders why the rest of the regulars get tired of talking to him pretty quickly.

Quote from: ggroy;499854Over the years, I've only ever came across three individuals in person who always asked for references/proof for literally everything.

Did they have any friends?

I find the premise of the original post problematic. I think Kyle Aaron got it right with:

Quote from: Kyle Aaron;499828It's not an academic publication, it's a discussion forum.

If therpgsite were to remake itself as a scholarly Internet forum, it would be unable to substantiate itself.
* Just gaining agreement, as a site, on what constitutes a credible source would be a nightmare.
* Any really scholarly notations are difficult to share because worthy notations are not usually on unsecured Internet sites that can be easily searched or linked.
* Academic publications and scholarly journals, even those with Internet publications, require accounts and annual fees, making citation ability an exclusive privilege, and therefore not a workable model for a public Internet forum.
* Further, there is not enough credible academic-level data in the field of Table Top Roleplaying available to substantiate the topics discussed on this site.

How many people does that leave for discussion? Four? A half-dozen?

Otherwise, you're just talking about a sub-wikipedia level bastard proof that is worth less than random gamig-group opinions, because it claims authority.

I think what the OP really intended with his post was simply that he's noticed some behavioural nuances in other posts annoy him with their generalisations, and he does not want to do the same.

//Panjumanju

QuoteEssentially these individuals were hardcore skeptic types.

 Not true in every case and perhaps just the ones you are accustomed to experiencing more likely but I just do not take one's word at face value especially those online in a gaming forum and those in the gaming community.

QuoteI think what the OP really intended with his post was simply that he's noticed some behavioural nuances in other posts annoy him with their generalisations, and he does not want to do the same.

Well, that make 3 intelligent posts.  At least this poster knows how to read and think before responding.

This going to be one fun-filled thread....

Quote from: Ancientgamer1970;499862Well, that make 3 intelligent posts.  At least this poster knows how to read and think before responding.

Are you familiar with the concept of ad hominem?