Good bye

[nexus]

That's it. I'm done. My posts are generally ignored or crapped on, I actually get less respect the than Hero Haters that pop up from time to time. I'm not the type to hang out where I am not wanted. I've met some nice people on here and I wanted to let them know what was up.

[Hermit]

I think you maybe making this choice prematurely and while still upset. I hope you reconsider.

[nexus]

I think you maybe making this choice prematurely and while still upset. I hope you reconsider.

Apparently my opinion, which I have never called anything but is so objectionable I'm bringing people out of the woodwork just to ride my ass about it. Even tseuji at his worst rarely manages to do that.

[Redmenace]

It would be a shame to lose you Nexus, why don't you just sign up under a different name? If after a week you think you are still on the crap end, well I can't blame you for leaving.

[OddHat]

Sorry to hear this Nexus. Hope you'll reconsider after this cools down.

[proditor]

Hurm...

I just got caught up on the main thread that probably sparked this. I hope you reconsider. Yes, we disagreed on the thread and I left long before it got more heated (Sleep is a good thing), but I thought you represented your points cogently and thoughtfully. I was more than ready to just agree to disagree. You weren't frothing at the mouth or anything, just expressing your views.

Hopefully you'll be around a good long while as the points you did bring up were ones that should be considered by any GM getting ready to run a superhero game. As you said in the thread, it's a very delicate balance that needs to be struck when running, and being aware of some of the potential pitfalls can only be a good thing.

[Wormhole]

Nexus, please reconsider; It'd be a shame to lose you.

[nexus]

I'll give it a few days and see how I feel then. There is allot of good material and great people on this board. Most of the people on that thread weren't that bad, it was just a few I felt were treating me like a moron for not agreeing totally with them. And that really sets me off. I should be less cranky or learn to just brush things off, but sometimes I explode.

Edit: Ironically enough, I ususally find myself arguing the Gamist perspective on Rpg.net. My I am just naturally contrary.

[Southern Cross]

Thanks for reconsidering,nexus!!

[Chuckg]

Well, allow me to represent the contrary opinion:

"Internet suicide notes" such as this are generally exercise in stirring up pity and playing the victim. 'Because I got so owned in a debate, I'm taking my marbles and GOING HOME!' (insert offended eight-year-old tone of voice)

I've seen them before, repeatedly, on other venues. And I laugh at them, mockingly.

And yes, nexus, that does mean I'm laughing at you, too.

... harsh? Yup. Insulting? Yup. Mean-spirited? mmmm... guilty!

But I never promised to be nice to anyone. I just promised to not be insincere.

I don't care how much popularity I lose with this post -- my own opinion of nexus' nauseating self-pity party here is that any lingering respect I may still have had for him has just died.

[memorax300]

Now that was really uncalled for Cg. I mean the man apologized for his actions and you had to start something. Why is that some people can never seem to just let it go.

Nexus ignore the TROLL. Harsh yes but considering the nature and tone of the post well deserved. I wil ignore it from no on. I hope you stay on the boards. I am a Hero newbie and would like to get as much advice and help from fans on these boards on various topics that I can.

[Chuckg]

What apology?

The man's posts in this thread, all four, are just repeating the message 'I want to leave the board because some people are mean, rude, and just plain suck.' As one of the 'some people' he's ragging on, what the crap does he *expect* from me -- a good-bye hug and kiss?

:rolleyes:

Ignore the troll? This entire thread is a troll. That's what "Internet suicide notes" are.

[JJR]

I too am pulling off of these message boards. I have found far too many posters on these boards to be exceptionally rude and condescending toward anyone expressing a differing opinion. These boards are now becoming as bad as rpg.net. Our gm has been wanting to switch over to M&M for some time now. Only a handful of us have been resisting the switch, and I have now thrown my vote over to M&M. At least on the M&M boards the posters only attack non-M&M trolls, not each other.

[memorax300]

Sorry CG I apologize that Troll comment was way out of line.

[memorax300]

I too am pulling off of these message boards. I have found far too many posters on these boards to be exceptionally rude and condescending toward anyone expressing a differing opinion. These boards are now becoming as bad as rpg.net. Our gm has been wanting to switch over to M&M for some time now. Only a handful of us have been resisting the switch, and I have now thrown my vote over to M&M. At least on the M&M boards the posters only attack non-M&M trolls, not each other.

Sorry but I have seen people on the M&M board say some rather unflattering things about the Hero system.

[aylwin13]

I too am pulling off of these message boards. I have found far too many posters on these boards to be exceptionally rude and condescending toward anyone expressing a differing opinion. These boards are now becoming as bad as rpg.net. Our gm has been wanting to switch over to M&M for some time now. Only a handful of us have been resisting the switch, and I have now thrown my vote over to M&M. At least on the M&M boards the posters only attack non-M&M trolls, not each other.

You're tossing out the greatest game system ever because you have issues with a few people on a discussion board? Sounds like you're cutting off your nose to spite your face. The only person who's going to lose is you. We won't, because someone else will discover HERO and come to the boards in your place. It's not the system or the boards that have a problem - it seems to be you, since you can't just turn away from a thread if you don't like what you're reading there.

[proditor]

Ignore the troll? This entire thread is a troll. That's what "Internet suicide notes" are.

There's one problem with that...sometimes they're also a sign that a board is getting too mean spirited as well. Taking the devil's advocate side, I could easily dismiss Nexus' post as a pity post and assume that he just needs to grow a thicker skin.

Note: I have not done that.

Here's why: On NGD and in several other threads, we can see that Ben is getting burned out by the harshness and visciousness on the boards. So this is not one person saying pity me, this is ANOTHER person saying "Well, this used to be fun, but too many people are jumping down my throat for no reason, so Hasta." I'm not pointing fingers at anyone, but before we assume that any post is just for some typed up hugs, we might all want to take a step back and dial down the vitriol a bit.

We're here (In the vast majority) because we truly love this game. Some of us passionately, even as we can see the flaws it might have. Expressing those ideas, pro or con, is just sharing ideas and concepts and seriously not a reason to flame someone into next thursday. Comparitively these boards are "tame" to me as a I cut my teeth on the Warhammer NG where 2 page insults were the norm and an admired art form. But that's like saying "It's okay that I shot this guy in the foot, Bob shot that other guy in the head!"

So before you tell someone they are wrong, maybe we could all ask the central question behind the stances we all take. Why. What about a given issue or idea gets your dander up? Why do feel that STR is undervalued? Why do you think high point official characters are bad? Maybe move on to the next question, If they were in a solo book that really was more like CKC than a setting book, would that bother you as much?

To quote the prolific and very often wise Zornwill, "KTR - or as Sinatra said "try a little tenderness" - in posting - Kindness, Tolerance, and Respect"

[Katherine]

Well, allow me to represent the contrary opinion:

"Internet suicide notes" such as this are generally exercise in stirring up pity and playing the victim. 'Because I got so owned in a debate, I'm taking my marbles and GOING HOME!' (insert offended eight-year-old tone of voice)

I've seen them before, repeatedly, on other venues. And I laugh at them, mockingly.

And yes, nexus, that does mean I'm laughing at you, too.

... harsh? Yup. Insulting? Yup. Mean-spirited? mmmm... guilty!

But I never promised to be nice to anyone. I just promised to not be insincere.

I don't care how much popularity I lose with this post -- my own opinion of nexus' nauseating self-pity party here is that any lingering respect I may still have had for him has just died.

Wow....simply..wow.

[Chuckg]

Proditor -- thank you for your well-reasoned reply.

I still don't quite agree, however. Nothing, repeat *nothing*, on that 'high power' thread justified this response -- people did not agree with him, true. And found faults with his reasoning, true. And just as stubbornly replied to his stubborn defenses, true.

However, IMO, if you can't handle *that* much, then the Internet is not a good place for you to be. There is a word for a place where you can post wherever you want and never have to face opposition to it, but "message board" is not that word.

If we'd been screaming abuse at him, he'd have a case. If we'd been insulting him repeatedly, we'd have a case. If we'd been deliberately refusing to address his points and always just harassing him the same old way, he'd have a case.

We didn't. And so, as far as I can see, he ain't got a case.

Hence, my conclusion that he was pulling the 'pity party' routine, and hence, my scornful response. 'Cause I *hate* the pity party routine.

[ChuckB]

Hey Nexus. The important thing to remember is that we were right and everybody else who disagreed with our posts was wrong or wrong to a degree depending on how proportionally they disagreed. Or something.

And don't get on ChuckG's bad side, he'll send a 10,000 pt. hero after you !

[Hypnotoad, the]

Well, I for one hope you stick around. You're the first buddy I've been able to confirm is actually on this board. Oh, I know that there are more, but you're the first.

[nexus]

Well, allow me to represent the contrary opinion:

"Internet suicide notes" such as this are generally exercise in stirring up pity and playing the victim. 'Because I got so owned in a debate, I'm taking my marbles and GOING HOME!' (insert offended eight-year-old tone of voice)


Excuse me? Owned? In an argument I wasn't having. More of a pissing contest to tell the truth about how to play a game. Whatever, man.



I've seen them before, repeatedly, on other venues. And I laugh at them, mockingly.

