Wolfire Games Forums

Its like watching someone who's Chaotic Neutral and someone who's Lawful Good trying to have a conversation.

I'm such a nerd.

Lawful good?

You insult me! D:
I will now proceed to poke at you with a stick.




*poke poke*

chaotic good?

I'd call him neutral good.

I wonder what I am.

Pure neutral?

I am probably chaotic walrus-dick.

Glabbit wrote:You should know better than anyone that good does not equal cheerful. Yet you seem to define being a good person as being a happy-go-lucky holier-than-thou preachface.

I seem to define being a good person as that? That's funny, because I thought all this time I had been trying to ram the opposite point into your obliviously sedated mind. My point is that you're a masquerade of an idea that doesn't exist, all your cheerful take-the-high-ground nonsense is just a self-serving bit of pretense to make you seem like a super swell guy.

Glabbit wrote:And you're misinterpreting my words yet again; I don't mean only hating things in the way of not having anything you don't hate, I mean more specifically having one of a collection of any thing which you specifically only hate, without any further thought of interaction.

Could you please decipher this? There's some cryptic and altogether clumsy phrasings in there. Either that or it's actually just nonsense that was never meant to make sense in the first place.

Also, misinterpreting your words? How else am I meant to take "Only hating things is unhealthy though, both for you and for those around you"? Or am I meant to have some sort of mind-reading device that only you seem to be privy to the technology of? Unless you mean that I should take the good and bad points of everything into account without only focusing on what I hate? If so, then I do. The balance of probabilities. If something is good or shit. If the balance of probabilities is so weighed down on the side of "This is shit" for something, then I choose to hate it. It's a conscious, deliberate decision. So I hate a lot of things, but that's because so many things are shit. See?

Glabbit wrote:Enlightened, you say? I thank you for the compliment, for I take it as one sarcasm or no.
I do try to be wise and good, but it seems it is a goal near equal difficulty as it is for you to consider a reasonable standpoint when you think someone's having a go at you.

So you're saying you're about as close to wise and good as I am cool and calculated in an argument? Well you certainly think a lot of yourself, don't you? =P

Can't anyone have a lengthy discussion without being called out for flaming around here? Geez.

Renegade_Turner wrote:I seem to define being a good person as that? That's funny, because I thought all this time I had been trying to ram the opposite point into your obliviously sedated mind. My point is that you're a masquerade of an idea that doesn't exist, all your cheerful take-the-high-ground nonsense is just a self-serving bit of pretense to make you seem like a super swell guy.

This is what I mean: You assume that the good I speak of is a non-genuine cobbling-together of spittle and lies intended for an image of purity or somesuch. You continue to insist that my motives are counterfeit. "Trying to ram your point into my obliviously sedated mind" indeed. What ever is your motive set, Ren? Do you even bother considering arguments or do you open the forum already expecting to find tasty targets to shoot at with your words of defiance? Why does it seem that your only wish is to convince me that I am a grey spot of mediocrity among the mass of scum that is humanity? Why are you so against the prospect of goodness existing?
I assure you I am no agent of the media, I am quite simply trying to be a genuine good person.
If that annoys you, just put it down as that ironic little vice of mine.

Renegade_Turner wrote:Could you please decipher this? There's some cryptic and altogether clumsy phrasings in there. Either that or it's actually just nonsense that was never meant to make sense in the first place.

Clumsy phrasing, yes. I apologise for not smoothing it out further, I was distracted at the time.
Let's put it like this:
See an object. Despise said object. Gain new information about object. Dismiss any information about object that conflicts with your disgust-driven views on object. Take it out on people who don't seem to hate object as much.

Renegade_Turner wrote:Also, misinterpreting your words? How else am I meant to take "Only hating things is unhealthy though, both for you and for those around you"? Or am I meant to have some sort of mind-reading device that only you seem to be privy to the technology of? Unless you mean that I should take the good and bad points of everything into account without only focusing on what I hate? If so, then I do. The balance of probabilities. If something is good or shit. If the balance of probabilities is so weighed down on the side of "This is shit" for something, then I choose to hate it. It's a conscious, deliberate decision. So I hate a lot of things, but that's because so many things are shit. See?

So essentially what you're saying is that everything that is shit is shit because you think it's shit? Do you also suffer from the delusion that you're the next Suzumiya Haruhi? Or are you saying that you simply assume things are shit on the statistical basis that many things are shit? According to whom are these many things shit? Whose word have you taken to be so certain that so many things are shit?
And more to the point: Why would you put so much effort into negating other points of view to preserve your own opinion of things?

Renegade_Turner wrote:So you're saying you're about as close to wise and good as I am cool and calculated in an argument? Well you certainly think a lot of yourself, don't you? =P

No more than you seem to think of yourself, porky.

"Fine then, ya prick."

I would've loved to throw that in as an end to this endless disagreement, but I can't just let it slide that you assault my integrity. I can appreciate you being open enough to say that you don't 'buy' my personalty as is, since I know enough to be aware that people of my ilk are rare enough to be virtually nonexistent on the internet (haha, see what I did there). I do not appreciate being tagged a liar for putting effort into being myself everywhere I go, being it online, or outside. Sure, I'm more of a hopeless shyguy when meeting new people in person than I am on the tubes, but that's a difference in ability, not personality (semantics yay!). I still think the same things, still want to express the same things, and still harbour the same good-guy attitude to things.

And whilst I'm at it, making a list of nitpicks, I might as well continue with the lot of it, now in reverse order because I feel like it.
Why I call you stubborn, disregarding information on hated subjects? Observation. It is what I see you do. It is what I've always seen you do. The first thing you do when anyone objects to something you say is you put that man down. You nitpick and insult, sometimes openly, sometimes passive-agressively, most always nastily. You start off with telling people why they are wrong. Not once have I seen evidence of clear consideration on your part in any situation where you clearly have your own solid opinion, no matter what that opinion was based on.

That brings me to the next miniparagraph. Whose views you are based yours off? No one is born with personal views. You have to have based them on something. Not necessarily a person. Surely you have the imagination to include that option. This should not be confusing for you at all.

The anime? It's only a very minor spoiler to say that Suzumiya, to put it simply, is god. Only she doesn't know it. Effectively this means is things will become true when she believes them to be true. This is not a big spoiler because basically the whole series is about what troubles this causes.

Sure, you can judge things to be shit all you want. You do sometimes forget, however, that your judgements are your judgements. No more.

I don't get what you mean to add with that first bit. So have this puppy:

Renegade_Turner wrote:to me it's all text on a screen anyway.

I think I found the problem.

Assaultman67 wrote:[excellentimg][/excellentimg]

...yes.
True.
I can't help it!




(yay romantically apocalyptic)