Bella Sara Charter Superscriber
|
I made an on-topic post and you pulled out a strawman to justify being rude.
Right.
Remember that the next time you complain about people not being civil. If you cannot control yourself you should not expect others to. You are part of the problem.
Fix your panties and accept that not everyone is a "kobold" like you.
You're projecting again...
|
You're projecting again...
I made an on-topic post and you pulled out a strawman to justify being rude.
Right.
Remember that the next time you complain about people not being civil. If you cannot control yourself you should not expect others to. You are part of the problem.
Fix your panties and accept that not everyone is a "kobold" like you.
That's why I ignored it.
|
Bella Sara Charter Superscriber
|
You're projecting again...When you even vaguely come close to being objective I will consider taking something you say seriously.
Until then . . .
Oh come on know, we both know that's not true.
You don't consider what anyone else says no matter how objective they may be. That would involve admitting there are limitations to your knowledge or that there are perspectives you have not considered. We both know that's not true.
But it's cute that you think you would listen.
To save you some trouble, I've crafted a response for you. I like any of the following:
"So, you admit that you aren't objective" (I like this one because it twists my words and yet you can claim it's "true.")
or
"Now you're projecting." (This one's great because it shows that I'm just a hypocrite, and that really, you're the one with the moral high ground.)
I also like:
"Maybe when you have something worth saying, I'll respond, much less use your arrogant premade quotes" (I like this because it's a direct attack, it shows that I'm getting under your skin.)
Feel free to pick one. Or more than one. Or innovate. I like some innovation.
|
Oh come on know, we both know that's not true.
You don't consider what anyone else says no matter how objective they may be. That would involve admitting there are limitations to your knowledge or that there are perspectives you have not considered. We both know that's not true.
Actually I do.
Quite often.But you are too caught up in your trolling to care.
Sebastian:
I've posted to let everyone know you may be on the way. :D
Smurf!
|
Bella Sara Charter Superscriber
|
Actually I do.
Quite often.
But you are too caught up in your trolling to care.
You call that innovation?!?! Come on.
Trolling?!?!?! Perish the thought! I was troll-baiting. And it worked!!!
Okay, here's how this one works. Now, you propose a definition of "trolling" which will include my behavior but exclude yours. I would recommend focusing on honesty (I posted that I like to get under your skin, a true sign of trolling, whereas your trollish attacks on CWM and others on this thread fall under the pretense of "legitimate discussion" or, the "he hit me back first" doctrine) or on intent (all I did was come here to refute your nastiness, you were here to "discuss" the topic.)
Next, and this is key, twist what I've said to fit your definition while hair-splitting to remove what you've said from the definition.
Don't forget to portray yourself as an innocent victim or, failing that, construct some absolute moral high ground which completely justifies your attacks.
At this point, I can respond and either challenge your definition, split hairs about my posts, or try and fit your posts into the definition. I'm sure I will do this because it is amazingly entertaining and, if we do it enough, we will prove conclusively who is the troll.
Good luck! I know you will rise to the challenge.
|
Bella Sara Charter Superscriber
|
You call that innovation?!?! Come on.
Trolling?!?!?! Perish the thought! I was troll-baiting. And it worked!!!
*YAWN*
Be careful troll, there are loose-boweled dragons flying about.
Well, if that's not admitting defeat, I don't know what is...
Thanks for the advice, but I think the dragon is looking for your breed of troll. My understanding is that yesmen like myself get to clean his toenails.
|
|
Well, if that's not admitting defeat, I don't know what is...
Thanks for the advice, but I think the dragon is looking for your breed of troll. My understanding is that yesmen like myself get to clean his toenails.
No, you are very clearly a troll.
If you want to claim to be a kobold too, that is up to you. You can put the half-troll template on a kobold.As for me, I continue to be amused by the WotC kobolds and half-troll kobolds like yourself. You are endlessly absurd.
|
Bella Sara Charter Superscriber
|
Well, if that's not admitting defeat, I don't know what is...
Thanks for the advice, but I think the dragon is looking for your breed of troll. My understanding is that yesmen like myself get to clean his toenails.
No, you are very clearly a troll.
If you want to claim to be a kobold too, that is up to you. You can put the half-troll template on a kobold.As for me, I continue to be amused by the WotC kobolds and half-troll kobolds like yourself. You are endlessly absurd.
If you say so. I can play "I'm rubber and your glue" all day (okay, that's not true, my attention span isn't that long). I'm not the one that started trolling in this thread, I'm just the one that pointed it out.
Poor defeated Sam. Attacking me as a troll to defend his own trolling. It's okay, you can come out of the closet. Everyone knows you regenerate except when attacked with acid or fire.
Have a good night, Sam. I'm done baiting you. Feel free to troll away in my absence. Lord knows that it's justified and excusable when done by you. Best of luck.
Sebastian, that was the most elegant and devastating put-down of a troll that I have ever seen. Thank you for the acid tongue and fiery wit.
|
|
If you say so. I can play "I'm rubber and your glue" all day (okay, that's not true, my attention span isn't that long). I'm not the one that started trolling in this thread, I'm just the one that pointed it out.