And yes, nexus, that does mean I'm laughing at you, too.

... harsh? Yup. Insulting? Yup. Mean-spirited? mmmm... guilty!

But I never promised to be nice to anyone. I just promised to not be insincere.

I don't care how much popularity I lose with this post -- my own opinion of nexus' nauseating self-pity party here is that any lingering respect I may still have had for him has just died.

And if I gave a two squirts of warm urine what you thought that might actually mean something. I wanted some time to calm down, but screw that.

Oh dear. An jerk online thinks poorly. Whatever shall I do? Oh dear. The pain. The angst. Ya know, I think I'll hang around here just to screw with you.

You've come across like some frothing jerk to me for just disagreeing with you over a GAME. Its silly for me to get upset over some dork online. That is what Ignore lists are for anyway. Just like you're other "discussions" you're covering being an ass, BY BEING A BIGGER ASS. Real classy. Paints a great picture of the board.

[nexus]

Proditor -- thank you for your well-reasoned reply.

I still don't quite agree, however. Nothing, repeat *nothing*, on that 'high power' thread justified this response -- people did not agree with him, true. And found faults with his reasoning, true. And just as stubbornly replied to his stubborn defenses, true..

I've got nothing against defenses. Except I wasn't attacking. You just seem to be one of those people that can't take someone, anyone having the smallest disagreement with you. I request, several time, to just keep it civil. I was responded to with snide, dismissive contempt. I don't care if folks don't agree with me, but casually dismissing what I have to say and treating me like a fool for having different experiences from them. or that myself, and apparently everyone I played with had mental problems because they didn't dance to your tune? You were the one that went into bulldog mode because you need a pissing contest, not me. You're the one the refused to keep it civil or just agree we had different opinions. You couldn't do that. You had to be right. The big mistake I made was just dragging it out and not realizing it was like trying to reason with snotty child and just Ignoring you at that point. I let you get under my skin instead of blowing you off like a should. My mistake.

[nexus]

Hey Nexus. The important thing to remember is that we were right and everybody else who disagreed with our posts was wrong or wrong to a degree depending on how proportionally they disagreed. Or something.

And don't get on ChuckG's bad side, he'll send a 10,000 pt. hero after you !

I don't think anybody was wrong. Its like saying there were wrong answers to a question like "Do you like apple pie?" You can disagree about it, you can debate it but nobody is "wrong". If some people can't accept, I shouldn't let them bother me, but I do unfortunately.

[Chuckg]

> Excuse me? Owned? In an argument I wasn't having. More of a pissing
> contest to tell the truth about how to play a game.

"Ahhh, those grapes were sour anyway!"

Every post you make on this thread only further proves that your primary motive for starting this thread in the first place is your own wounded, petty, ego... and your love of playing the victim.

:retch:

> Whatever, man.

Whatever, indeed.

> And if I gave a two squirts of warm urine what you thought that might
> actually mean something.

You know, for something that supposedly didn't mean anything to you, you sure went out of your way to post back to it.

Be honest with us, nexus. You lost face and are really PO'ed about that, and now see a cheap way to try and get some back.

> I wanted some time to calm down, but screw that.

Whatever.

[snip]
> You've come across like some frothing jerk to me for just disagreeing with
> you over a GAME.

Whereas your own 30 or so posts in that thread weren't intended to disagree with anyone... /sarcasm/

There are people who I can believe the 'We shouldn't take this so seriously!' routine from.

Anybody who did his best to match me post-for-post in an argument is *not* one of those people.

Which means you, skippy.

> Its silly for me to get upset over some dork online.

And yet you did so anyway, and are still doing so...

> That is what Ignore lists are for anyway. Just like you're other "discussions"
> you're covering being an ass, BY BEING A BIGGER ASS.

*looks at nexus' post*

Are you talking about me or yourself?

> Real classy.

I do believe I was up front about being abrasive as hell in this thread, yup.

You, OTOH, are acting like a titanic ass /and/ simultaneously trying to claim the moral high ground. Spare me the fake job, already.

[Agent X]

Excuse me? Owned? In an argument I wasn't having. More of a pissing contest to tell the truth about how to play a game. Whatever, man.



And if I gave a two squirts of warm urine what you thought that might actually mean something. I wanted some time to calm down, but screw that.

Oh dear. An jerk online thinks poorly. Whatever shall I do? Oh dear. The pain. The angst. Ya know, I think I'll hang around here just to screw with you.

You've come across like some frothing jerk to me for just disagreeing with you over a GAME. Its silly for me to get upset over some dork online. That is what Ignore lists are for anyway. Just like you're other "discussions" you're covering being an ass, BY BEING A BIGGER ASS. Real classy. Paints a great picture of the board. Just put folks you don't like on ignore. Just a few folks on ignore and the boards are a much healthier place. Check out the Dr. Destroyer/Takofanes thread. This crap isn't new and the sights will be set on someone else besides you soon enough.

[Chuckg]

> I've got nothing against defenses. Except I wasn't attacking. You just seem to
> be one of those people that can't take someone, anyone having the smallest
> disagreement with you.

Dead wrong. I get in disagreements all the time. Some of them with the same people who, in that thread, I was friends with.

What I can't stand is insincerity, and dude, you *reek* of it.

> I request, several time, to just keep it civil.

Only if 'just keep it civil' means 'stop posting in opposition to you'.

Seriously. No matter *what* the disagreement was, you kept whining about the lack of 'civility'. Apparently, "civility" means "nobody disagrees with nexus".

Are you familiar with the word "projection"? You're living it.

> I was responded to with snide, dismissive contempt. [snip]

Again, are you talking about me, or yourself?

[nexus]

Just put folks you don't like on ignore. Just a few folks on ignore and the boards are a much healthier place. Check out the Dr. Destroyer/Takofanes thread. This crap isn't new and the sights will be set on someone else besides you soon enough.

yeah. My Ignore list here has grown longer than my Rpg.net one. That makes me a bit sad.

[Chuckg]

yeah. My Ignore list here has grown longer than my Rpg.net one. That makes me a bit sad.

Maybe it's just you.

[Magmarock]

Hang in there Nexus. :thumbup:

Mags

[Lord Liaden]

*Sigh* :(

I fear we're seeing here the symptoms of what was happening on that other unfortunate thread: what I call "rebut-itis." Someone makes a point, someone else responds to it, the first person feels the need to rebut that rebuttal, etc., more people jump in pro and con... Everyone's trying to get in the definitive last word, which is an understandable human instinct, but people aren't willing to let anyone else do it. They get frustrated and impatient that the other parties aren't "getting" their point, tempers start to flare, remarks turn personal and things turn ugly. I've seen it more times than I can remember, with many otherwise reasonable people.

I believe part of the problem is that many people instinctively associate their viewpoints with their own self-worth. If those views are challenged, especially in a manner that could be interpreted as hostile or condescending, they react as if they've been personally attacked, with anger and resentment.

Some fights are worth it, but how many of them come up in venues like this? This is just a game - there are no great stakes involved. You're not lessened in any way if you just walk away from an argument that's plainly not going to be won. Is saying something hurtful that won't change anything, just for the satisfaction of saying it, really worth all the turmoil it's going to cause among all the people who hear/read it?

I ask that you please consider my signature:

[Ghost who Walks]

I can't beleive I wasted 10 minutes reading this thread.

Nobody ever wins an argument in a forum, and that goes back to "which Star Trek show is better" topics.

Its pointless.

Yet there are always people who try. All you ever do is drive someone away, and that isn't winning an argument.

Keep this stuff in the NGD forum, thats why its there.

That way, I can read the rest of the forums in peace.

[nexus]

> I've got nothing against defenses. Except I wasn't attacking. You just seem to
> be one of those people that can't take someone, anyone having the smallest
> disagreement with you.

Dead wrong. I get in disagreements all the time. Some of them with the same people who, in that thread, I was friends with.

What I can't stand is insincerity, and dude, you *reek* of it.


Insincerity? ok. whatever.

> I request, several time, to just keep it civil.



Only if 'just keep it civil' means 'stop posting in opposition to you'.


Actually, on my planet its means stop the condescension and personal attacks, but I guess that translates into something different on your world.



On my
Seriously. No matter *what* the disagreement was, you kept whining about the lack of 'civility'. Apparently, "civility" means "nobody disagrees with nexus".

Are you familiar with the word "projection"? You're living it.


Oh, I see. I was the one talking about people like they were stupid and YOU were the one asking to just agree to disagree. I see. yes. That makes things much clearer. I made the persona attack.

What color is the sky in your world? Is it pretty?



> I was responded to with snide, dismissive contempt. [snip]

Again, are you talking about me, or yourself?

So, "I respect your point, but I don't agree with it. Can you we agree to disagree?" is "Snide dismissive contempt in Chuckg land? I gotcha, yeah.

[Chuckg]

> Actually, on my planet its means stop the condescension and personal
> attacks,

*What* condescension and personal attacks? Apparently, it's a personal attack and condescending to tell you that we don't agree with you -- which ties exactly what into Lord Liaden just said.

[snip]
> Oh, I see. I was the one talking about people like they were stupid
> and YOU were the one asking to just agree to disagree.

