http://forum.rpg.net/showthread.php?s=&threadid=2781

Another theory proposed, and probably another debate off miss-quotes and 'don't label me comments' on rpg.net.

Might be worth checking out.

There are some real quality people and some real quality posts over at RPG.Net. Unfortuneately at the end of the day most of them are drown out by a legion of 12 year old morons and their one line "thats crap, you're stupid" posts. I finally reached the point where I just don't have the time for a site where the noise to signal ratio is so high.

I did check out this thread on Ian's suggestion. Christopher had an excellent response -- although you meandered a bit there at the end :-). I wish Mythholder hadn't lost his original post, because I wasn't really sure where he was going with the abbreviated one, but it seemed to be leading somewhere significant.

In the end I blame public schools for failing to teach people the basic skills of critical thinking. There's alot of oppinions out there. Few people have the skills to analyse them, and articulate them effectively. I find I prefer the company of those who can and do over those who won't.

Hardly a recommendation, more a heads up :)

When I posted it there was only about two posts.

Actually, the thread has been remarkably civil . . . so far. There are the usual misconceptions flying around, and Jocelyn's big counterargument falls squarely into the "But the point should just be to have fun!" fallacy that Ron's essay addresses early on, but so far it's been the most intelligent, reasoned debate about GNS to ever appear on RPG.net in my memory, and by a wide margin to boot.

Christopher should get serious props for his participation there. He's representing you guys well.

Valamir,

Yeah, it was only I crashed my head into my pillow last night right after posting that I realized I had started with numbered arguements and then sort of broke up ideas with little lines of asterisks, and then just sort of kept... typing....

But thanks for the compliments, for those who offered them.

It was an exercise. I wanted to see if I could port some of the posting strategies I've learned here over there and keep things civil.

Strangely, it worked. Only *one* vague flame out of 60+ posts and 1100+ views, which was politely rescinded after Michael called him on it.

Take care,

Christopher

Valamir wrote:
I did check out this thread on Ian's suggestion. Christopher had an excellent response -- although you meandered a bit there at the end :-). I wish Mythholder hadn't lost his original post, because I wasn't really sure where he was going with the abbreviated one, but it seemed to be leading somewhere significant.

Afraid I had to step out after getting dizzy from parsing Jocelyn's circular logic. Nice touch, whoever called him on submitting tautologies.

Best,

Blake

Then you missed my analogy of GNS as great foreplay!

Too bad for you, my friend!

Christopher

No, no. I got that one, actually. Very nice. Just took some Advil and glossed over Jocelyn-posts. A few minutes ago, I dropped my own contribution into the discussion over there -- though I didn't mention manacles and satin whips, more's the pity.

Now how would foreplay go under each of the three points of the triangle, I wonder? Egad. The mind boggles. Have to go now, but the evil part of this little writer's brain is aspin with... interesting RP scenes.

GM: "OK, you have the satin whip and leather face mask. The manacles hold your lover securely to the silk-covered mattress. Roll to [expletive] the [heck] out of her."

Player (rolls): "I whiff."

Ah, well.

Best,

Blake

[Bother. Had to edit out a stylistic glitch in the first paragraph. That's what you get for being a perfectionist.]

That was exhausting.