*
*
Home
Help
Login
Register
Welcome, Guest. Please login or register.
December 21, 2014, 02:41:33 AM

Login with username, password and session length
Forum changes: Editing of posts has been turned off until further notice.
Search:     Advanced search
275647 Posts in 27717 Topics by 4283 Members Latest Member: - otto Most online today: 57 - most online ever: 429 (November 03, 2007, 04:35:43 AM)
Pages: 1 2 [3]
Print
Author Topic: What's Wrong with Pawn Stance?  (Read 5752 times)
xiombarg
Member

Posts: 1183


WWW
« Reply #30 on: November 12, 2002, 09:13:23 AM »

Quote from: fleetingGlow
Don’t interpret this as being difficult.  Sometimes I just like to summarize in my own words to make sure I understand the concept.

You know, it's days like this that I sometimes think we should just make up words to represent these concepts. To heck with "Author stance" or "Pawn stance" -- how about "Zigfurt stance"?

(yes, I'm kidding)
Logged

love * Eris * RPGs  * Anime * Magick * Carroll * techno * hats * cats * Dada
Kirt "Loki" Dankmyer -- Dance, damn you, dance! -- UNSUNG IS OUT
Ron Edwards
Global Moderator
Member
*
Posts: 16490


WWW
« Reply #31 on: November 12, 2002, 09:18:49 AM »

Hi Tim,

You got it.

Kirt, I hate to tell ya this, but this kind of terminology-construction and dialogue is the only way it's done clearly.

Best,
Ron
Logged
Jonathan Walton
Member

Posts: 1309


WWW
« Reply #32 on: November 12, 2002, 09:28:27 AM »

I understand how you use the terms, but I think there's oftentimes some confusion that comes up during regular discussion.

If I say "Author Stance" does that mean the meta-category "Author Stance" or the specific subset "Author-Author Stance"?  This is what reinforces the misconception of 1(a), that Pawn Stance is Author-Author Stance's inbred hick cousin (as opposed to being "Author-Pawn Stance").

I think part of the reason people want 2(b) is because that, at least, puts Author-Author and Author-Pawn on equal footing, even though it makes them two seperate stances.

So people's misconceptions are really arising just from the terminology and their natural insticts to rectify matters.  As Metallica says, sad but true.

Later.
Jonathan
Logged

xiombarg
Member

Posts: 1183


WWW
« Reply #33 on: November 12, 2002, 01:23:14 PM »

Quote from: Ron Edwards
Kirt, I hate to tell ya this, but this kind of terminology-construction and dialogue is the only way it's done clearly.

I know. That doesn't mean I can't poke fun at it. :)

Anyway, to try to add to this discussion, instead of talking about "substances", what about calling them "views" or "perspectives"? Then you could have "Author stance -- Pawn view" and "Author stance -- pure view" or somesuch.
Logged

love * Eris * RPGs  * Anime * Magick * Carroll * techno * hats * cats * Dada
Kirt "Loki" Dankmyer -- Dance, damn you, dance! -- UNSUNG IS OUT
Tim C Koppang
Member

Posts: 356


WWW
« Reply #34 on: November 12, 2002, 03:04:24 PM »

Kirt,

You wrote, "Then you could have 'Author stance -- Pawn view' and 'Author stance -- pure view' or some such."

I'm not trying to start something, but calling something a pure view will run you into all sorts of connotation problems.  You'll have people thinking that the pure view is better, and it's not.

As to calling them sub-stances or perspectives or whatever—I think you are adding extra vocabulary that doesn't really clarify meaning.  To me at least, Author-Pawn stance and Author-Author stance is clear enough if I want to differentiate between the two.
Logged

Pages: 1 2 [3]
Print
Jump to:  

Powered by MySQL Powered by PHP Powered by SMF 1.1.11 | SMF © 2006-2009, Simple Machines LLC
Oxygen design by Bloc
Valid XHTML 1.0! Valid CSS!