WHY ARE WARGAMERS SO FRIGGIN' PISSY?

[New Age Santa]

oh god...Slapdragon is here..

I must say I am fairly sick of seeing real debates turn into long drawn out flame-fests with no end in sight. In fact most of these debares turn into flame fests!!

LIGHTEN UP!

Ok so someone made a historically inaccurate scenarios which are gamey. So?? We all need a little gameyness now and then and if you don't like the scenarios don't play em.

So someone suggests blood or even *gasp* gore in CM to realistcally portray battle. And then offers that it is a patch. So? If you dn't like the idea of it then don't download the path

Someone has different political views than you. Instead of ardently flaming them and starting things WAY off topic...agree to disagree and call it a day.

Please stop it guys (you know who you are) it's getting tiresome

[Bigdog]

I am e-mailing you Steve. It ends now. I wish no flame war. Please respond

Tom the "Big Dog" Oliver

[Slapdragon]

There is no flamewar Santa, except what is being directed at me right now.

To turn this back into a discussion -- why should issues not be discussed in your opinion Santa? I have never commented on a scenario, and I did comment that realistic blood was not so bad, so your a bit behind in reading posts, but what I want to know is, in your opinion, what sort of censorship would you place on the discussion of issues the effect the game.

As I see it, there is a movement to drive out the people who discuss historical aspects of the game and the simulation issues the game brings up. Certainly people have grown exceedingly thin skinned -- note what happened when Spook tried to discuss things on an even level.

But I am interested in your ideas on how censorship of historical discussions should be put into place, and who should do the censoring.

Oh, I found the post about US always kicking German ass -- so I know why we were playing the game BigDog. If I could find even the password I would send it to you, but I fear that I have even misplaced students papers and my birth certificate in those crazy weeks after my illness.

[ 07-26-2001: Message edited by: Slapdragon ]

[Slapdragon]

<BLOCKQUOTE>quote:</font><HR>Originally posted by Bigdog:

I am e-mailing you Steve. It ends now. I wish no flame war. Please respond

Tom the "Big Dog" Oliver<HR></BLOCKQUOTE>

Sorry, cross post. Let me read your e-mail. I will respond soon, my lunch is over so I have to go back to work.

[Username]

Ponderous.

Since I am double-secret probation, please leave me out of this thread.

Lewis

[Panzer_Meyer]

You people need a fvcking life, go argue with your wife, girlfriend or your dog for that matter.

Here we go again, the same ol' people arguing over the most insignificant subject. They spend and hour typing a post, trying to figure out how to make use of english words from the 1200's. They don't argue for the sake of the subject whatever the subject is, but try to make their post the most insulting to others.

Note that most of these people are over 30 years old, yet they enganage in the dumbess debates and beat them to death, just like this one. They find the littlest and insignificant point in a post and argue over that, like it matters. And to top it off, they are sensitive as hell. Anything to do with blood or sex they start saying it's a discrase to WWII veterans, like those idiotic hamsters are not.

Even though blood was, I dare to say it (LOL), part of WWII!

I may spend my time here to, but I am way younger, and can afford. I don't have a wife or kids or a "real" job that I got to 8-6pm. (I do have a job but only weekends as I have college during the day, nope it aint fast food, thank god.) These people have full time jobs and wifes, yet they still spend at least 2-4 hours on this board a day arguaing over the dumbess and most simplistic topic.

It's the same people over and over, it's getting old.

[Moriarty]

A part of the problem is attempting to communicate strongly held beliefs and positions using the written word. In this format there is no voice inflection, no eye contact, no cues as to what is "between the lines." (Side note: The various emoticons can impart some of this but only if the reader accepts them. Many do not, believing instead the author is using a smiley or winky to hide the dagger.)

For example, from the opening post (Disclaimer: Nothing is intended about Franko by choosing this particular statement and I am simply using it as an example).

<BLOCKQUOTE>quote:</font><HR>No one on this board knows as much as they think they know, all could stand a bit more knowledge, and just about everyone could stand just a tad more civility.<HR></BLOCKQUOTE>

Is this: A) a statement of well-reasoned observation, a statement of obvious truth and wisdom, C) a statement that the author thinks he is smarter than everyone else, D) a statement that the author has more smarts, more courteous manners and therefore is a better person than anyone who enters into a debate.

I think the answer is "B" with a little "A" thrown in, but another reader could take it another way.