No, I wasn't asking to 'agree to disagree' -- if I want to agree to disagree, usually I just stop posting.

*Asking* to "agree to disagree" is, IMO, just a cheap device for grabbing the last word -- when truly agreeing to disagree means, duhhh, letting the other guy have it.

OTOH, I wasn't the one slagging off on everybody who didn't see it your way as people who just wanted to 'make the PCs irrelevant', or other forms of power gamer...

[snip]
> What color is the sky in your world? Is it pretty?

It's blue, except sometimes it's gray, and every night it gets black with white little speckles! And if I get up reaaaaaally early, it's purple! Whee!

> So, "I respect your point, but I don't agree with it. Can you we agree to
> disagree?" is [snip]

See above.

[ChuckB]

I can't beleive I wasted 10 minutes reading this thread.

Nobody ever wins an argument in a forum, and that goes back to "which Star Trek show is better" topics.

Its pointless.

Actually it's not. The best episode is the one where Kirk goes back in time to the 1920's to kill Bone's old girlfriend who is a salt-eating monster who runs a boarding house.

Actually, my memory on this one might be off, but I definitely remember that Burgess Meredith was the Special Guest Villain.

[Slim_McCoy]

OK, this is going out to everybody on the whole board. I've said it in another thread but I feel it bears repeating here.

You each choose to come to this board, or not.
You each choose to read a particular thread, or not.
You each choose to be offended by the thread, or not.
(Note: by be offended I mean to have any negative reaction)

Now, by the time you become offended by anything you see on these boards, you have made at least three choices. Your choices, your fault.

You have the power, each and every one of you, to control your reactions to what you see here. No one can take it away from you.

Step up and use that power.

[Chuckg]

Slim -- that's a truly excellent post. Mind if I steal it for future use? :)

[Worldmaker]

Sorry CG I apologize that Troll comment was way out of line.

No it wasn't.

[JmOz]

It would be a shame to see you go, unfortunaltly I have noticed a rather negative streek around here more and more (I hardly ever go to some sections of the boards because of the people who haunt them)

I will not leave, but it is more habit now than enjoyment...

[Slim_McCoy]

Slim -- that's a truly excellent post. Mind if I steal it for future use? :)

:yes: :yes: :yes:

Feel free. It's the end result of a series of conversations I've had with John T (another board regular and sadistically talented GM). I'm considering boiling it down a bit further to use as a sig.

[Blue]

The ignore list is again open for business! And this after I purged everything last week. Dagnabit.

[Worldmaker]

You just seem to be one of those people that can't take someone, anyone having the smallest disagreement with you.

Sounds about right.

[Sketchpad]

I too am pulling off of these message boards. I have found far too many posters on these boards to be exceptionally rude and condescending toward anyone expressing a differing opinion. These boards are now becoming as bad as rpg.net. Our gm has been wanting to switch over to M&M for some time now. Only a handful of us have been resisting the switch, and I have now thrown my vote over to M&M. At least on the M&M boards the posters only attack non-M&M trolls, not each other.
I dunno if I can agree with ya there JJR ... I've been lurking over at the M&M boards since they were made and, honestly, they're sometimes worse there :( It's really a shame a fan-base can't get along with each other :(

[Metaphysician]

Sounds about right.

Funny, nexus is the one threatening the leave the board because people are being mean to him by considering his arguments incorrect, and explaining why. . .

[Worldmaker]

Funny, nexus is the one threatening the leave the board because people are being mean to him by considering his arguments incorrect, and explaining why. . .

And from what I've seen of the Chuck's postings, Nexus is being utterly accurate in his description of Chuck's usual MO.

It is no insult to a dead man to say that he is dead.

[nexus]

Funny, nexus is the one threatening the leave the board because people are being mean to him by considering his arguments incorrect, and explaining why. . .

The reason I was pissed off was "people" were being condescending, asshats not just discussing ideas and opinions. Not because they disagreed with me. :rolleyes:

[Metaphysician]

And its no insult to any man to tell him that his arguments are faulty.

[Worldmaker]

And its no insult to any man to tell him that his arguments are faulty.

And if that were all that Chuck was doing, I'd agree with you.

Chuck, unfortunately, never leaves it at that. He always makes it personal, and always makes it condescendingly personal on top of it. It is not enough that he is right... whomever he is disagreeing with must be shown to be wrong.

[nexus]

And its no insult to any man to tell him that his arguments are faulty.

Sure, tell me you think I'm wrong, but it is possible to do that without being insulting, dismissive or snide.

[Chuckg]

And if that were all that Chuck was doing, I'd agree with you.

Chuck, unfortunately, never leaves it at that. He always makes it personal, and always makes it condescendingly personal on top of it. It is not enough that he is right... whomever he is disagreeing with must be shown to be wrong.

Telling somebody that he's wrong is automatically 'condescendingly personal'?

Lord Liaden *definitely* hit it on the head with you lot, then.

Here's a clue -- if we hold diametrically opposite opinions on a matter that is not capable of encompassing both simultaneously, then one of us *is* wrong, and all that remains is the process of discovery to determine which one.

Unless, of course, the very idea that you *might* be wrong is an intolerable personal affront, at which points, nuts to you.

[Worldmaker]

Sure, tell me you think I'm wrong, but it is possible to do that without being insulting, dismissive or snide.

The problem being that Chuck is so aggressively sure that he is right and you are wrong that he is incapable of posting anything without making it insulting, dismissive, and snide.

[nexus]

"I like pie and would like a peice."

"I don't like pie and wouldn't like a peice"

Neither of these statements is objectively wrong.

"I would like to see high level cannonical characters included in the champions U."

"I would not like to see high level character included in Champions U."

As far as I'm conerned, neither of these statements is objectively wrong. I was just stupid and frankly, short tempered enough to get pulled into argument about them.

[Chuckg]

> "I would not like to see high level character included in Champions U."

"... because of X, Y, and Z."

It's that 'because' that's the lethal part -- matters of personal taste can't be argued about, but *reasons* can be. Especially reasons that have logical errors in them, such as:



'The default CU works just fine without powerful NPC heroes to match the megavillains!'

'Umm, actually, there's no logical way it can.'

'It works just fine that way in my campaign!'

'... and how does it do that?'

'I alter the villains so that they're less powerful enough the players can take them!'

'Would these significant alterations not mean that you weren't in the default Champions U any longer, then? So how does this prove your point?'

'Shut up and quit personally attacking and condescending to me!'

[Katherine]

Chuckg, you're really not making Nexus look like the bad guy here.

This would be funny if it weren't so sad... .
:rolleyes:

[cutsleeve]

'Umm, actually, there's no logical way it can.'

In superhero universes people get doused with radiation, bitten by high energy vermin, splashed by toxic waste, find mystic tin foil hats of the gods, and many other strange things. These people dont do what real people do which is Die, Die, ummm get sick and Die, and walk around detroit mumbling to themselves. They become super beings.

Comic book universes are Logics version of a seaside resort where it can sit back in the sun drinking alcohol mixed with mango juice.

Lets not even mention Logic in RPG's. Or Logic on the internet.

Thats why people shouldnt take things to seriously when they are involved in any of the aforementioned 3. :D :D :D

[Chuckg]

> In superhero universes people get doused with radiation, bitten by high
> energy vermin, [snip]

This is what I refer to as the 'flying underwear fallacy'. Or 'Because this is a universe where a flying man will let himself be seen in public in his underwear, therefore *ANYTHING* is possible.'

Ummm... nope. sorry. doesn't work. The /characters/ are wildly impossible by realistic physics, yes. And so are their superpowers.

But the planet they live on is still Earth, and still has normal rocks, normal trees, normal concrete, and normal human behavior. Comics is not about some strange alternate continuum where there is no logic and all is but raw chaos and whim. Comics are about the *intersection* of extraordinary people *and ordinary settings*.

There's physics, and then there's motivations. While the laws of physics in superhero universes are completely out to lunch, that doesn't change the basics of *why* characters will do what they do.

Villains want to stomp the heroes, get rich, and/or obtain power. In order to do this, they will use whatever talents or powers they have, with whatever lack of morality they possess.

Does the presence of a radioactive spider bite in the universe mean that Dr. Destroyer is going to sit you down and have tea and cucumber sandwiches with you? Hell no. If you're interfering with his plans, he's going to hurt you, and quite probably kill you. For him to do anything else is not logical, under the circumstances.

And neither is it in character.

[snip]
> Comic book universes are Logics version of a seaside resort where it can sit
> back in the sun drinking alcohol mixed with mango juice.

Logic is "If A implies B and B implies C, then A implies C". It has nothing to do with the laws of physics.

> Lets not even mention Logic in RPG's. Or Logic on the internet.

So, all your games are Toon, then? (sarcasm)

Unless you are genuinely talking about Toon and similar places, logic *always* has a place -- even with superhero physics. To say that it doesn't is a cop-out.

[Chuckg]

Chuckg, you're really not making Nexus look like the bad guy here.

This would be funny if it weren't so sad... .
:rolleyes:

That's the problem. You're caring about making something look like something else.

