Alright. Will delay ic posts to next week then.
Also, quick personal update: I may be out of commission over the weekend. If there are any questions, I might not be able to answer them until Monday. Someone gave me a gift to try and cheer me up due to my own financial troubles.
PS: Still love you, and that return gift is still in the works. ;)
Brovo Member
- Last Seen: MIA
- Old Guild Username: Brovo
- Joined: 12 yrs ago
- Posts: 1116 (0.25 / day)
- VMs: 0
-
Username history
- Brovo 12 yrs ago
Status
User has no status, yet
Bio
User has no bio, yet
Most Recent Posts
No. Casual is not "purer" than Advanced. How does one even define purity when the act of role playing is literally defined in its own name? Role playing = Playing a role. It's akin to acting, which is in turn just professional level playing pretend in imagination-land. It's why Dungeons & Dragons was defined as role playing: A humongous portion of your entertainment value was literally playing your role, was getting into your character, and so on. However, role playing is not squared off to just Dungeons & Dragons acting skills--role playing is essentially just playing pretend. So if you're really into a video game, like Left 4 Dead, and start playing as Bill--watching your team mate's backs, always using the M16, leading the way--you're role playing. It's just a different form of it, no more or less valid or pure than any other, and to say otherwise is pure elitism.
Now, yes, there is actually a definable skill to role playing. You can see the difference between a terrible actor and a professional actor, for example: One gets into the role, adjusts their appearance, the tone of their voice, the look in their eyes, and really adopts what it is they're doing, while the terrible actor just imagines himself as person X, he doesn't actually really "become" person X, he's always consciously separate from it and never gets into the role. He fails to play his role.
The same applies to forums. You can see the difference between someone who gets into a character, builds a back story and tries to show multiple angles of that character, versus the person who's playing a walking, talking author insert, or a person who's field of comprehension of literature and role playing is merely tropes and how they are used, not why.
Casual and Advanced, while different in attitude about the type of writing used, do not in any way differ about the format of role playing used--PbPRP, specifically. Neither one is more "pure" than the other, it's skin-level differences. What you're more likely seeing is the boisterous voice of advanced proclaiming advanced literary knowledge and not understanding that they probably don't actually have that knowledge just because they can write ten paragraphs per post, and then confusing that with the skill of role playing.
Summary.
To put it metaphorically: Casual and Advanced are different in artistic style, not in that one is art and the other is not. If Casual is to games what Advanced is to literature, they're both still art, and they're both still role playing, in equal parts. Advanced just tends to get the two confused more often because it tends to get filled with more wannabe professional writers than Casual does.
Now, yes, there is actually a definable skill to role playing. You can see the difference between a terrible actor and a professional actor, for example: One gets into the role, adjusts their appearance, the tone of their voice, the look in their eyes, and really adopts what it is they're doing, while the terrible actor just imagines himself as person X, he doesn't actually really "become" person X, he's always consciously separate from it and never gets into the role. He fails to play his role.
The same applies to forums. You can see the difference between someone who gets into a character, builds a back story and tries to show multiple angles of that character, versus the person who's playing a walking, talking author insert, or a person who's field of comprehension of literature and role playing is merely tropes and how they are used, not why.
Casual and Advanced, while different in attitude about the type of writing used, do not in any way differ about the format of role playing used--PbPRP, specifically. Neither one is more "pure" than the other, it's skin-level differences. What you're more likely seeing is the boisterous voice of advanced proclaiming advanced literary knowledge and not understanding that they probably don't actually have that knowledge just because they can write ten paragraphs per post, and then confusing that with the skill of role playing.
Summary.
To put it metaphorically: Casual and Advanced are different in artistic style, not in that one is art and the other is not. If Casual is to games what Advanced is to literature, they're both still art, and they're both still role playing, in equal parts. Advanced just tends to get the two confused more often because it tends to get filled with more wannabe professional writers than Casual does.
mdk said
I don't know if there's a 'nice' way to run a slaughterhouse. People eat meat. Don't lose sleep over it.
Eh'. We could be a little more humane if just because from a coldly logical point of view, sticking millions of animals in conditions arguable worse than Africa and then getting surprised when diseases run rampant that kill thousands of them nonstop and develop at alarming rates because they have the perfect environment for it... Well... Hm... We really shouldn't be.
It's in our own self interest to treat them at least a little better. I mean, granted, most of these species require direct human intervention to survive at this point, and hunting is also used as a cheap method for crowd control (else deer would fucking overrun everything with the rabbits), so... More balance would be best. Outright banning these things or disposing of them is sheer folly, but on the other hand, treating them like garbage and then being surprised when a good portion of them do turn out to basically be made of garbage that is as unhealthy for us as it was for them... Uhm... Hm. That's problematic.
Plus, if we're going to raise and kill porky, the least we can do is let porky have a halfway decent life before we stick a knife in his head and send his body through a nightmare factory so the rest of us can eat his delicious, delicious guts... Mmm... Bacon...
How are posts coming along folks?
@Everyone: Post going up Wednesday morning. I was going to put it up today, but I lost it in a power outage... :\ Hopefully things will cooperate better tomorrow. No power outages then maybe? Fingers crossed.
Tydosius said
First of all, free will. It can't be removed. It can be dampened, a lot, but not removed. Second of all, in a universe of chaos and free will, a plan can fail, and omnipotence is something we assume has the same meaning as god-like, even if, well, it isn't true.Sorry, sorry, cool like fonz, cool like fonz.On topic, it is not selfish to commit suicide, but it is infuriating. It also evokes those weird emotions that regular feeling humans have.
