This thread has gone way off topic and it going well out of the bounds of civility. It is also becoming totally tasteless. James' warnings appear to have gone relatively heeded.
Methinks you mean unheeded. Heck, I was happy to just see the first page be civil and reasonable. I was afraid to even open the thread.
Methinks you mean unheeded. Heck, I was happy to just see the first page be civil and reasonable. I was afraid to even open the thread.
It was late when I typed the stuff above. The thread in question started out well. Inevitabley someone showed up and started to ruin. James stepped in and did some moderating, but everyone has to get some sleep sometime and it's long since gone downhill from there...
Now what's wrong? I thought i was thin skinned. This thread is entertaining and informative. It never got that far out of hand to begin with.
It's met with far more civility than such a topic would find elsewhere.
Considering it concerns a topic you wouldn't even be able to discuss at all on the WOTC board. And it is a hot button issue. What is this a kindegarten class?
A random poster even apologised for some imflammatory statements he made on the internet. How often do you see that?
I did not want to lose my posting priveleges, or arouse the ire of the community in general. I like this board as compared to the WOTC forums. They are prone to attack you over the slightest thing over there. And this is really a great community, it takes all kind of people to form a community. So i can't really complain if someones view differs from mine.
I'll admit that by about page 3 things have calmed down and gotten reasonable again.
I also noticed that while James' suppressed certain posts, they "live on" as quotes in some of his replies, which seems to undo what he intended by suppressing them in the first place.
And by "tasteless" I'm referring to that gay Christian equine thing...Kruelaid you know what I'm referring to.
It's an ongoing joke for threads where the acrimony is getting redundant. And it's not intended as an attack on anyone, sorry if it bothers you, but I really don't see any reason for it to be regarded as tasteless. IMO.
There are gay Christians out there. One wonders, what would they think of the attacks coming from both sides of the thread in question?
It's an ongoing joke for threads where the acrimony is getting redundant. And it's not intended as an attack on anyone, sorry if it bothers you, but I really don't see any reason for it to be regarded as tasteless. IMO.
There are gay Christians out there. One wonders, what would they think of the attacks coming from both sides of the thread in question?
Gay or not...the equine thing I find a little over the top (especially paired with the icky-looking avatar).
I shall refrain from explaining the joke. Methinks it won't improve your appreciation.
=)
Off to sleep, folks.
I shall refrain from explaining the joke. Methinks it won't improve your appreciation.
=)
Off to sleep, folks.
I was wondering if some of you guys had even gone to sleep yet. I'm back after having done so.
|
Was a second thread for this really necessary? Just in case Paizo didn't see the first one?
I find it a bit sad we need moderators here, which we do, for the constant derails and petty flaming, but the deluge of "Vote to ban a user!/In my capacity as not a moderator I post about closing this thread./Wow this thread has been derailed, lol." are getting just as annoying.
If you don't like gays in your RPGS, "vote with your wallet". If you think a thread is crappy, it's not part of the solution to thread-crap some more on it.
Moderators are unnecessary if people can look at their own posts and say, "Does this contribute to the discussion at hand? Am I conducting myself like a civilized person off the internet would?"
It's simply not anywhere near as complicated or difficult as some people make it out to be.
It's an ongoing joke for threads where the acrimony is getting redundant. And it's not intended as an attack on anyone, sorry if it bothers you, but I really don't see any reason for it to be regarded as tasteless. IMO.
That doesn't come across at all, just so you know. It comes across as weird and off-putting.
If you want to let others in on the joke, try linking to some of the other times you've done that, so that people who interact with different parts of the boards.
|
It's an ongoing joke for threads where the acrimony is getting redundant. And it's not intended as an attack on anyone, sorry if it bothers you, but I really don't see any reason for it to be regarded as tasteless. IMO.That doesn't come across at all, just so you know. It comes across as weird and off-putting.
If you want to let others in on the joke, try linking to some of the other times you've done that, so that people who interact with different parts of the boards.
Look at the name of the avatar he uses when saying the joke. It's a dead horse. We're beating it.
Ah. Gay Christian equine = dead horse.
The fact that "gay Christian" = "dead" is possibly the most offensive and disturbing thing I have ever seen on these boards.
Don't need moderation? I beg to differ.
|
|
Ah. Gay Christian equine = dead horse.
The fact that "gay Christian" = "dead" is possibly the most offensive and disturbing thing I have ever seen on these boards.
Don't need moderation? I beg to differ.
It is an expression. Beating a dead horse means staying on a topic far longer than is necessary. Kruelaid certainly did not mean that gay christians should be dead.
It is an expression. Beating a dead horse means staying on a topic far longer than is necessary. Kruelaid certainly did not mean that gay christians should be dead.Ah. Gay Christian equine = dead horse.
The fact that "gay Christian" = "dead" is possibly the most offensive and disturbing thing I have ever seen on these boards.
Don't need moderation? I beg to differ.
Actually I think the point that "gay Christian" is supposed to be synonomous with "dead" is perfectly clear and without ambiguity.
I would think that gays, Christians, and gay Christians alike would be offended by this, however flippant it was meant to be.