I just care about talking about what's actually happening.

[Katherine]

That's the problem. You're caring about making something look like something else.

I just care about talking about what's actually happening.

I've read the thread. I'm well aware of what "actually happened". You weren't the innocent choirboy in all of this. And pursing it across another thread isn't really making your case. Its like your arguing and being an ass to prove you're not an argumentative ass. It would be best just to let it go.

[Kara Zor-El]

What I can't stand is insincerity, and dude, you *reek* of it.


Ummmm, rudeness isn't admirable either. And it seemed to me you jumped in just so you could be rude.

Not anything to brag about. Nor is someone exhibiting an unattractive trait a good reason to exhibit a different one.

Not takin' sides on the general argument here, just this one point.

Just somethin' to think about. :)

[Chuckg]

> Ummmm, rudeness isn't admirable either.

Odd, everybody seemed to admire and sympathize with Nexus'...

> And it seemed to me you jumped in just so you could be rude.

So? This entire thread was created for the purpose of being rude to people.

[Chuckg]

> I've read the thread. I'm well aware of what "actually happened".

Really? Then with your following statement, you are deliberately choosing to misrepresent what happened.

> You weren't the innocent choirboy in all of this.

And neither am I the egomaniacal ogre, unable to tolerate even the slightest disagreement, that Nexus claims I am.

> And pursing it across another thread isn't really making your case.

Yes, far better that I just sit back and let nexus say WTF he wants without daring to oppose him. Apparently, that was my offense on the *first* thread, too.

> Its like your arguing and being an ass to prove you're not an argumentative
> ass. It would be best just to let it go.

*LOL*

We stand in the middle of a thread created by nexus for the sole purpose of *not* letting it go, and you lecture *me* about taking an issue 'across multiple threads'?

What about the man who created a thread solely to bitch and whine about other people? Go give *him* your "Let It Go!" lecture, he seems to desperately need one.

[Katherine]

> Ummmm, rudeness isn't admirable either.

Odd, everybody seemed to admire and sympathize with Nexus'...


Doesn't that tell you something? On some level?

[Chuckg]

Doesn't that tell you something? On some level?

Indeed. It tells me that you've got one set of rules for those whose side you've picked, and a completely different set for the opposing POV.

Oh, but *I'm* supposed to be the one who polarizes every situation... how does that figure, again?

[Kara Zor-El]

> Ummmm, rudeness isn't admirable either.

Odd, everybody seemed to admire and sympathize with Nexus'...

> And it seemed to me you jumped in just so you could be rude.

So? This entire thread was created for the purpose of being rude to people.

Are you serious?

Point one: Everyone? I specifically said I wasn't taking sides.

Ergo, you're wrong when you say everyone.

Point two: It was created to be rude to people? You created it so you KNOW why it was created?

Point three: If you ARE right about point two, that means you have to take part why? Was someone holding a gun to your head? :think:

Very childish argument there, Chuckg. Please try again, since you're trying to be accepted as an adult here. :)

[Katherine]

> I've read the thread. I'm well aware of what "actually happened".

Really? Then with your following statement, you are deliberately choosing to misrepresent what happened.

> You weren't the innocent choirboy in all of this.

And neither am I the egomaniacal ogre, unable to tolerate even the slightest disagreement, that Nexus claims I am.


If you say so...



> And pursing it across another thread isn't really making your case.

Yes, far better that I just sit back and let nexus say WTF he wants without daring to oppose him. Apparently, that was my offense on the *first* thread, too.


Nexus didn't say anything at first except he was pissed and he was leaving because he felt insulted. You jumped and starting "defending yourself". You're name wasn't even mentioned from what I saw until you volununteered it.



> Its like your arguing and being an ass to prove you're not an argumentative
> ass. It would be best just to let it go.

*LOL*

We stand in the middle of a thread created by nexus for the sole purpose of *not* letting it go, and you lecture *me* about taking an issue 'across multiple threads'?

What about the man who created a thread solely to bitch and whine about other people? Go give *him* your "Let It Go!" lecture, he seems to desperately need one.

He created the thread to tell people he was leaving. You jumped and started posting insulting things to it. You've almost posted more in this thread than he has. Allot of the posts he has made have been pretty much explaining things that you and Metaphysican or saying he didn't think anyone was really wrong the original argument. He's clearly not the one letting it go.

[Kara Zor-El]

What about the man who created a thread solely to bitch and whine about other people? Go give *him* your "Let It Go!" lecture, he seems to desperately need one.

Actually, Chuck, if you hadn't stepped in and continued the argument with him, this thread would have probably died a fairly swift death.

You, too, seem to "desperately" need the "Let It Go!" lecture. You're coming across as someone who always has to be right. If you're so sure you're right, why are you so worried about continuing the argument? It really doesn't look like you're going to get everyone to agree with you, so why keep trying?

Your posting to this thread, content-wise, has provoked the responses that have kept it alive.

[Katherine]

Indeed. It tells me that you've got one set of rules for those whose side you've picked, and a completely different set for the opposing POV.

Oh, but *I'm* supposed to be the one who polarizes every situation... how does that figure, again?

That more people are sympathetic to Nexus tells you that I have a problem? All righty. Clearly reason has left the building.

[aylwin13]

I'm sorry ladies, but you have it all wrong. ChuckG is only continuing this to pad his post count. :rolleyes:

And with that thought I will bid you good night. :)

[cutsleeve]

Not in character and not logical are two seperate things.

Expressing the real world with realistic concrete and blue skies like our world in terms of hero's and villians is absolutely illogical. Thats why you cant really justify any super hero comic based universe as logical.

RPG's are systemized which implies it has internal logic and structure. That however doesnt mean that the rules are logical in accordance to real world phenomenon.

Logic is the enemy of Drama. Which is basically what most people play games, read comics, read books, or watch tv for.

Its like the clock in Shakespeares's Julius Ceasar. You can sit around and debate the logic of why the clock is present in the story. Or you can say it is illogical because they did not have automated clocks back in those ye old roman times. Or you can shut up and enjoy the play.

[Acroyear]

See... people forget what really matters.

It's peanut butter jelly time!

And use of the ignore list is a wonderful, wonderful thing.

[Lord Liaden]

Yep, rebut-itis has reached epidemic proportions around here. :rolleyes:

[cutsleeve]

:doi: Ok maybe i shouldnt be throwing around rebutles.

Mainly i think people takes message boards way to seriously. :p

most of it is opinion. theres only about 10% fact floating around message boards at any given time. which means that theres 90% other in them. No matter how load you yell it an opinion is still just an opinion. :bounce:

My opinion is that if nexus doesnt get any enjoyment out of posting here he should leave and use his time for more productive things. You dont need this board to play Hero and you dont need the agrivation of people treating you badly. Its bad for your health. I would however recommend you just take a break for awhile and ignore ChuckG if you feel he is giving you to much grief.

[death tribble]

Nexus,

Take a few days out and come back. Getting upset with what someone says is perfectly reasonable as it has happened to a whole load of us on the site.
There is a lot of good information, ideas etc, to which you have contributed.
You won't please all the people all the time and people will disagree with what you do.

As regards ChuckG. He managed to get Raven'sPath thread on Games Gone Awry shut down. And is free and liberal in his use of swear words forgetting that this is a family board. It looks like becoming a necessity to report various of his posts to the administrators. If we cannot persuade him to behave then we can ask them to have a word with him.
If it was just one thread and just one person complaining then it would be excessive. It isn't. Worldmaker's summation is entirely accurate. Chuck is being condescending and personal. And if he continues attacking people, I for one will report him regardless of who the target is.

[Worldmaker]

I've read the thread. I'm well aware of what "actually happened". You weren't the innocent choirboy in all of this. And pursing it across another thread isn't really making your case. Its like your arguing and being an ass to prove you're not an argumentative ass. It would be best just to let it go.


That, of course, is always his next trick. While in the midst of bashing the hell out of someone else, he begins wailing about how he's just the victim in all this and how the other person is being unreasonable.

Personally, I'd enjoy it if everyone... and I do mean 100% of the participants here, ignored him as I do.

[Chuckg]

> Are you serious?

Absolutely. This entire thread exists for one and only one reason -- nexus wanted to bitch about how horrible and rude some other people were.

[snip]
> Point two: It was created to be rude to people? You created it so you KNOW
> why it was created?

I see a guy deliberately peg a brick at a window, I think it's a very reasonable inference he wanted to break the window. I dno't need to read his mind.

> Point three: If you ARE right about point two, that means you have to
> take part why?

*shrugs* He deserved it, and I felt like it.

> Very childish argument there, Chuckg.

So much for "not taking sides".

[Chuckg]

> Actually, Chuck, if you hadn't stepped in and continued the argument with
> him, this thread would have probably died a fairly swift death.

*snorts*

Again, so much for "not taking sides". For somebody who claims to be such an impartial observer, you spend all of your time talking to chuck and none of it talking to nexus.

Kara, you're saying one thing and doing another. This makes me want to listen to you *how*?

> You, too, seem to "desperately" need the "Let It Go!" lecture. You're
> coming across as someone who always has to be right. If you're so sure
> you're right, why are you so worried about continuing the argument?

