Print

Please login or register.
1 Hour 1 Day 1 Week 1 Month Forever
Login with username, password and session length

[Tiruin]

This title is a fallacy. :v

GWG: Argue on what is, not what was. There could've been a ton of things that happened to do that action, but what happened, happened.

You can return to argue in future tense now.

[Yoink]

...No, no it's not.
Perhaps just enough argument to make a decision on something is justified, but arguing for the sake of arguing- or to actually *snerk* change someone's mind- is generally a big waste of time on the internet.

[Radio Controlled]

This title is a fallacy. :v
GWG: Argue on what is, not what was. There could've been a ton of things that happened to do that action, but what happened, happened.
You can return to argue in future tense now.

...No, no it's not.
Perhaps just enough argument to make a decision on something is justified, but arguing for the sake of arguing- or to actually *snerk* change someone's mind- is generally a big waste of time on the internet.

So, basically, try to be productive. Life is too short to waste it on arguments over the internet (that most ridiculous of media) if nothing productive comes out of it. Unless 'being right' is ones only goal in life, which I doubt it is. In fact, why don't you take all that energy that normally goes into arguing, and put it into updating the wiki? Now that's a cause worth writing for hours on end!

[smurfingtonthethird]

Look at the title. Look at it.

You have all lost.

You also just lost the Game.

[Tiruin]

This title is a fallacy. :v
GWG: Argue on what is, not what was. There could've been a ton of things that happened to do that action, but what happened, happened.
You can return to argue in future tense now.

...No, no it's not.
Perhaps just enough argument to make a decision on something is justified, but arguing for the sake of arguing- or to actually *snerk* change someone's mind- is generally a big waste of time on the internet.

So, basically, try to be productive. Life is too short to waste it on arguments over the internet (that most ridiculous of media) if nothing productive comes out of it. Unless 'being right' is ones only goal in life, which I doubt it is. In fact, why don't you take all that energy that normally goes into arguing, and put it into updating the wiki? Now that's a cause worth writing for hours on end!

Hear hear!
Now y'all get to work. :I

...No, no it's not.
Perhaps just enough argument to make a decision on something is justified, but arguing for the sake of arguing- or to actually *snerk* change someone's mind- is generally a big waste of time on the internet.

I'd point that arguing for the sake of arguing is just...ugh.
Changing someone's mind, however, is a different thing altogether.
[/argumentaccomplished]

Look at the title. Look at it.

You have all lost.

You also just lost the Game.

no u

[GreatWyrmGold]

Directly, how?

Just a few people saying, "GWG's right on this." That's all, and if it's so, there's a good chance you're 'right', whatever that means.

...What, the fact that, objectively, we were safe opening the elevator door--which is what I was saying--isn't enough? If I was arguing that the Earth revolved around the Sun (imagine that the Internet existed several centuries ago), would general consensus by the astronomical community not be enough to let me say that I won?

[Yoink]

@Tir: Well, you didn't exactly change my mind, and you declared yourself the winner of the argument, soooo...
Don't get me wrong, I'm not adverse to the occasional bit of internet arguing- it can be rather entertaining, after all! I'll just be watching from the sidelines and laughing, though, as opposed to actually wasting my keystrokes getting involved.

When it starts needlessly clogging up threads that I enjoy, though, it gets seriously annoying...
Perhaps we could make an "Arguing with GWG" thread in the subforum?

[TCM]

...No, no it's not.
Perhaps just enough argument to make a decision on something is justified, but arguing for the sake of arguing- or to actually *snerk* change someone's mind- is generally a big waste of time on the internet.

I'd point that arguing for the sake of arguing is just...ugh.
Changing someone's mind, however, is a different thing altogether.
[/argumentaccomplished]

I agree with you to an extent Ti, but I think it all depends on who the other party is. GWG, for example, has far more at stake than trying to be right, although that's certainly a large factor in his arguments. As he has stated before, he also has his own code of honor, where, for example, he doesn't want to be insulted or ignored.

Honestly, I'd probably get into some stuff as well if it pertained to what I actually knew. I know the fundamentals of science and math but I'm not going to try and prove other people wrong who have scientific degrees or have an occupation in a scientific field. Sure, I'll jump in if we ever brought up late 90's/early 2000's hip-hop or who the best draft picks would be for the NFL, as I can hold my own in that sort of stuff.
Plus, I think I'm better at this sort of thing in real life, my syntax on the Internet is janky.

[piecewise]

This title is a fallacy. :v
GWG: Argue on what is, not what was. There could've been a ton of things that happened to do that action, but what happened, happened.
You can return to argue in future tense now.