How you view the written word depends on what you bring to the table. Do I, as the reader/recipient, take the words at face value or do I go looking for meaning in between the lines that may or may not be intended or exist? Do I categorically reject the statement because I saw Franko's name and didn't like or agree with what he has written elsewhere or because we have been on opposite sides in a flame war or debate and I have no respect for him? Am I just in a pissy, hypersensitive mood today and this just struck me wrong?

This happens a lot with e-mails, too. Sadly, we as society largely have lost the ability to argue a point without taking it personally.

In the days before TV (and no, I'm not that old), debate was a form of entertainment, an art form, if you will. The great debaters vehemently and emotionally argued positions based on clearly thought out reasoning and evidence. Lawyers will say some of the most outlandish, provocative things to further their case, but when it's over ... it wasn't personal.

In my side job as a firefighter/EMT, the chief of my department and others, myself included, often do not see eye to eye. He is of the sort who can get into a verbal donnybrook, complete with shouting, ingenious concoctions of cuss words, etc., and after it is done, buy you a drink at a bar. Why? Because it was business, nothing more, nothing less and definitely not personal. You may not agree with him, but you do respect that in him.

The Reader's Digest form of what I'm getting at is that before you respond to a perceived slight:

1. Take a quick look at different ways the post could be taken.

2. If you're going to enter the fray, argue the issue.

3. If both sides have made their points and neither is swayed, it's time to agree to disagree (or challenge the other guy to a game. A lot of respect can be regained over a good PBEM game of CM).

Just my 2 cents.

[ 07-26-2001: Message edited by: Moriarty ]

[Spook]

<BLOCKQUOTE>quote:</font><HR>Originally posted by Moriarty:

In my side job as a firefighter/EMT, the chief of my department and others, myself included, often do not see eye to eye. He is of the sort who can get into a verbal donnybrook, complete with shouting, ingenious concoctions of cuss words, etc., and after it is done, buy you a drink at a bar. Why? Because it was business, nothing more, nothing less and definitely not personal. You may not agree with him, but you do respect that in him.

<HR></BLOCKQUOTE>

Oh, man....sounds JUST like my Uncle Ed, a former city fire chief. At my sister's wedding reception a couple of years ago, we argued over pretty much anything from economics to whether or not Lee Harvey Oswald acted alone. But he kept buying me Irish whiskies all along, and got me a bit tanked.

[Bruno Weiss]

Hey Santa, can I get a copy of CM2 for Christmas?!?

[0time]

Ahh, Hi, remember me?

No?

I didn't think so.

WHAT A BIG BUNCH OF KINDERGARTEN CHALLENGED, WUSSED UP WANNABEES.

YOU GOT AN OPINION? STATE IT!

YOU GOT A QUESTION? ASK IT!

YOU SCREW UP? ADMIT IT!

YOU DON'T LIKE IT? PASS IT BY!

GO PLAY THE GAME FOR CRYING OUT LOUD!

Oh, and by the way, I never did buy the game.

[Cubbies Phan]

<BLOCKQUOTE>quote:</font><HR>Originally posted by Slapdragon:

The above posts strikes a number of issues. There is the issue of intellectual discourse versus anti-intellectual elements, of how deep discussions are "allowed" to get before the peanut gallery pipes in, and the issue of censoring posts because they may cause intellectual debate.<HR></BLOCKQUOTE>

This has no reflection on this post in question, but the part about censoring posts because they may lead to intellectual debate is very interesting.

We, on this Forum don't know how good we have it. On other forums posts that invoke thought and debate are usually locked down quickly. These forums are usually those that deal with twitch crowds in the RTS genre or FPS genre. In quickly find myself bored with a forum that only contains one line posts of how cool or shotty something is. I recently joined the Empire Earth Forum and I opened with a nice long post similar to what is about an average post on here. So, I find this forum at least to be a good way to learn things other than that the Ultra Heavy Uber Tank should have 100 hit points instead of just 80.

[Pzman]

<BLOCKQUOTE>quote:</font><HR>Originally posted by 0time:

Ahh, Hi, remember me?

No?

I didn't think so.

WHAT A BIG BUNCH OF KINDERGARTEN CHALLENGED, WUSSED UP WANNABEES.

YOU GOT AN OPINION? STATE IT!

YOU GOT A QUESTION? ASK IT!

YOU SCREW UP? ADMIT IT!

YOU DON'T LIKE IT? PASS IT BY!

GO PLAY THE GAME FOR CRYING OUT LOUD!

Oh, and by the way, I never did buy the game.<HR></BLOCKQUOTE>

Then be quiet! Hehe.

