Forumulating Guidelines for Forum Debate

[Geo]

So... if anyone here likes my posts enough to say so, I don't need 'flirty' window-dressing. I'm just pleased and honored to know that I've said something someone else liked.

 

Better?

[Valka]

I have no idea what that graphic means. 

[Geo]

Modified for your convenience.

[Green1]

Better than that, if you like the post, compliment them in public. That goes for anyone. That just made that guy look like a fool.

I could see it now,

 PM: "Hey BU, I am not flirting or have gay hotz for you but I like your bases9 graphics".

Was that necessary?

[Green1]

But on a more serious note. BU is right about my indifference to one's gender as it deals with gaming.

I ran public Dungeons and Dragons sessions as a DM for 6 years. On and off there were 0 to 2 gamers at the table who happened to be female. My monsters slaughtered them just as easily as it slaughtered male players if they screwed up.

When I was an officer for a MMO guild, I invited to events based on gear and performance, not just to hear a female voice in chat.

In conventions and the role playing tables of others, I have had the pleasure of gaming with female of all skill levels. Including one who was a genius at the Cleric class and another who knew every dirty trick as a fighter/rogue hybrid.

Now, should I have been flirty and maybe bagged a fabled "gamer grrrrl" in my travels by flirting with them? Those things are just so hard to read. I have known folks get married over gaming, etc... but I have seen far more get pissed and go away, killing the fun. It may have worked, maybe blow up in my face. Probably the latter. Hindsight is always 20/20.  I never really had that as a goal. I valued the fun time over turning someone off and ruining stuff.

Something tells me those females were of the same mind I was. Having fun and intelligent conversation.In this day and age, that is getting rarer and rarer and is to be cherished.  Not "hooking up". Though that can be fun, too. Nor would I or anyone else on this board or any games turn that down as long as the person was not a stalker/serial killer/weird type, married, 4 time zones away, or just grotesque.

[Geo]

Still, that's alot of "or's" I'm seeing in that post, Green1.

[Green1]

Still, that's alot of "or's" I'm seeing in that post, Green1.

Yes. There are disqualifiers in that. The "or's" are necessary. I may be a single dude in my 40s. But I am NOT hopping on a bird for a crazy chick in Boise Idaho who is 300 lbs, PMs me 20 times a day, is morbidly obese, and has 50 cats. Nor do I think a female would do that for a guy of that description.

I will however, game with that person or exchange forum posts. No harm in that.

Although.. if said chick was rich.... and I could sit in my underwear and not work and play video games and troll forums all day.... I might be tempted to put up with cat crap everywhere and lift it up and stick it in. Even if it was in the middle of nowhere in Idaho.

[Green1]

Forgot to add..

I would not put up with violence either. No matter if a new gaming rig was guaranteed to me. getting my ass kicked is not my idea of relationship bliss.

Not even S&M type stuff...

[Green1]

Enough. Leaving the thread. Before I am accused of "chasing folks off"

 I am not sure what this thread was vaguely about and have polluted it with stories of gamers of the feminine persuasion and online/ gaming etiquette. I just saw "unread posts" and started commenting on my own experiences.  I should probably start a new thread and tell you guys some stories of drama.

Man, I got some good ones. None from 4x or forums, though. Seems forums are immune to that.

[Geo]

Still, that's alot of "or's" I'm seeing in that post, Green1.

Although.. if said chick was rich.... and I could sit in my underwear and not work and play video games and troll forums all day.... I might be tempted to put up with cat crap everywhere and lift it up and stick it in. Even if it was in the middle of nowhere in Idaho.

Oh, and now the "if's" are flyin' galore?

[Green1]

Still, that's alot of "or's" I'm seeing in that post, Green1.

Although.. if said chick was rich.... and I could sit in my underwear and not work and play video games and troll forums all day.... I might be tempted to put up with cat crap everywhere and lift it up and stick it in. Even if it was in the middle of nowhere in Idaho.

Oh, and now the "if's" are flyin' galore?

Do not interrupt my dream of having a sugar momma pay for my gaming, Geo!

Da Wimminz have if , ands, and buts too. So I can not have standards?

But seriously, I know of those that have sugar mommas, and it does not sound cool. EVERYTHING must be for them. My exes mom was telling me snidely I should get one. She even said the dudes that do that can only handle it for a few weeks. Screw that. I want to have fun, play video games, troll backwater forums, ride my bike and not worry about a car, and be free.

And I will throw my clothes on the floor and not use a hamper WITH PRIDE.

[Green1]

I do enjoy enjoy discussing the topic that is implied.

Join me here http://alphacentauri2.info/index.php?topic=8770.0 if you have stories. I do not participate though there are instances I probably should have but did not due to not wanting to ruin fun, but you must admit, it is intriguing.

If you have stories, share them!

[Geo]

If you have stories, share them!

Nope, not me.
I'll leave you at it.

[Buster's Uncle]

Obama, of course.

Yeah, he's very Chamberlain-like; that's one thing I think both sides can agree to criticize him about, though in different areas.

There's a thing that gets my goat - it's like the entire political right had a secret meeting when he was elected, and decided as one to just throw mud at the man until something stuck.  Do you follow the Daily Show?  After the Republican Convention, they played a clip of Clint Eastwood talking to the empty chair, and Jon Stewart exclaimed "There's an INVISIBLE Obama that only republicans can see!"  The man has failed as a leader, and failed to see that compromise with unvarnished evil; I was sick of all the Opposite Day lies years ago, they could have been hitting him with things he actually did, or failed to do.