...No, no it's not.
Perhaps just enough argument to make a decision on something is justified, but arguing for the sake of arguing- or to actually *snerk* change someone's mind- is generally a big waste of time on the internet.

So, basically, try to be productive. Life is too short to waste it on arguments over the internet (that most ridiculous of media) if nothing productive comes out of it. Unless 'being right' is ones only goal in life, which I doubt it is. In fact, why don't you take all that energy that normally goes into arguing, and put it into updating the wiki? Now that's a cause worth writing for hours on end!

Maybe You should be assisting lars with his propaganda.

Directly, how?

Just a few people saying, "GWG's right on this." That's all, and if it's so, there's a good chance you're 'right', whatever that means.

...What, the fact that, objectively, we were safe opening the elevator door--which is what I was saying--isn't enough? If I was arguing that the Earth revolved around the Sun (imagine that the Internet existed several centuries ago), would general consensus by the astronomical community not be enough to let me say that I won?

You win GWG. You win.

Alright everyone, alright TCM? GWG won this internet argument. He gets a little crown. May it forever be his mark of Cain; let no one argue pointless subjects with him lest they receive the same sevenfold.

...No, no it's not.
Perhaps just enough argument to make a decision on something is justified, but arguing for the sake of arguing- or to actually *snerk* change someone's mind- is generally a big waste of time on the internet.

I'd point that arguing for the sake of arguing is just...ugh.
Changing someone's mind, however, is a different thing altogether.
[/argumentaccomplished]

I agree with you to an extent Ti, but I think it all depends on who the other party is. GWG, for example, has far more at stake than trying to be right, although that's certainly a large factor in his arguments. As he has stated before, he also has his own code of honor, where, for example, he doesn't want to be insulted or ignored.

Honestly, I'd probably get into some stuff as well if it pertained to what I actually knew. I know the fundamentals of science and math but I'm not going to try and prove other people wrong who have scientific degrees or have an occupation in a scientific field. Sure, I'll jump in if we ever brought up late 90's/early 2000's hip-hop or who the best draft picks would be for the NFL, as I can hold my own in that sort of stuff.
Plus, I think I'm better at this sort of thing in real life, my syntax on the Internet is janky.

TCM is forever to be known as "Too Funky for his own good."

[TCM]

Directly, how?

Just a few people saying, "GWG's right on this." That's all, and if it's so, there's a good chance you're 'right', whatever that means.

...What, the fact that, objectively, we were safe opening the elevator door--which is what I was saying--isn't enough? If I was arguing that the Earth revolved around the Sun (imagine that the Internet existed several centuries ago), would general consensus by the astronomical community not be enough to let me say that I won?

You win GWG. You win.

Alright everyone, alright TCM? GWG won this internet argument. He gets a little crown. May it forever be his mark of Cain; let no one argue pointless subjects with him lest they receive the same sevenfold.

Man, where's the snarky-ass PW? It's not typical of you to let someone off like this. Just like everyone else, you've let yourself succumb to GWG's greatest strengths: stamina and determination. See, I don't know about the rest of y'all, but I like GWG. Sure, he and I annoy the shit out of each other pretty regularly, but that doesn't effect me at all really. What I want to do is help him out. I'm simply attempting to give him some friendly advice, or as we say around here, "Tryna' learn 'em."

I think it's of importance to attempt this right now, before things get out of hand. Because if this keeps up in the future...well, you're a smart and experienced GM PW, I'm sure you can foresee the possible consequences.

And I don't think it's his entirely his fault either, it's ours too for letting these things go on. When a conflict is present, I think it's bets if everyone involved gets something out of it.

[piecewise]

Mocking the situation with biblical references wasn't enough? Ok. Hows about this:


Stop getting into protracted and entirely pointless arguments with GWG. I'm fairly certain he can't help himself. He's like a compulsive liar except he's a compulsive arguer. He feels the unstoppable urge to continue arguing until the other person gives up. Getting into an argument with him is like invading Russia in the winter; it never fucking turns out well. It just leaves us with a barren battlefield full of dead quote pyramids.

ACTUALLY.

FUCK IT.

NEW THREAD.
http://www.bay12forums.com/smf/index.php?topic=137981.0

[Yoink]

PIECEWISE USED MY IDEA! MY EXISTENCE HAS BEEN VALIDATED! YAAAAY

[syvarris]

The point I was trying to make was proven right. If that's not victory, what is?

Do you have anyone backing you up on that?

