active vs passive entertainment (split)

[crespowu]

I think RPG is more interactive.

[Ron Edwards]

Hello,

The above post was split from the 2002 thread active vs passive entertainment From Mainstream a Revision.

Let me take a guess - you're new here, and looking for a way to post to fit in. You found an interesting thread and found something fairly non-threatening to say in its context. All that is understandable.

However, it's not what happens here. For one thing, threads of a certain age (measured in weeks, not years) are to be left alone. You can start new threads that refer to them, but not post to them. For another, instead of finding a way to fit in by agreeing in a non-threatening way, look for a way for the site really to meet your needs. There are many forums here, each with its own, explicit purpose.

If you really want to talk about the interactive, active site of role-playing, then the best thing to do is to post in the forum Actual Play, describing some experiences of your own. It'd be great to refer back to the thread you posted in, to give the readers context for why you're posting your ideas.

Or, if you want to stick with the publishing side of things, which is what that thread was nominally involved with, then let's do it right here. Given your view of the interactivity of the hobby, how do you think it relates to publishing books, or to other available mechanisms of play?

Best, Ron