Ah, so in your world, the people who are right should shut up and yield the floor to the people who are wrong? Or, alternatively, trying to win an argument is somehow a sign of massive insecurity? If the only people who keep trying to win arguments are those who think they're wrong, what does that say about *you*, and *your* repeated attempts?

Of course, for some reason, your own logic *won't* apply to you. Only to Chuckg.

... nothing but a continual series of excuses as to why Chuckg should shut up and let Nexus have the floor -- regardless of who's right or wrong. This isn't impartial anything, Kara, and your attempt to pretend it was was cheap.

[snip]
> Your posting to this thread, content-wise, has provoked the responses
> that have kept it alive.

Because, of course, absolutely *nobody* was posting to this thread and encouraging nexus before I got here. And, of course, nexus wasn't writing post after post before I said anything.

Kara, the man had already made four posts bashing some other people hard (out of maybe 10 posts in the thread total) before I opened my mouth in this thread *once*, and was showing no signs of stopping. So I don't believe you.

[Chuckg]

> Nexus didn't say anything at first except he was pissed and he was leaving
> because he felt insulted.

And then he went on to say it three more times, wailing about how nasty and mean some people were.

> You jumped and starting "defending yourself". You're name wasn't even
> mentioned from what I saw until you volununteered it.

*ROTFLMBO*

Do you seriously want to try and pretend he was talking about anyone else? No one else has.

And if he wasn't talking about me, then who /was/ he talking about? Meta? Pendaran? Jeff? All of the above are good friends of mine -- to rag on them is to rag on me.

> He created the thread to tell people he was leaving. [snip]

That would've taken one post, and required a simple 'Folks, I'm leaving."

He made four posts.

All of which went out of their way to talk about how horrible some other people were.

Q.E.D.

> You've almost posted more in this thread than he has.

By now, yes. Of course, by now, it's not just nexus that I'm talking to...

[Chuckg]

> Not in character and not logical are two seperate things.

Not really.

As I said, Logic is "A implies B and B implies C means A implies C."

That's it. Logic is an orderly succession of events. *What* order depends on your basic starting postulates. That's elementary.

Logic applies equally as well to worlds with comic book physics as they do to worlds with utter realism. It's merely that in the world with comic book physics, you have a different set of starting assumptions.

Logic != Realism. Logic = remaining internally consistent to the original premises set up by the situation, whatever those were. The premises do *not* have to be realistic... that is to say, to be strictly consistent with real-world physics. They just have to be *internally* consistent, with *themselves*.

And one of the original premises of a situation is that if the bad guy is out to conquer the world, somebody had better be capable of stopping him, or he *will* conquer the world.

Which leads us back to the original question -- 'Since there's nobody in default CU canon capable of stopping the megavillains on the rampage, why haven't they conquered the world yet?'

> Expressing the real world with realistic concrete and blue skies like our
> world in terms of hero's and villians is absolutely illogical.

Really? Then why do 99+% of the comic book worlds out there have ordinary concrete and blue skies on Earth?

A directly observed fact needs no explanation to exist, it simply is. First principle of epistemology.

> Thats why you cant really justify any super hero comic based universe as
> logical.

Logic is when you take a set of postulates, apply a set of rules, and reach an outcome. Which postulates and which rules are changeable from world to world. The key point is, you don't change the rules after you've started, and neither do you go against your initial posits.

> RPG's are systemized which implies it has internal logic and structure. That
> however doesnt mean that the rules are logical in accordance to real world
> phenomenon.

The problem is, the default CU as published isn't logical even in accordance to *game* phenomenon -- which is the whole problem.

> Logic is the enemy of Drama.

Logic is the avoidance of plot holes -- and plot holes are the enemy of Drama.

[Chuckg]

> That more people are sympathetic to Nexus tells you that I have a problem?

Yup.

To be consistent with the set of principles and motivations you want me to believe you have, the proper time and place for this lecture of yours would have been to nexus, in the last thread, yesterday. Or to nexus, after his first four posts in this thread, before I showed up, yesterday.

You didn't even bother trying. As far as you were concerned, an entire thread bitching about the horrible behavior of people -- even repeat statements that the entire board was turning to crap -- was just fine so long as Nexus was doing it.

But God forbid anybody bitch about *his* behavior.

> All righty. Clearly reason has left the building.

You know, for people who claim that I call everybody names just because they don't agree, you sure are doing a lot of that yourself today.

I have disagreed with Katherine, therefore I must be nuts. That's what you just did.

[Chuckg]

I'm sorry ladies, but you have it all wrong. ChuckG is only continuing this to pad his post count. :rolleyes:

I don't give a crap about post count. I have /never/ given a crap about post count. And even if I did, there are far easier ways to inflate post count, that make you a lot more popular.

Right now I'm running on pure annoyance -- with nexus, and now with his crop of loyal-defenders-who-pretend-to-be-purely-impartial-and-are-anything-but.

As far as I can see, there are only two people in this thread who are being even halfway honest about how they really feel and why they really posted here -- and that's me and nexus. And, natch, my significant annoyance with nexus' behavior is what prompted me to come into this thread in the first place.

Oh, and for those who want to hit 'report to mod' -- go ahead. Really. That's what mods are there for. They warn me off, I get warned off. They don't, I won't.

If you want me to follow your 'advice', it had better come with the official weight of authority behind it. Peer pressure, by itself, really isn't something that bugs me very much. I take advice only from friends. You people ain't friends, and somehow, for some reason, I really doubt you want to be.

[Kara Zor-El]

> Actually, Chuck, if you hadn't stepped in and continued the argument with
> him, this thread would have probably died a fairly swift death.

*snorts*

Again, so much for "not taking sides". For somebody who claims to be such an impartial observer, you spend all of your time talking to chuck and none of it talking to nexus.

Kara, you're saying one thing and doing another. This makes me want to listen to you *how*?

> You, too, seem to "desperately" need the "Let It Go!" lecture. You're
> coming across as someone who always has to be right. If you're so sure
> you're right, why are you so worried about continuing the argument?

Ah, so in your world, the people who are right should shut up and yield the floor to the people who are wrong? Or, alternatively, trying to win an argument is somehow a sign of massive insecurity? If the only people who keep trying to win arguments are those who think they're wrong, what does that say about *you*, and *your* repeated attempts?

Of course, for some reason, your own logic *won't* apply to you. Only to Chuckg.

... nothing but a continual series of excuses as to why Chuckg should shut up and let Nexus have the floor -- regardless of who's right or wrong. This isn't impartial anything, Kara, and your attempt to pretend it was was cheap.

[snip]
> Your posting to this thread, content-wise, has provoked the responses
> that have kept it alive.

Because, of course, absolutely *nobody* was posting to this thread and encouraging nexus before I got here. And, of course, nexus wasn't writing post after post before I said anything.

Kara, the man had already made four posts bashing some other people hard (out of maybe 10 posts in the thread total) before I opened my mouth in this thread *once*, and was showing no signs of stopping. So I don't believe you.

I'm not saying NOBODY. You don't listen. I'm saying that you've perpetuated this thing way beyond the life span these threads normally have.

And you don't believe anyone that doesn't agree with you, Chuckg. I'm sorry if holding you responsible for your behavior is "wrong" or taking sides. And you're not trying to win an argument. You're trying to browbeat someone into agreeing with you by being smug, condescending and superior about a difference of opinion. Arguments based on opinion are never right or wrong.

Sorry for hoping you could be an adult about it for a change. You're not always right. No one is. I also apologize for appealing to your better side. I was hoping that you had one.

Have a nice life, Chuck. Go ahead and flame away, sonny. I know you'll have to have the last word. I hope it makes you feel better. :)

[Chuckg]

> I'm not saying NOBODY. You don't listen. I'm saying that you've perpetuated
> this thing way beyond the life span these threads normally have.

"Normally" have? 'Scuse me, but I find that to be a *very* interesting choice of words? "Normally"?

Does nexus do this kind of thing often? Are 'internet suicide notes' and 'bashing threads' accepted practice here?

If so, then why are you bent out of shape about *me*?

> And you don't believe anyone that doesn't agree with you, Chuckg.

Really? I seem to recall posting several posts saying 'I stand corrected.', without comment, whenever shown to be wrong on a point of fact.

The most recent being to Katherine, yesterday.

Of course, that was on a thread where Katherine was simply talking about facts and reason -- and got responded to in kind. In this thread, she's been anything but... and got a much less warm response.

You'd think that people would learn after a while what works and what doesn't work, but apparently not.

Here's a clue. What you're trying now does not work. It will *never* work. Try something different. *Substantially* different.

> Sorry for hoping you could be an adult about it for a change.

Again, so much for your pose of impartiality.

And again, for people who gripe so much about my inability to tolerate the existence of opposing POVs, you sure do a lot of name-calling. Now, the act of disagreeing with you isn't just foolish, it's also childish.

At the rate I'm going, I can probably get the impartial defenders of civility here to be accusing me of insanity by this afternoon, and devil worship by tomorrow morning. All the while they're congratulating themselves on what adult people they are, too. (sarcasm warning!)

[snip[
> I also apologize for appealing to your better side. I was hoping that you
> had one.

