| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
Lord Snow, that's a pretty silly (dare I say false) premise to create considering you rarely know anything for sure i.e. deductively.
Agreed, but I think there's a scale, and before a mob forms and starts grabbing torches and pitchforks, a little more certainty than we had here -- or at least more time for everyone to cool down -- is almost never a bad thing, in my experience.
Please let's not turn this into an alignment or epistemology thread. It's dramatic enough already.
I bet she was a paladin.
|
Lord Snow, that's a pretty silly (dare I say false) premise to create considering you rarely know anything for sure i.e. deductively. You shouldn't jump to conclusions but you also shouldn't be so flimsy and non-judgemental as to never draw conclusions or judgements on anything because you don't have 100% certainty.
Enough was given here to have pretty strong certainty about her actions. Maybe Tim is a complete dick. He might be neglectful, verbally abusive, cheats, who knows. But that's irregardless of the fact she created a public spectacle and dragged non-involved parties into her and Tim's personal problems.
She may have said things in the heat of the moment out of anger but it doesn't mean she's right. If anything she should have made an effort to apologize to the group after for her actions and said she was angry and shouldn't have dragged them into it.
Absolutely true - she should have apologized by now (though I will repeat that apologies are hard, and indeed given the new information it IS now reasonable to reach all sorts of judgmental calls... that are similar to those you originally made. Just because you happened to be right didn't mean the process you used to get there was justifiable - it's like guessing an answer and having it be the right one, which is nice, but it was still a guess.
I never said we have to be 10000000% sure about something before going by it, but:
a) you guys had a much less than 100% certainty in that case because you were missing a lot of very important details - for example, that the girl insisted to accompany the guy to his game, and that she only started to be spiteful when she grew bored. In Hama's original post there were not enough details to be sure that that was the case - for example, when I read it I guessed that the situation was that the gamer suggested to the girl that if she wants to spend more time with him she could come with him to the session - that would have been a very different situatuin.
b) When concerning humans, it is always for the best to wait until you have as high a certainty as possible - see how in court you are innocent until proven otherwise, and to prove guilt you need to go beyond reasonable doubt. You guys were far, far away from these standards. Sure, your verdict does not have as much of an impact as that of a court, so it's not like I expected a jury and a ten months long trial with witnesses and evidence... but those link should be the description of the guiding philosophy, and asking for more details would have certainly been the reasonable approach.
| 6 people marked this as a favorite. |
Beyond a reasonable doubt is only needed in criminal cases. Since you're using legal analogies, this would have more likely been a civil matter, in which case, you only need a preponderance of evidence - of which had been provided that the person in question was, more probable than not, an insufferable boor.
An insufferable boor, I would point out, that you'll never meet (or, never know if you had), so getting worked up in said anonymous boor's defense to an extent that you're attempting to equate a social situation to a criminal (or otherwise) court case is rather wacky.
I'm reminded of a phrase, "You only get one chance to make a first impression." This person certainly made a memorable one.
Yep Brian, interesting angle.
To break it into lawful, traditional lines. If the bread and salt is taken, you behave responsibly and respectfully. This applies to the guest and the host; but if the guest is in breach, the host is very much in their right to tell the guest to f~#* off, or remove them, or call the constabulary.
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
You're going to kill the player characters, or a bunch of NPCs?
Maybe even my players if they mooch the last piece of pizza.
Don't. It's always a PITA to get rid of those bodies...
Does the pizza have stuffed crusts?
If not, killing them is not really worth it.
I have an easy time making sure no one eats my pizza.
I just order anchovies on it.
Mmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmm, salty fishy goodness!
I have an easy time making sure no one eats my pizza.
I just order anchovies on it.
Mmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmm, salty fishy goodness!
Huh, I should probably try a pizza with anchovies on it some day.
I have an easy time making sure no one eats my pizza.
I just order anchovies on it.
Mmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmm, salty fishy goodness!
And they are going to prevent me from eating the pizza... How? Have those anchovies trained as secret ninja pizza defenders? Or are they filled with explosives rigged to explode after the first bite but before I eat all of it?
| 2 people marked this as a favorite. |
This is one of the reasons I like to host my games at a local game store instead of at a house. Being in a public area people seem to behave better in general.
Well, I'm in my early 40s, and my gaming friends are more-or-less in the same age bracket. Grown ups should know how to behave in other peoples' homes-- and if they don't, they don't get invited back.
Whenever I've played at my FLGS, I've found that most of the other gamers have been the same age as, or younger than, my own kid. And, I tend to get the hairy eyeball from the parents of said kids. (I can almost hear them think, "Why would a man my age want to play games with children?") And the games have always devolved into long irrelevant discussions about some anime show I've never seen. Not fun. I'll play with other grown-ups in the privacy of our own homes!
Examples of kids behaving badly in public, and inconsiderate parents who won't discipline them.
Yup. Some parents are inconsiderate jerks who won't discipline their kids. While those are the ones who tend to stick in your mind, it's my experience that the VAST MAJORITY of parents DO appropriately discipline their kids, or have the sense not to bring kids into non-kid-friendly space.
As a parent, when I had a young kid, nothing would boil my blood worse than ponying up for a babysitter, and going out for a once-or-twice-a-year pull-out-the-stops romantic dinner with my wife at an expensive restaurant, only to find out that some idiot couple decided to bring a restless three-year-old to such a restaurant that doesn't even offer a childrens' menu.
Seriously people-- that's a jerk move.
And on that night, I remember comiserating with three other couples in exactly my position-- these all happened to be other parents who had also left their own kids with sitters, and were equally upset with the inconsiderate jerks who couldn't bear not to bring their precious little snowflake to a place where dinner for two can easily cost $400. (And ruin the experience for everyone else.)