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
So, were there any more actual questions about homosexuality in Golarion? Or did James catch most of them?
While any mention of sexuality in Pathfinder is meant to add verisimilitude to the experience, remember that the societies of Golarion face far greater concerns that those of the real world (not being on the top of the food chain and all). The relevance of sexuality is a concern of luxury--you don't care who the person standing to your left boffs when you need their help to build a wall to keep out the orcs and ghouls and chimeras and dragons.
So, were there any more actual questions about homosexuality in Golarion? Or did James catch most of them?
While any mention of sexuality in Pathfinder is meant to add verisimilitude to the experience, remember that the societies of Golarion face far greater concerns that those of the real world (not being on the top of the food chain and all). The relevance of sexuality is a concern of luxury--you don't care who the person standing to your left boffs when you need their help to build a wall to keep out the orcs and ghouls and chimeras and dragons.
What about dopplegangers? Those guys must really be confused.
Sorry...that was totally facetious.
|
I can imagine some people would...
"I'm glad he helped me build the dragon shelter, but I'm worried about what might happen if we have to spend a week together in it... He might 'make a move on me'."
Actually, somewhat off tangent, I'm constantly surprised at how many people who dislike homosexuality are afraid of being come on to. It's not like they're the chainmail bikini girl at GenCon (or so I've heard). I guess the most amusing sterotype of homosexual males in particular is that they are equally attracted to all other males.
Perhaps some people who don't approve of homosexuality wouldn't mind it so much if they knew how 'unattractive' they were considered by the homosexual community. Just an idle thought.
|
|
It is an expression. Beating a dead horse means staying on a topic far longer than is necessary. Kruelaid certainly did not mean that gay christians should be dead.Ah. Gay Christian equine = dead horse.
The fact that "gay Christian" = "dead" is possibly the most offensive and disturbing thing I have ever seen on these boards.
Don't need moderation? I beg to differ.
Actually I think the point that "gay Christian" is supposed to be synonomous with "dead" is perfectly clear and without ambiguity.
I would think that gays, Christians, and gay Christians alike would be offended by this, however flippant it was meant to be.
Sorry, I do not agree, although maybe my perspective is skewed, because I am not gay. (I am a devout Presbyterian, however.)
Actually, somewhat off tangent, I'm constantly surprised at how many people who dislike homosexuality are afraid of being come on to. It's not like they're the chainmail bikini girl at GenCon (or so I've heard). I guess the most amusing sterotype of homosexual males in particular is that they are equally attracted to all other males.Perhaps some people who don't approve of homosexuality wouldn't mind it so much if they knew how 'unattractive' they were considered by the homosexual community. Just an idle thought.
My friend Pat argues that point all the time. "Why do straight guys all think gay guys want them? The grossest dude can be sitting there covered in Cheetohs and..."
My gadar is so busted. There have been a few times when I was halfway to a date with a stranger and didn't even know it. This GQ guy steers up on his bike and catches a rap. Fine by me. We talk about trivialities. Then he asks me where I'm going after I finish what I'm doing. So I tell him as if a friend had asked where you're going. It didn't occur to me until later that the male model dude wanted to use me for target practice. I felt sympathy for leaving him looking as mystified as he did but also felt proud I was attracting guys who worked out. Who's got time for that? ;)
It did not freak me out. Why would it? What, was the gay gonna rub off on me during conversation?
Tim Hitchcock and I were leading up against his hotel at 3am during last year's Gen Con and a taxi pulls up. A gaunt, weathered black man with shoulder length hair steps out of the car and walks up to shake my hand. He's wearing a pimp suit with matching hat (don't judge my judgement. It WAS a pimp suit) and black rimmed glasses. He carried a cane and his gums looked a little meth mouthy as he spoke sheer babble. Luckily Tim Hitchcock speaks babble. He went into a story about how one of his b!tches is down at the strip club and can't do something for him... lots of words I didn't understand, and then Tim said something and the guy replied, "oh, you straight?"
See now I thought he meant, straight as in not using drugs, so I nodded and explained I didn't want anything. He was polite. Bizarre but polite, and got back into the taxi. Tim then explained that the man thought I was a rent-boy and that he had stopped to ask me to go with him in the taxi.
"Look at it this way. He thought you were like 15 years younger than you are."
"Well, there's that..."
Good times!
Let's let it drop then.
Let's let it drop then.
You got it, boss.
Wow. Just wow. That's the first time I've ever seen that on any forum anywhere.
Good job gents!
Can a Xaositect sit still long enough to even develope a thesis?
Where the hell is Frank? The week is up.
???
More like: ^@#(!(%@*&$*!%#((!#
Where the hell is Frank? The week is up.I remember reading somewhere he's not coming back (his decision).
Too bad. I argued with him but found him insightful. Too bad he can't roll with it and just come back and move on.
Too bad. I argued with him but found him insightful. Too bad he can't roll with it and just come back and move on.Where the hell is Frank? The week is up.I remember reading somewhere he's not coming back (his decision).
No...I amend that. If you can't handle a simple time out for the reasons cited...you're not grown up to play in this yard.