No, you are the one who started trolling.
Crosswiredmind started the casual rudeness.Poor defeated Sam. Attacking me as a troll to defend his own trolling. It's okay, you can come out of the closet. Everyone knows you regenerate except when attacked with acid or fire.
ROFL
That's right Sebastian, play the victim.That's what you wanted to do, isn't it?
The poor helpless 4E kobold, abused by the mean man.
Have a good night, Sam. I'm done baiting you. Feel free to troll away in my absence. Lord knows that it's justified and excusable when done by you. Best of luck.
Well it certainly is not justified and excusable when done by you.
|
|
Sebastian, that was the most elegant and devastating put-down of a troll that I have ever seen. Thank you for the acid tongue and fiery wit.
Oooh, another troll claws his way up.
Thank you for your simpering contribution Taliesin. It really brought so much to the discussion.As for your lack of sense in recognizing a decent put-down . . .
Well, you obviously share low standards with your idol.
Let's not forget WotC's attempt at smurf ethnic clensing.
Ok...now THAT was funny.
|
|
A lack of objectivity does not preclude the presence of truth.You mean the way people who hate 4E are actually often right about its shortcomings, and the shortcomings of WotC?
Of course 4e has shortcomings. Of course WotC has shortcomings. Unfortunately most of the posts that try to show them often fall short on logic or overload on hyperbole like - OMG THEY ARE MAKING YOU PAY TO PLAYTEST!!!!
Quite over the top that bit.
|
Ok...now THAT was funny.
True, the "cleansing" video was humorous...
But I think the truly funny thing (in a sad sort of way), is how the whole 4e issue is still such a deep burning wound...
I will freely admit that I was on the "I Hate 4e and will state my opinion as such at every opportunity" band-wagon...
Now, while I still dislike 4e, I can no longer personally justify all the rigmarole...
WotC has made their decision, and the people here have made their's...
And there is absolutely NOTHING I can say or do to change that!
Besides, it does not effect me (well, okay, I can't go out and pick up the latest D&D book)...
But I own a whole life-time of stuff I have not even used...
Not to mention, there's the Pathfinder RPG and all the rest of the Paizo Pathfinder Goodness!!!
-That One Digitalelf Fellow-
|
|
Sebastian, that was the most elegant and devastating put-down of a troll that I have ever seen. Thank you for the acid tongue and fiery wit.Oooh, another troll claws his way up.
Thank you for your simpering contribution Taliesin. It really brought so much to the discussion.
As for your lack of sense in recognizing a decent put-down . . .
Well, you obviously share low standards with your idol.
Sam - give it up. My interactions with you in "the real world" were never this negative. You always seemed like a very nice and very reasonable guy. Thanks for showing me how wrong I was.
|
|
Of course 4e has shortcomings. Of course WotC has shortcomings. Unfortunately most of the posts that try to show them often fall short on logic or overload on hyperbole like - OMG THEY ARE MAKING YOU PAY TO PLAYTEST!!!!
Quite over the top that bit.
Only one small problem there:
Paying to playtest is not a shortcoming of 4E.It is a shortcoming of WotC.
Saying it in no way attacks 4E, diminishes whatever qualities you see in it, or hinders your ability to enjoy it.
That is why the only thing over the top has been your response, turning an observation about the company into both an attack on the product, and on you personally.
And let us be very clear, there is no shortfall in logic or overload of hyperbole in that statement.
If you want to playtest that 4E material for WotC, you must pay them for the privilege. (Well, that is their plan. They still have not managed to create a product they can charge for. But that is another issue.) It is a simple observation on their plan, combined with an observation that most people do not charge you a fee to access playtest materials.
Further, it still leaves you with no response for just how far short this falls of a full playtest of all material in a particular product.
|
|
Sam - give it up. My interactions with you in "the real world" were never this negative. You always seemed like a very nice and very reasonable guy. Thanks for showing me how wrong I was.
I am very nice. And quite reasonable.
Until people go "quite a bit over the top", deliberately choosing to construe comments about a company's policies as a general attack on a specific product, as well as a personal attack.Stop freaking out when people say WotC made a mistake and you will discover a lot of people are a lot nicer and more reasonable than you thought.
|
|
Of course 4e has shortcomings. Of course WotC has shortcomings. Unfortunately most of the posts that try to show them often fall short on logic or overload on hyperbole like - OMG THEY ARE MAKING YOU PAY TO PLAYTEST!!!!
Quite over the top that bit.
Only one small problem there:
Paying to playtest is not a shortcoming of 4E.
It is a shortcoming of WotC.
Saying it in no way attacks 4E, diminishes whatever qualities you see in it, or hinders your ability to enjoy it.
... and that is different than what I said above how?
I gave you an example of a perceived WotC shortcoming taken to a hyperbolic extreme.
That is why the only thing over the top has been your response, turning an observation about the company into both an attack on the product, and on you personally.