[WineCape]

Chivalry, manners, being gracious, gentlemanly ... try these attributes when all else fails, gentleman.

If that does not help ... (it does help at the most unlikely of places - even on the soccer pitch while I'm officiating at FNB Soccer Stadium, South Africa, 80 000+ fans screeching, nay baying, for your blood during a regular top of the league clash between Orlando Pirates v Kaizer Chiefs etc)... THEN IGNORE ALL ELSE FOR YOUR OWN SANITY!

Kind regards (as always )

Charl Theron

[Pzman]

<BLOCKQUOTE>quote:</font><HR>Originally posted by WineCape:

THEN IGNORE ALL ELSE FOR YOUR OWN SANITY!

Charl Theron<HR></BLOCKQUOTE>

Sanity. Lets think about that. Who really fits under what we like to call sanity. Everyone is at a diffrent level. Maybe all of us are playing CM form a mental hospital! :eek:

[ 07-26-2001: Message edited by: Panzerman ]

[Terence]

I have to ask. I read the thread (all three of them) and I know Ill regret it, but I have to ask.

Is it possible that Tiger wanted a mod-able dead body icon NOT because he wanted to add blood, but because he wanted to make it consistent with uniform mods on living soldiers.

Perhaps some people are bugged when they see living soldiers in one uniform and dead soldiers from the same unit in a different uniform. Is that at all possible, that this inconsistency motivated his request, and NOT the desire to see blood?

[Spook]

<BLOCKQUOTE>quote:</font><HR>Originally posted by Terence:

I have to ask. I read the thread (all three of them) and I know Ill regret it, but I have to ask.

Is it possible that Tiger wanted a mod-able dead body icon NOT because he wanted to add blood, but because he wanted to make it consistent with uniform mods on living soldiers.

Perhaps some people are bugged when they see living soldiers in one uniform and dead soldiers from the same unit in a different uniform. Is that at all possible, that this inconsistency motivated his request, and NOT the desire to see blood?<HR></BLOCKQUOTE>

Okay, you've asked. Now I'll make you regret it. Regret! REGRET!!!! MUWAHAHA!!!

Ahem. Well, that's not the case, Terence. All of the CM uniform *.bmps in my game are modded (by myself, mainly), but there's no "reversion" per se. Per example, my standard Wehrmacht use a modded field gray tint, but the "body" casualty marker doesn't revert to the stock grey color supplied in the original CM. Same with my SS; an SS casualty marker uses what I've provided for SS uniforms. And so forth.

[David Aitken]

<BLOCKQUOTE>quote:</font><HR>Terence wrote:

Is it possible that Tiger wanted a mod-able dead body icon NOT because he wanted to add blood, but because he wanted to make it consistent with uniform mods on living soldiers.<HR></BLOCKQUOTE>

As far as I know, casualties use the same bitmaps as active troops, not a copy of the same bitmap. So if you replace the bitmap, it's used for casualties too. If there were a separate slot for the casualty bitmap, even if it used a copy of the active bitmap, then that's exactly what Tiger was asking for and this debate would never have started.

[Terence]

<BLOCKQUOTE>quote:</font><HR>Originally posted by David Aitken:

As far as I know, casualties use the same bitmaps as active troops, not a copy of the same bitmap. So if you replace the bitmap, it's used for casualties too.<HR></BLOCKQUOTE>

Oh drat. And there I was hoping to be the One Just Man, again. Thanks for the responses, guys.

[Battlefront.com]

Folks,

I am closing this up because it is a misdirection of energy that could be better spent elswhere. To partake in ANY give and take intellectual discussion (even low level ones) involves a certain amount of skin thickness. It has been my experience that too many people lack even the basic ability to debate without getting bothered by the act of debating iteself. The extreme range of people either try to beat the other side into submission with insults and whatever, or they shy away from further debate. Neither one is good for an honest exchange of ideas.

I too am bothered by the suggestion that strong, even slightly heated, challenges to a point of fact or opinion should be avoided for fear of having someone either go ballistic or into hiding.

While simple rules of good debate behavior should be adheared to, one can not avoid direct challenges without losing the hole reason for debating in the first place. So if someone goes nuts or runs away, that is the price one pays for an open discussion. If too many people go ballistic or leave, then obviously the discussion that remains won't be very valuable. This is my personal opinion about USENET (in general) and it is why we moderate this BBS. That doesn't mean that everybody is going to act the right way all the time. Humans are Humans afterall

Steve