Perhaps I should have taken the sarcasm warning off that 'devil worship' joke, then. I think I just got accused of having no soul. Or, at least, of having no conscience. :stupid:

*shrugs*

Whatever.

[Thrakazog]

FILTH FLARG FILTH FOUL FILTH FLARG FLARG FOUL FILTH...



Oh, poop. I'm late again. Oh well.


Ahem.


Cum bay yah, my Lord....cum bay yah.....

[Agent X]

Telling somebody that he's wrong is automatically 'condescendingly personal'?

Lord Liaden *definitely* hit it on the head with you lot, then.

Here's a clue -- if we hold diametrically opposite opinions on a matter that is not capable of encompassing both simultaneously, then one of us *is* wrong, and all that remains is the process of discovery to determine which one.

Unless, of course, the very idea that you *might* be wrong is an intolerable personal affront, at which points, nuts to you. I seriously doubt that Lord Liaden would want his comments to be interpreted the way you have.

[Metaphysician]

Just out of curiousity, how *is* someone supposed to go about arguing with a person's statements??

[Chuckg]

Just out of curiousity, how *is* someone supposed to go about arguing with a person's statements??

Apparently, in some mysterious 'adult' way that doesn't involve actually disagreeing...?

[Agent X]

Nexus,

Take a few days out and come back. Getting upset with what someone says is perfectly reasonable as it has happened to a whole load of us on the site.
There is a lot of good information, ideas etc, to which you have contributed.
You won't please all the people all the time and people will disagree with what you do.

As regards ChuckG. He managed to get Raven'sPath thread on Games Gone Awry shut down. And is free and liberal in his use of swear words forgetting that this is a family board. It looks like becoming a necessity to report various of his posts to the administrators. If we cannot persuade him to behave then we can ask them to have a word with him.
If it was just one thread and just one person complaining then it would be excessive. It isn't. Worldmaker's summation is entirely accurate. Chuck is being condescending and personal. And if he continues attacking people, I for one will report him regardless of who the target is.Sounds like a plan to me.

[Vondy]

Happy Trails

[Chuckg]

Here's an even better one -- report me now.

Seriously. Don't threaten, don't posture -- just drop the time *right now*.

If you can. If you actually have any just cause too. If you're not just trying to win a pissing contest on a bluff.

Well, bluff called.

Edit -- where the bloody hell is the 'Report to Mod' button? *shrugs* Ah well, so much for dropping the dime on myself. One of you will have to do it.

[Agent X]

Kara, the man had already made four posts bashing some other people hard (out of maybe 10 posts in the thread total) before I opened my mouth in this thread *once*, and was showing no signs of stopping. So I don't believe you. I noticed three posts before he responded to your posts. In those three posts he mentioned one name, Tesuji.

Now, your statement is inaccurate and I have witnessed you lambaste others for these sorts of inaccuracies. I just thought you'd like to know.

[Chuckg]

*looks again*

I stand corrected re: three posts as opposed to four posts. I miscounted.

As for 'mentioning no names' -- that, however, I do not accept. Does anyone seriously want to pretend that he was *not* talking about me (or my some of friends, such as meta)? So far, even nexus hasn't tried that.

I also stand pat on 'showed no signs of stopping'. He still didn't.

[Agent X]

If you want me to follow your 'advice', it had better come with the official weight of authority behind it. Peer pressure, by itself, really isn't something that bugs me very much. I take advice only from friends. You people ain't friends, and somehow, for some reason, I really doubt you want to be.Considering your commentary on this and many other threads, I think you are right. At this moment, I sincerely doubt many posters want to befriend you.

[Chuckg]

Considering your commentary on this and many other threads, I think you are right. At this moment, I sincerely doubt many posters want to befriend you.

I sincerely doubt that as well.

Then again, I don't really care. The way I live my life, I have few friends -- but those few friends I *do* have are very, very *good* friends.

(And no, that does /not/ mean 'they always agree with Chuckg'.)

All I need, really.

[Agent X]

Just out of curiousity, how *is* someone supposed to go about arguing with a person's statements??They probably would want their statement to be interpreted in context.

[Chuckg]

They probably would want their statement to be interpreted in context.

Contest was hardly the problem here.

[Simon]

Here's an even better one -- report me now.

Seriously. Don't threaten, don't posture -- just drop the time *right now*.

If you can. If you actually have any just cause too. If you're not just trying to win a pissing contest on a bluff.

Well, bluff called.

Edit -- where the bloody hell is the 'Report to Mod' button? *shrugs* Ah well, so much for dropping the dime on myself. One of you will have to do it. Don't bother.

Frankly, chuckles, you're being an argumentative ass. And we really don't have need of any more of those around here (of late).

So....I'm going to officially overstep my bounds and put you in a "time out" -- also known as a temporary ban.

Ben can (of course) override this when he gets in for the day (making it a very short temporary ban). Or he can make it permanent -- that's his call.

[Agent X]

I sincerely doubt that as well.

Then again, I don't really care. The way I live my life, I have few friends -- but those few friends I *do* have are very, very *good* friends.

(And no, that does /not/ mean 'they always agree with Chuckg'.)

All I need, really. I don't remember asking how many friends you had or how good they were.

Look, it's getting tiresome. Nobody enjoys being treated the way you treat people when there is a debate. You don't simply debate. You make snide, condescending statements and when someone calls you on it you ramp up the character assassination attempts.

Death Tribble is tired of it. Worldmaker is tired of it. Kara is tired of it. Katherine appears tired of it. I'm tired of it. If you really want to get reported, just do what you do and we'll see what happens. Be careful what you wish for though. If you continue to alienate people and get reported often enough, Ben will get tired of it too.

The sad thing, for me, is that I have a lot of the same tastes in character design, etc. Unfortunately, the way you make your point either reflects a very mean-spirited person or someone totally devoid of social skills.

So yeah, I think you need to consider why so many are more sympathetic to Nexus than to you and your running buddy, Metaphysician. I'd like to have you stay on the boards for the many positive contributions you make but I have a feeling you will be paving the road for your own departure if you don't stop chewing people up when they disagree with you.

[Metaphysician]

And how, exactly, is it "chewing out" to say that a person's statement is wrong, for X reason??

If a person makes a factual statement ( "the Champions Universe does not need powerful superhumans to explain why the villains haven't taken over" ), how *are* you supposed to say "You are wrong, and here is why??"

[Agent X]

And how, exactly, is it "chewing out" to say that a person's statement is wrong, for X reason??

If a person makes a factual statement ( "the Champions Universe does not need powerful superhumans to explain why the villains haven't taken over" ), how *are* you supposed to say "You are wrong, and here is why??"I'm not going to argue with you. There shouldn't be any need to. Maybe, you're too close to it or something but I would drop this if I were you. Better threads and better days. [waves]

[Simon]

And how, exactly, is it "chewing out" to say that a person's statement is wrong, for X reason??

If a person makes a factual statement ( "the Champions Universe does not need powerful superhumans to explain why the villains haven't taken over" ), how *are* you supposed to say "You are wrong, and here is why??" There is a way to state your <em>opinion</em> without deriding others and starting a flamewar.

The fact that <strong>I'm</strong> the one having to tell you this should say something about just how far over the line Chuckg has gone.

[Metaphysician]

There is a way to state your <em>opinion</em> without deriding others and starting a flamewar.

The fact that <strong>I'm</strong> the one having to tell you this should say something about just how far over the line Chuckg has gone.

If it were a discussion of opinions, than it might be relevant. When one discusses facts, however, is it "deriding" to say that the other person is wrong??

[Simon]

If it were a discussion of opinions, than it might be relevant. When one discusses facts, however, is it "deriding" to say that the other person is wrong?? They way he was saying it, yes, yes it is.

Again, the fact that I'm the one having to point this out to you is rather ironic....or a sign of just how badly Chuck has handled things of late.

[Vondy]

If it were a discussion of opinions, than it might be relevant. When one discusses facts, however, is it "deriding" to say that the other person is wrong??
There's an old addage: "its not what you say, but how you say it."

One can be gracious in disagreement or correction. One can be abusive in disagreement or correction.

Its a matter of tone and tenor - its how you say it.

[Metaphysician]

Odd, I just scanned through his entire set of posts in the High End NPC thread.

I would *really* like to see someone point out an actual example of him being offensive from that thread. With quotes.

( and before someone mentions the short tiff with Katherine, may I remind everyone that she first asked a question of me that could reasonably be interpreted as an insult )

[Slim_McCoy]

If a person makes a factual statement ( "the Champions Universe does not need powerful superhumans to explain why the villains haven't taken over" ), how *are* you supposed to say "You are wrong, and here is why??"

How are you supposed to say it? That's actually a very good question. Tact goes a long way. Tact could be defined as telling someone to go to Hell in such a way that they look forward to the trip.

Some suggestions:

Qualify your answer with "In my opinion...", "In my game...", "In my experience...", etc.

Don't say "This is...", say "I think this is..."

Don't be afraid to just walk away from a thread.