Gitmo is still open and NASA has its budget year - for the first time as an adult, I've sat out a presidential election, because he failed the audition rather badly.

You're taking my metaphor too far - in this case, I'm only talking about the police state aspects, not the communistic leaning or Eastern elements.

Police state seems to be equally embraced by both sides...and  is specifically an atheist police state, which fits with some of the fringe on the left, but isn't going to be welcome on the right at all.

Where does he say that there is no God?  I tend to agree that he's an atheist, but here the metaphor fails; I was talking about Police State, Police State and nothing but Police State in my use of Yang.    could have racist problems with his Chineseness, too, which also has nothing to do with what I was saying.

I do not concede that police state seems to be equally embraced by both sides.  My contempt for legislators on the left (including Obama) during the Cheney Administration is profound, but they were collaborators, not the instigators.

I'm not surprised to get something of a right political perspective from you, having observed that your world-view is deeply informed by conservative religious values, but I'm a bit surprised that you're actually trying to claim the Republican party is what it was before Reagan, I suspect long before you were born; how can you ignore the torture, the camps, the open surveillance of citizens and claim the left is the greater enemy of freedom?

The torture and internment camps are pure  , and the open surveillance of citizens is something that Obama doesn't seem any more willing to get rid of than Bush was.  That said, I'm not claiming the left is a greater enemy of freedom;  and even  are no friends of freedom, and  , to what extent he's found at all, is to be found on the left.  I'm saying that  in particular is more welcome on the left than the right, simply because  hates him as much as  , and is far more prominent on the right than  is on the left.

Does not compute.  I'll see your Stalin with a Hitler.

Small government always seems to end up conflicting with , , or 

Not always.  The use of government to persecute religion (as was found in the French revolution), for example, is not something that any of those three would favor, and so its absence is a form of small government that doesn't conflict with them.  Which would normally be too much of a niche case to be relevant, except that  it's the sort of thing that really likes.

No not actually always, just often.   I should have left  out completely, as he loves a free hand.    is a government function, so a special case probably not apt here.    these days, though, LOVES legislating morality...

and the small government conservatives (who are NOT wrong, on the whole) don't belong in the same party with  at all.  I have no ideas of what they can do about it without marginalizing what political power they have left, but Sarah Palin is very much the enemy of what they hold dearest at least as much or more so than Andrea Dworkin.

True.  Actual small government conservatives (i.e. conservative libertarians) will tend to be a mix of  and  , possibly with  thrown in there too, probably agreeing with  in the private sphere, but not the public one.

(My own position gets quite a bit more complicated; while I favor  (with a different religion, of course) in principle, it's the wrong choice for this country, where  is the right answer.  I also strongly favor  , and think  and  , and even  to a small extent, have important ideas to contribute but should not be followed blindly.  I think  has some good ideas, but would rather use  's or  's approach to getting them implemented; I also respect except when she starts to look like  or  .  I think  is nuts,  is evil, and  doesn't really apply here.    doesn't really care that much what other people think of him, and I return the favor.)

Interesting, and a nuanced position.

I think you nail it exactly about the small government conservatives.

[Yitzi]

Gitmo is still open and NASA has its budget year - for the first time as an adult, I've sat out a presidential election, because he failed the audition rather badly.

Rather than sitting out, I would either vote for a third-party candidate, or just give my vote to whoever spends the least money (because we know that over-the-top campaign spending is a major source of the problem.)

Where does he say that there is no God?

Whenever he talks to you if you're running Fundamentalist (#SOCIAL0CAT3BAD1 in script.txt):

"Have you no intellectual integrity whatsoever, $TITLE0 $NAME1?
It pains me to see an educated person pointlessly cripple
$<1:himself:herself::> with the pathetic fantasy of a creator
and afterlife. Will you not put aside medieval mythology and
join the rest of us in the third millennium?"

( isn't very friendly in such a situation either, but he doesn't actually say it's false, just an irrelevant relic.)

Also, note that his agenda explicitly says "Atheist Police State."

I tend to agree that he's an atheist, but here the metaphor fails; I was talking about Police State, Police State and nothing but Police State in my use of Yang.

And I believe that is a mistake, as his atheism is very much a part of his character.  (Just as other faction leaders' characters include more than just their social engineering agenda;  isn't just Green, but also a scientist and someone with strong regard for other sentient beings.)

I do not concede that police state seems to be equally embraced by both sides.  My contempt for legislators on the left (including Obama) during the Cheney Administration is profound, but they were collaborators, not the instigators.

I may be mistaken, but I was under the impression that the NSA has substantially increased its spying on Americans in the last 5 years.

Does not compute.  I'll see your Stalin with a Hitler.

But while  may be the closest of the faction leaders to Hitler, he's not nearly as close a match as to Stalin.   Hitler is probably best represented by Police State/Green (not a perfect match, but he certainly wasn't Free Market or Planned), whereas Stalin was pure Police State/Planned.  And while Planned isn't  's actual agenda, he certainly does tend to go that way.

No not actually always, just often.   I should have left  out completely, as he loves a free hand.

Well, depends on your interpretation; he may prefer corporate welfare.

is a government function, so a special case probably not apt here.    these days, though, LOVES legislating morality...

Definitely.  But only when it's her preferred morality; she absolutely HATES when other moral systems are legislated.