Actually, he does.  I bowed out of our last argument, and announced him as the winner, as I felt sorry for him.

Spoiler: @GWG (click to show/hide)

Anyways, I'd go through and refute everything like normal, but I was getting too into it last time, and was lapsing too near ad hominem for my own liking.  So, sorry GWG, but you win; I give up.

So, basically, try to be productive. Life is too short to waste it on arguments over the internet (that most ridiculous of media) if nothing productive comes out of it. Unless 'being right' is ones only goal in life, which I doubt it is. In fact, why don't you take all that energy that normally goes into arguing, and put it into updating the wiki? Now that's a cause worth writing for hours on end!

Uhm, define productive?  As in, improving your position in life?  If that's so, then why do you not yell at me for joining B12, playing games on here, talking (non-argumentatively) with people, and such things?  All they do is make me happy.  Arguably, they are negatively productive, as I could spend time practicing math or programming or something that is actually useful to my life goals.

While if you mean "Productive towards happiness", well, arguing with GWG is really, really fun for me.  Unreasonably so.  The only non-fun part of it is when I start feeling empathic for him.  But if arguing with him is wrong because it annoys him, then why is it not wrong to play competitive games like Perplexicon where you kill the other players, ruining their fun?

_{Also, writing wiki stuff is less fun.  I actually desire to be correct there, and so put in the research.  Then worry about being wrong anyways.  Or having bad writing.  Or doing the wrong thing ohgodwhyyyyy.}

[GreatWyrmGold]

Alright everyone, alright TCM? GWG won this internet argument. He gets a little crown. May it forever be his mark of Cain; let no one argue pointless subjects with him lest they receive the same sevenfold.

...
Is that supposed to be a compliment, an insult, or what?
(Going in my sig regardless.)

See, I don't know about the rest of y'all, but I like GWG. Sure, he and I annoy the shit out of each other pretty regularly, but that doesn't effect me at all really.

*adds TCM to his list of frenemies, right next to Xantalos and*...um...a blank spot, I guess.

[NAV]

Spoiler: @kj1225 (click to show/hide)

((Oh, good!  If there's anything unclear/missing, please mention it so that someone can fix it.  The wiki is perpetually a work in progress, so feedback is always nice.

1: As far as optimizing, make charisma and speech zeros.  I can count the number of times either stat has been rolled in this whole game, on one hand.  It's entirely possible to completely avoid using either of those, without losing any functionality except in very specific circumstances.

2: Next, I suggest you go with Exotic weapons instead of Unconventional.  As far as space magic, Exo is entirely better; the only advantage of uncon is that you can also use advanced melee weapons like kinetic amps and monofilament blades.  If you do this, drop Intelligence to zero as well; the only uses for int are qualifying for manips, and having your character think for you.

Those are the basic suggestions that cost basically nothing.  Here's more risky/costly stuff.

3: If you buy a sub-exoskeleton model C, for two tokens, you get +3 to strength and endurance rolls.  That's six points to spend elsewhere.  Further, it allows you to use AUX rolls to control your exoskeleton like a puppet, meaning you can use aux in place of dex and strength for stuff like dodging and melee combat.  It's possible that it can even let you circumvent the CON penalty of a fleshtech by using AUX for shooting conventional weapons.

The problems with that are that those require specialty programs to be written.  You could get them from my char, Steve Saint, but his programs haven't been tested, and he's dead at the moment.

There's probably more that I forgot, but I'm tired.  Sorry.))

1: If he plans on using the flesh/mindwarping amps, high charisma is a must. That is charisma's only use.
Speech has been rolled way more than 5 times. That's why there's the joke about speech rolls always being failed or overshot. That joke would never have been made if there were no speech rolls. For example, Charles sometimes uses speech to mind control people.

2: That is not the only advantage to uncon. You can have an unlimited number of manipulators, but only 3 amps. realistically, 2 amps and a decomp. There is a universal manip, but no universal amp. Kinetic shunts uses uncon. So do grenades. Amps leave the user temporarily disabled after too much usage, manipulators don't. Manips can be used as emergency nukes. Piecewise always keeps track of mind points, but he rarely keeps track of ammo.

3: Sub-exoskeletons provide a +1/3, not a +3 strength and endurance. That won't make up for a -1 to the stat. You still can't use it to shoot guns with aux, that requires an auxiliary weapon hardpoint.

Also, roleplaying. Some people choose their stats to match the character, not to be the most powerful. I don't enjoy roleplaying a character with 0 intelligence, but who somehow acts intelligently. Or a character with 0 charisma who somehow acts charismatic.