Sam - all of my responses to you original ALL CAPS fit was to point out the gross exaggeration inherent to your original argument. I pointed out that the playtest material has been just one article of of dozens (which is true) and that the money spent on the DDI is not just for playtesting (true), and that the playtest articles are a perk - exclusive content access if you will - which is normal for publications of all kinds (also true). Your response was to go into hair splitting mode - columns are not articles (stretch), the warforged article was also playtest material (false), playtest material should be free (opinion), etc.
Then when I used a light hearted quip about twisted knickers you drove the train into the ditch by flinging accusations.
I did not take the original argument personally but I sure as heck to the "lack of civility" thing personally - who wouldn't?
And let us be very clear, there is no shortfall in logic or overload of hyperbole in that statement.
If you want to playtest that 4E material for WotC, you must pay them for the privilege. (Well, that is their plan. They still have not managed to create a product they can charge for. But that is another issue.) It is a simple observation on their plan, combined with an observation that most people do not charge you a fee to access playtest materials.
... but you stated your case by screaming it (all caps remember). Then you split hairs and nit picked as folks responded to you. Do you see how that can cause a problem?
Further, it still leaves you with no response for just how far short this falls of a full playtest of all material in a particular product.
So who ever said that the material released in Dragon is their only playtest outlet?
|
|
Sam - give it up. My interactions with you in "the real world" were never this negative. You always seemed like a very nice and very reasonable guy. Thanks for showing me how wrong I was.I am very nice. And quite reasonable.
Until people go "quite a bit over the top", deliberately choosing to construe comments about a company's policies as a general attack on a specific product, as well as a personal attack.
Stop freaking out when people say WotC made a mistake and you will discover a lot of people are a lot nicer and more reasonable than you thought.
Since that is not what happened I am still left scratching my head as to what actually did happen.
I'm with you on that one Sam.
;)
Hehe.
... Best of luck.
WE LOVE YOU!!!
|
|
... and that is different than what I said above how?
I gave you an example of a perceived WotC shortcoming taken to a hyperbolic extreme.
Except you keep complaining that everyone is hostile to 4E.
WotC is not 4E.Likewise criticism of WotC is not automatically hostility, even if it possibly contains hyperbole.
Sam - all of my responses to you original ALL CAPS fit was to point out the gross exaggeration inherent to your original argument.
There is no exagerration, gross or otherwise, in my original comparison.
There is no argument in my original comparison.That you consider it an argument is an example of your overreaction.
I pointed out that the playtest material has been just one article of of dozens (which is true)
Well no it is not, as I demonstrated in my response.
However, even without that, it does not constitute a proof that my original statement was incorrect. Indeed if anything it amplifies it, as it shows just how little playtest material you are getting access for when you do pay.and that the money spent on the DDI is not just for playtesting (true),
Which yet again does not negate that you are still paying to playtest.
and that the playtest articles are a perk - exclusive content access if you will - which is normal for publications of all kinds (also true).
Except that such "exclusive" content in other publications does not typically extend to having you edit their material for the publisher.
Your response was to go into hair splitting mode - columns are not articles (stretch),
Not a stretch, look at the table of contents. It has articles and columns.
the warforged article was also playtest material (false),
Not false, that is how it is presented to the RPGA and the LFR campaign.
playtest material should be free (opinion), etc.
An opinion backed by the industry standard, including the product being compared to.
Then when I used a light hearted quip about twisted knickers you drove the train into the ditch by flinging accusations.
Given how overly sensitive you are to anything even remotely critical of WotC, you have no particular credibility to hide behind quips, light hearted or otherwise, or claim anyone else is flinging accusations.
I did not take the original argument personally but I sure as heck to the "lack of civility" thing personally - who wouldn't?
Then you should be more civil.
You keep saying you want others to be, show some yourself.... but you stated your case by screaming it (all caps remember). Then you split hairs and nit picked as folks responded to you. Do you see how that can cause a problem?
The screaming was to highlight the absurdity of it, and how casually it was being overlooked.
Perhaps you have never playtested anything before. I have. SPI did not ask me to pay. West End Games did not ask me to pay. Even WotC did not ask me to pay when I playtested 4E. Now for this material it is available if you pay. That is a pretty significant element.I could also go into a long and involved discussion about it sets up their LFR campaign to be pay for access, something that was quite destructive to the LG campaign, but that is not directly related.
As for being precise about the elements, that is because you were splitting hairs and picking nits while trying to "prove" that you were not actually paying to playtest even though you were. If you use such narrow definitions then you must expect them to be used back against you.
Finally, in what possible way is this a problem unless you choose to actively take any criticism of WotC as a personal attack?
No matter what else you say, it all comes back to that.
So what if I yelled at WotC?
How do you possibly construe that as an attack on the 4E game system, or yourself?
So who ever said that the material released in Dragon is their only playtest outlet?
Nobody.
Any more than anyone has said Paizo is not running other playtests of the PFRPG.The difference is, still going back to the title of the thread, compare and contrast.
The Pathfinder open playtest is of all the material.
The WotC open playtest is of very limited material.