This thread started, as I see it, because two people got into an argument like two dogs fighting over a bone. Either of them could have walked away, but they were both apparently so afraid of losing face that they couldn't just say to themselves:
"Man, that guy is SO stupid. I'm not even going to waste my time trying to educate him." and go post somewhere else.

Now we've got people threatening to leave the board, another being banned, and the bulding of a couple of armed camps. Now all we need is the assasination of a minor dignitary and we can have ourselves a good old fashioned World War.

[JmOz]

They way he was saying it, yes, yes it is.

Again, the fact that I'm the one having to point this out to you is rather ironic....or a sign of just how badly Chuck has handled things of late.

As one of your biggest critics:

"I think this is a sign of the apocalypse" :)

[Captain Obvious]

*Looks around at all the rubble*

What the hell happened here?

[cutsleeve]

I'm Not sure it matters really. I think nexus left at about pg 3 of the thread.

ChuckG just seemed arguementative nexus didnt mention him or the thread involved in his decision by name he showed a bit of tact in just stating how he felt. ChuckG who could have left the thread alone and not suffered any loss of face. This thread would have been filled with people telling him to just give the boards a rest and put mr. mysterious on ignore. ChuckG decided to continue this to save a little honor he didnt need to save.



And yes, nexus, that does mean I'm laughing at you, too.

... harsh? Yup. Insulting? Yup. Mean-spirited? mmmm... guilty!

not exactly friendly. but like i said it really probably doesnt matter anymore. :no:

[zornwil]

I think you maybe making this choice prematurely and while still upset. I hope you reconsider.
I agree with Hermit, hope you stay. :(

[zornwil]

Well, allow me to represent the contrary opinion:

"Internet suicide notes" such as this are generally exercise in stirring up pity and playing the victim. 'Because I got so owned in a debate, I'm taking my marbles and GOING HOME!' (insert offended eight-year-old tone of voice)

I've seen them before, repeatedly, on other venues. And I laugh at them, mockingly.

And yes, nexus, that does mean I'm laughing at you, too.

... harsh? Yup. Insulting? Yup. Mean-spirited? mmmm... guilty!

But I never promised to be nice to anyone. I just promised to not be insincere.

I don't care how much popularity I lose with this post -- my own opinion of nexus' nauseating self-pity party here is that any lingering respect I may still have had for him has just died.
Well, I'd prefer to respond to the suicide note than let someone commit suicide. So I guess I'm not to concerned with offending your sense of things.

[zornwil]

I too am pulling off of these message boards. I have found far too many posters on these boards to be exceptionally rude and condescending toward anyone expressing a differing opinion. These boards are now becoming as bad as rpg.net. Our gm has been wanting to switch over to M&M for some time now. Only a handful of us have been resisting the switch, and I have now thrown my vote over to M&M. At least on the M&M boards the posters only attack non-M&M trolls, not each other.
Again, hope you don't go; I think there's a little more strife than usual but these things come and go.

[Metaphysician]

How are you supposed to say it? That's actually a very good question. Tact goes a long way. Tact could be defined as telling someone to go to Hell in such a way that they look forward to the trip.

Some suggestions:

Qualify your answer with "In my opinion...", "In my game...", "In my experience...", etc.

Don't say "This is...", say "I think this is..."

But what if the matter *isn't* opinion??

To use an ( albeit exaggerated ) example, if someone says that they like green because its the color of nectarines, how else are you to respond but "Thats not correct"??


Don't be afraid to just walk away from a thread.

This thread started, as I see it, because two people got into an argument like two dogs fighting over a bone. Either of them could have walked away, but they were both apparently so afraid of losing face that they couldn't just say to themselves:
"Man, that guy is SO stupid. I'm not even going to waste my time trying to educate him." and go post somewhere else.

You'd have a point, if it weren't for the fact that only *one* of the parties in question is being chastised for an unwillingness to walk away. Besides which, why *shouldn't* you keep debating a point, so long as someone is still debating it with you.


Now we've got people threatening to leave the board, another being banned, and the bulding of a couple of armed camps. Now all we need is the assasination of a minor dignitary and we can have ourselves a good old fashioned World War.

[Metaphysician]

I'm Not sure it matters really. I think nexus left at about pg 3 of the thread.

ChuckG just seemed arguementative nexus didnt mention him or the thread involved in his decision by name he showed a bit of tact in just stating how he felt. ChuckG who could have left the thread alone and not suffered any loss of face. This thread would have been filled with people telling him to just give the boards a rest and put mr. mysterious on ignore. ChuckG decided to continue this to save a little honor he didnt need to save.




not exactly friendly. but like i said it really probably doesnt matter anymore. :no:

Please, do you *really* think it wasn't obvious to whom nexus was referring in the original post here?? It was a blatant sympathy grab.

Apparently, it is "riding one's ass" or "unwillingness to tolerate any disagreement" to point out the flaws in the arguments that someone else is making.

[Metaphysician]

Let me make one last point at the moment:

If a person does not want their views and positions questioned and debated, then perhaps they should not put them up for debate. If a person *does* put them up for debate, then they are giving tacit approval to those who come up and debate them.

[cutsleeve]

I shoot Metaphysician with foxbats pingpong gun. Thus sparking off FLAMEWAR I the flame to end all flames. :bmk: Metaphysician. :bounce:

[Metaphysician]

Nah, the flame war on this thread is already started.

Now, the flame war on the original thread of contention could still be triggered, seeing as there hasn't been one yet. . .

[cutsleeve]

Please, do you *really* think it wasn't obvious to whom nexus was referring in the original post here??

:think: actually no because i hadnt read the thread in question before hoping on this one. So i can say it wasnt obvious to everyone who he was talking about. :angel:

[Chimpira]

Please, do you *really* think it wasn't obvious to whom nexus was referring in the original post here?? It was a blatant sympathy grab.

Apparently, it is "riding one's ass" or "unwillingness to tolerate any disagreement" to point out the flaws in the arguments that someone else is making.
Truth be told, I had no idea and now I care even less.

[Super Squirrel]

If you ever work any customer service, you will learn about this thing called empathy.

You don't tell someone: "I can't do that. Your account is closed."

You tell someone, "Unfortunately, I will be unable to do that because you do not have an active account with us at this time."

The same goes for forum discussions if you want to hold a civil discussion.

You don't say: "Your wrong. He had 30 STR so he has 15 casual STR."

You say: "I believe you are mistaken about the rules. My understanding of the rules is that half of your STR is casual STR meaning in this example he should have 15."

[Katherine]

> That more people are sympathetic to Nexus tells you that I have a problem?

Yup.

To be consistent with the set of principles and motivations you want me to believe you have, the proper time and place for this lecture of yours would have been to nexus, in the last thread, yesterday. Or to nexus, after his first four posts in this thread, before I showed up, yesterday.

You didn't even bother trying. As far as you were concerned, an entire thread bitching about the horrible behavior of people -- even repeat statements that the entire board was turning to crap -- was just fine so long as Nexus was doing it.

But God forbid anybody bitch about *his* behavior.*


Boggles the mind. The majority of people posting to this seem to think your being the asshole. Most normal peoople would figure "hey, maybe I am doing something wrong." But it doesn't even make a dent somehow proves I have a problem? Because Chuckg, of course, cannot be in wrong.


> All righty. Clearly reason has left the building.

You know, for people who claim that I call everybody names just because they don't agree, you sure are doing a lot of that yourself today.

I have disagreed with Katherine, therefore I must be nuts. That's what you just did.[/QUOTE]

LOL Classic. Act like ass then insist its everyone elses fault and everyone is picking on Chuckg. Wow, I didn't know Nexus had the much clout around here.

But I'll try one last time. If this a sympathy thread and intend to do nothing but make Chuckg look bad, thanks to these continued bullhead rants. Its working . You doing just what he wants you to do. Nexus hasn't even posted to the thread in a page or so. You are the one keeping it alive, not him.

Edit:I did report the thread to mods. Hopefully, it'll be closed soon. How long does it typically take for them respond?

[Lord Liaden]

Just a word to those who are disappointed by threads like this (and you can definitely count me in that camp); don't let yourself become disenchanted with the Hero boards because of this. This kind of disintegration of discussion is just an aberration, a very small percentage of what actually gets posted here. I know it seems like we've been getting more of this behavior lately, but I've been on this forum long enough to have seen that this sort of behavior waxes and wanes. Not that long ago the Non-Gaming Discussion boards had become so relatively placid that some people were complaining (tongue in cheek) that they were withering away from lack of flames. ;)

Even at their worst our forums never descend to the level of those on many other websites which we could name. Most of the participants on this thread - even those who have behaved the most objectionably - make positive contributions here most of the time. This was one of those unfortunate combinations of the wrong personality types in the wrong circumstances, that got out of hand. Nobody thinks clearly or reacts reasonably when emotions get heated.

I recommend that everyone relax, take a time out, and let things blow over. Trust me, they will; lots of times I've seen combatants who have virtually sworn undying enmity to each other on one discussion thread, post quite civilly together on another a few days or weeks later.