But, thankfully, (at least where I live) such people are very much in the minority.
Most drivers aren't drunk; most country music fans aren't racists; most New Yorkers aren't rude; most bicyclists obey traffic rules. Unfortunately, most people only remember the incidents that make a bad impression, and that can color your opinion of the VAST MAJORITY of responsible people.
(That said-- I am way more forgiving of screaming kids at a "family restaurant" like Denny's or Applebees. You go to a place like that, you need to expect families with young kids. It's at places like that where responsible parents teach their kids how to behave in good restaurants!)
|
|
I can't imagine why you would take a small child to a fancy restaurant. If you can afford that place you can pony up 20 bucks for a baby sitter. That is pretty damn rude, but you can choose to not let it bother you by ignoring it or being asked to move to a farther table.
Well personally, it's so said child could learn how to behave in such a place, and develop a broad taste before the age where any unfamiliar food is automatically considered poisonous. I only recall waiting with him on the curb outside once while my wife finished her meal and then swapping places. These days, he's fantastically well-mannered, orders for himself and chats to the staff. He's six.
I get the point that you and Haladir are making though - why take a child to a fancy place if you are not intending to make them behave appropriately.
|
|
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
He said 3. That's a little early to start introducing a child to escargot and duck de la range (or however it's spelled). And if you are so bold as to try this, take the child outside when they act up.
Actually, you want to start before then. But yes, you take them outside if they misbehave.
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
Stop talking about food.
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
Stop talking about food.
Okay.
|
He said 3. That's a little early to start introducing a child to escargot and duck de la range (or however it's spelled). And if you are so bold as to try this, take the child outside when they act up.
My theory is that this was a really rich couple and spending a few bills here wouldn't blink an eye so they brought the child. It's probably not a once every 3 years thing for them like for most people.
And escargot (snails) is not fancy food, it's traditional French peasant food.
I've never spent that much on a meal for two ($180 is my limit, thinking about it) but I do agree with Brock that introducing a child to unusual food and formal dining environments is best done at a young age, although three seems a little too young to me.
He said 3. That's a little early to start introducing a child to escargot and duck de la range (or however it's spelled). And if you are so bold as to try this, take the child outside when they act up.
My theory is that this was a really rich couple and spending a few bills here wouldn't blink an eye so they brought the child. It's probably not a once every 3 years thing for them like for most people.
That is a little too late. The earlier the better, as eating habits can get ingrained at a pretty early age.
But yes, discplining your child is a good idea.
| 3 people marked this as a favorite. |
I'll let my child form it's own taste in food.
Just leave various edible things around the house, they'll figure out what is good and what isn't.
|
|
| 2 people marked this as a favorite. |
I'll let my child form it's own taste in food.
That's a great idea. The way to do it is to get it to try everything before the age of three. After that, a reflex kicks in where they become mistrustful of new foods.
If they have a large pool of foods to choose their favourite tastes from, you'll be ok - there may even be a non-potato vegetable included. Otherwise you might face 10 years of dishing up chicken nuggets and spaghetti hoops twice a day.
|
|
In my house it was simple. You ate what was served or you didn't eat.
My parents had better things to do than worry about a little kid's palate.
Eventually, I got hungry enough to eat it anyway.
We're certainly lucky to have a vast range of cheap food easily available. That said, it's the same rule at home - this is what you are having, nothing else unless you eat this first. Outside the home we like him to choose what he wants off the menu, and ideally order it himself.
We're getting pretty off-topic here.
Stop talking about food again.
| 2 people marked this as a favorite. |
Ecto gammit.
To get the thread back on track... I had a situation like this come up for the first time last week, although it was actually a case where we usually played at my friend Kate's apartment and were GOING to play at my place this time, but Kate and her apparently had a guest visiting that I didn't know about and they didn't really plan ahead.
He kept himself busy playing TF2 on his laptop but Kate got distracted a few times. I didn't like the whole situation, but she apologized before we started playing at it went okay. Honestly, I had more trouble with Kate's roomate player, who doesn't seem to care very much about the game, but that's a subject for a different thread.
Seriously? That name, that avatar, and you are making that suggestion?
Maybe he think it's too meta when his food begin discussing food.
And they are going to prevent me from eating the pizza... How? Have those anchovies trained as secret ninja pizza defenders?
Experience had led me to believe that I was the only person on the planet who would tolerate them.
What are anchovies?
What are anchovies?
It's a kind of fish. Quite small, and rather disgusting, but some people swear by them. The German word for one is "Sardelle", if that helps.
And they are going to prevent me from eating the pizza... How? Have those anchovies trained as secret ninja pizza defenders?Experience had led me to believe that I was the only person on the planet who would tolerate them.
If it was true then pizzerias wouldn't keep pizzas with anchovies on their menus.
I have yet to find a pizza component that would prevent me from eating pizza but I admit that I don't remember eating anchovies on pizza... Probably because other people were opposed to getting pizza with them.
If it was true then pizzerias wouldn't keep pizzas with anchovies on their menus.
Sadly, most of them don't anymore.
I weep for those lost pleasures.| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
Oh, that? We eat that canned (i don't, too many bones, always hated plucking bones out of fish). Never thought of putting that on a pizza. TBH, never thought of putting anything except ham, bacon, yellow cheese, mushroms, olives (green), and sometimes breaking an egg over everything.
You can eat some fish, bones and all, because their bones are softer. Smelt and sardines are delicious whole. :D
If it was true then pizzerias wouldn't keep pizzas with anchovies on their menus.Sadly, most of them don't anymore.
I weep for those lost pleasures.
Quick scan of local pizzerias' menus tells me that indeed, anchovies are no longer available as a pizza ingredient.