Hm. To quickly rebuttle without derailing.
1. In a universe where any entity can know the future with any sort of certainty (omniscience) and shape it with absolute certainty (omnipotence), there is no such thing as free will, in the same sense that no matter how well designed an AI is in a computer game, it will always perform the functions you programmed it to.
2. A God may or may not exist. I don't know. That God may or may not be perfect. I don't know. It may not even be a God, it may be space aliens, or it may be nothing at all and we simply formed as a natural process. I don't really know... But on a topic as sensitive as suicide, God should take a back seat to the person's well being first and foremost.
Family, friends, counseling, psychiatric evaluation, medical assistance--all far more important than a god in the case of suicide. If your best argument against suicide is that it might make a being whose mere existence is unprovable frustrated that things didn't go accordingly to plan, you have massively skewered priorities considering this is a person's life on the line.
But, free will. The person will do as they may. The best one can do is support them emotionally and try to guide them to a healthy course, then respect whatever decision it is they end up making for themselves, so long as they do it with a sound mind.
Vortex said
Yeah... I planned on having a healthy debate on Church State relations not about a particular god or a endless loop of arguments.Well out goes the window my hopes for Off topic!
"Abandon hope all ye who enter here" is the unofficial motto of OT.
Vortex said Wait your not serious Brovo? Oh how you break my heart!
No.
I rarely am very serious. I come here to relax, not get wound up.Dervish said
I am satisfied. Just keep in mind that you might think you're joking, but everyone else might think you're throwing fuel in the fire.Hell, that's why I thought I should say something. When something has been going on for 12 pages and getting increasingly snippy, it's probably not a bad idea to take a step back and let things cool down.C'mon guys, group hug and beer. Let's go hate on something productive, like Donald Trump. Fuck that guy.
Yep. I can see that, not everyone gets that style of humour, so might as well address it in as blunt a fashion as I can, no?
And ha. Hate on something productive. Hate is a wasted emotion. Think I'd rather write a book.
I mean I guess to wrap this thread up in a neat bow tie since it looks like it's finally going to kick the bucket is I've repeatedly stated throughout this thread that I don't... Honestly... Give a rat's ass what a person believes. If a person wants to believe that a pedophile rode a unicorn into heaven, they can believe that, I don't really care so long as the person themselves is a decent person. Everything I've argued here has been pretty much for the fuck of it, for fun, devil's advocacy and all that.
I mean jeez, I've been posting Star Wars clips for god's sake, I should hope that at least would give away my complete lack of giving a fuck for making a really monumental argument. I mean if I really wanted to argue anything, I'd stay specific: I'd pick one thing and I would stick to it like a fly sticks to shit.
At the end of the day the same rights and freedoms that guarantee someone's right to believe whatever fantastical thing they want to believe, protects my right to not believe a damned thing. That is what matters most to me and it's the real reason why I advocate for a secular government: In this way, the government is unable to go for or against religion. That means it cannot make laws that support Christianity, or atheism, or Islam, or any other religion on the planet. That should remain purely a personal domain, whatever makes you feel comfortable, whatever makes the most sense, go with it, and be a good person.
Beyond that, nothing else matters to me concerning religion and government, or religion and law, or religion in general usually, unless you want to debate the philosophical side of it, which I find intriguing and usually take a grey world mentality on.
That's all really. I hope that clarifies it for anyone who thought this thread was actually a serious exchange from me at least. Alright Dervish?
I mean jeez, I've been posting Star Wars clips for god's sake, I should hope that at least would give away my complete lack of giving a fuck for making a really monumental argument. I mean if I really wanted to argue anything, I'd stay specific: I'd pick one thing and I would stick to it like a fly sticks to shit.
At the end of the day the same rights and freedoms that guarantee someone's right to believe whatever fantastical thing they want to believe, protects my right to not believe a damned thing. That is what matters most to me and it's the real reason why I advocate for a secular government: In this way, the government is unable to go for or against religion. That means it cannot make laws that support Christianity, or atheism, or Islam, or any other religion on the planet. That should remain purely a personal domain, whatever makes you feel comfortable, whatever makes the most sense, go with it, and be a good person.
Beyond that, nothing else matters to me concerning religion and government, or religion and law, or religion in general usually, unless you want to debate the philosophical side of it, which I find intriguing and usually take a grey world mentality on.
That's all really. I hope that clarifies it for anyone who thought this thread was actually a serious exchange from me at least. Alright Dervish?
Dervish said RIP Respectful debate.Are you guys really doing anything other than throwing thinly veiled insults at each other?
No, is anyone still taking this debate seriously? I'm doing this to kill time while I wait for the grocery store to open.
Dervish said I also enjoyed how the new guy in the thread with some good points was throughly ignored in favour of the bicker battle going on.Also, Vortex, it seems you have an irrational loathing of Mormons, given that response and how condescending you were in the thread that one member made about his religion. You know that a lot of people on this site are Mormon and act in no way different from anybody else, right? Some of my best friends I made on this site are Mormon. Try getting to know one, you just might learn that they're really no different than any of your other religious friends.
Wait, wait, the person you're going to single out more than anyone else... Is Vortex? Not the Not Boerd guy or ActRaiser's deranged rambling about how Obama is this evil baby eating monster or even me, taking potshots at them for the last like what, week? Two weeks? You're going to pick out... Vortex?
... Okay. That's real strange, but okay.
© 2007-2026