This too shall pass. :)

[zornwil]

Just a word to those who are disappointed by threads like this (and you can definitely count me in that camp); don't let yourself become disenchanted with the Hero boards because of this. This kind of disintegration of discussion is just an aberration, a very small percentage of what actually gets posted here. I know it seems like we've been getting more of this behavior lately, but I've been on this forum long enough to have seen that this sort of behavior waxes and wanes. Not that long ago the Non-Gaming Discussion boards had become so relatively placid that some people were complaining (tongue in cheek) that they were withering away from lack of flames. ;)

Even at their worst our forums never descend to the level of those on many other websites which we could name. Most of the participants on this thread - even those who have behaved the most objectionably - make positive contributions here most of the time. This was one of those unfortunate combinations of the wrong personality types in the wrong circumstances, that got out of hand. Nobody thinks clearly or reacts reasonably when emotions get heated.

I recommend that everyone relax, take a time out, and let things blow over. Trust me, they will; lots of times I've seen combatants who have virtually sworn undying enmity to each other on one discussion thread, post quite civilly together on another a few days or weeks later.

This too shall pass. :)
Well said, and accurate, LL.

[zornwil]

Boggles the mind. The majority of people posting to this seem to think your being the asshole. Most normal peoople would figure "hey, maybe I am doing something wrong." But it doesn't even make a dent somehow proves I have a problem? Because Chuckg, of course, cannot be in wrong.


> All righty. Clearly reason has left the building.

You know, for people who claim that I call everybody names just because they don't agree, you sure are doing a lot of that yourself today.

I have disagreed with Katherine, therefore I must be nuts. That's what you just did.


LOL Classic. Act like ass then insist its everyone elses fault and everyone is picking on Chuckg. Wow, I didn't know Nexus had the much clout around here.

But I'll try one last time. If this a sympathy thread and intend to do nothing but make Chuckg look bad, thanks to these continued bullhead rants. Its working . You doing just what he wants you to do. Nexus hasn't even posted to the thread in a page or so. You are the one keeping it alive, not him.

Edit:I did report the thread to mods. Hopefully, it'll be closed soon. How long does it typically take for them respond?
I think Dan already handled it...note ChuckG is temporarily banned.

[Blue]

Bottom line is: There's no point in leaving, Nexus. The problem will never be resolved, for wherever you go, as long as it's on the internet, people are going to be pompous, self-righteous, and mean spirited.

That's the Cliff's Notes version of what I was going to post. Time to seize the handle and flush this thread and be done with it.

[zornwil]

Yikes, my message looked very different than it was supposed to - some quoting got messed up - now corrected!

[Ben Seeman]

Don't bother.

Frankly, chuckles, you're being an argumentative ass. And we really don't have need of any more of those around here (of late).

So....I'm going to officially overstep my bounds and put you in a "time out" -- also known as a temporary ban.

Ben can (of course) override this when he gets in for the day (making it a very short temporary ban). Or he can make it permanent -- that's his call.
Having read this entire thread, I'm thoroughly disappointed in chuckg's behavior, not because of the whole "it's okay to argue with someone's opinion" thing... that's fine. It's this one phrase "But I never promised to be nice to anyone," that really gets me. If you're going to be using these boards, you'd better believe you're going to be nice. If not, then you don't get to use these boards. It's that simple.

[Guzalot]

To lighten things up a little, I give you "Real life vs. the Internet" from the cast of Red vs. Blue
http://files.redvsblue.com/NYC2/RvB_NYC2.mov

[Worldmaker]

Let me make one last point at the moment:

If a person does not want their views and positions questioned and debated, then perhaps they should not put them up for debate. If a person *does* put them up for debate, then they are giving tacit approval to those who come up and debate them.

The issue isn't debating or not debating, its the manner in which the "debate" proceeds.

If you were to post "In my opinion, they should stop making left-handed waffle irons because the market for them is small and the manufacturer loses money", and I say in response "This is true, but does the cost of manufacturing them really outweigh the potential market? Maybe it breaks even and the company feels justified in supplying lefties kitchen equipment for the PR they gain?" its debating in a polite manner and all is right with the world.

If you were to post "In my opinion, they should stop making left-handed waffle irons because the market for them is small and the manufacturer loses money" and I say in response "That's the stupidest thing I've ever heard. Only a moron would think that way", then I'm emulating Chuckg's debating style, which is not polite and is intended to ruffle feathers.

[Worldmaker]

:think: actually no because i hadnt read the thread in question before hoping on this one. So i can say it wasnt obvious to everyone who he was talking about. :angel:


I didn't know who he was talking about until Flamey-Boy started posting and people started quoting him (I've got Chuck on ignore, you see) being defensive. So it really wasn't obvious to me at all.

[Hugh Neilson]

I didn't know who he was talking about until Flamey-Boy started posting and people started quoting him (I've got Chuck on ignore, you see) being defensive. So it really wasn't obvious to me at all.

Count me in the "didn't know until the rebuttals started" camp, as I must not have been following the thread this started in.

Some people on this board have argumentative styles. I'm probably one of them, so I don't think I'm in a position to throw stones. It is nice to see some of the more level-headed posters chime in when they think someone's being unfairly abused. Hence, "internet community".

[JeffreyWKramer]

Y'know, agree or disagree with someone, it's still poor form to be attacking them when they aren't around.

Not to mention this whole thing is getting real old.

[Kara Zor-El]

Please, do you *really* think it wasn't obvious to whom nexus was referring in the original post here?? It was a blatant sympathy grab.

Apparently, it is "riding one's ass" or "unwillingness to tolerate any disagreement" to point out the flaws in the arguments that someone else is making.

It wasn't obvious to me, as I hadn't read the thread in question. So, yeah, it wasn't obvious to everyone until Chuckg made it obvious and continued the argument here.

[Hyper-Man]

To lighten things up a little, I give you "Real life vs. the Internet" from the cast of Red vs. Blue
http://files.redvsblue.com/NYC2/RvB_NYC2.mov
OMG! very funny!

the visuals of a 'flame war' are priceless!

[Blue]

I had to hunt down the impetus for this whole thing myself (having barely been on last week). I had ChuckG on ignore a while back but removed everyone last week just to see if things were all better.

Already 3 people made it back on, which means I must be thinner skinned than I thought. The other two are political posters with no self-control from th NGD forums.

[Agent X]

Y'know, agree or disagree with someone, it's still poor form to be attacking them when they aren't around.

Not to mention this whole thing is getting real old.Old it may be getting but I think folks are just processing what happened. I suppose you would consider my posts attacks but what I was going for was correction and warning someone from pushing too far.

[JeffreyWKramer]

Old it may be getting but I think folks are just processing what happened. I suppose you would consider my posts attacks but what I was going for was correction and warning someone from pushing too far.

I wasn't really speaking specifically of your posts. Many others are simply tossing insults around - and again, at someone who isn't even here. I don't see a whole lot of value to that.

[Agent X]

I wasn't really speaking specifically of your posts. Many others are simply tossing insults around - and again, at someone who isn't even here. I don't see a whole lot of value to that. I don't get that. What I'm getting from reading the posts is that quite a few folks agree with Nexus' perception of how he was treated and that most folks agree there is a problem with Chuckg's philosophy as to how to post. He burned some folks and they are letting Nexus and others know that he/she/they are not alone. Still, who knows (Ben and Dan), he might get to come back (assuming he's even interested).

I know you like Chuckg and I know Metaphysician does as well. I think it's admirable to defend a friend. I also think it's admirable to take a friend aside and privately let them know when they've gone too far.

[Enforcer84]

I had to hunt down the impetus for this whole thing myself (having barely been on last week). I had ChuckG on ignore a while back but removed everyone last week just to see if things were all better.

Already 3 people made it back on, which means I must be thinner skinned than I thought. The other two are political posters with no self-control from th NGD forums.
Can you see this?
then I am not one of them! :D

[Metaphysician]

:think: actually no because i hadnt read the thread in question before hoping on this one. So i can say it wasnt obvious to everyone who he was talking about. :angel:

Then maybe you should refrain from commenting until you have read the thread, and can judge based on first hand information whether nexus was, in fact, being horribly abused.

[Metaphysician]

It wasn't obvious to me, as I hadn't read the thread in question. So, yeah, it wasn't obvious to everyone until Chuckg made it obvious and continued the argument here.

This is the third person who's said this very same thing.

Okay, if you hadn't read the original thread, then why the hell were you here automatically feeling all sorry for nexus without knowing whether or not he had any legitimate complaint??

[Metaphysician]

I don't get that. What I'm getting from reading the posts is that quite a few folks agree with Nexus' perception of how he was treated and that most folks agree there is a problem with Chuckg's philosophy as to how to post. He burned some folks and they are letting Nexus and others know that he/she/they are not alone. Still, who knows (Ben and Dan), he might get to come back (assuming he's even interested).

I know you like Chuckg and I know Metaphysician does as well. I think it's admirable to defend a friend. I also think it's admirable to take a friend aside and privately let them know when they've gone too far.

And if he spontaneously went berserk, I would.

This was not spontaneous. This was a ploy on nexus' part to draw sympathy, mainly from people who hadn't even read the original thread. This thread reeked from the very beginning.

[Ben Seeman]

Since this discussion is not Champions related, I'm going to close it. If you wish to continue this discussion, please got to the NGD.