Why the beer hate? (Forked Thread: What are the no-goes...)

[Farganger]

No, I'm pretty sure I'm understanding you.

The fact that you even feel the need or desire to say this is pretty telling.

"You can indulge in <something that doesn't affect me> when I'm not around" is not a reasonable statement. It's the default state of adult relationships. Similarly, "You can indulge in <something> that <doesn't affect me>" is also the default state of adult relationships.

By contrast, "You can't indulge in <something> that <doesn't affect me> because someone who indulges in the future or has indulged in the past might or has affected me" is controlling behavior, and in the context of a leisure activity like a game between friendly acquaintances it's peculiar.

Sometimes there are good reasons to impose controlling behavior (prior restraint). All of these that I can think of involved concerns for public safety or the unknown factors of dealing with strangers. As far as i can tell, unless we're misunderstanding your situation, your controlling behavior is simply a matter of your enforcing your preference on someone else because "maybe."

Very lucid -- this summed up my (more visceral and less intellectual) take on things after reading many more oblique posts and responses.

 

[Mistwell]

Yeah, regardless of my personal feelings on the other intoxicants, their mere presence at the game table affects me. It could put me in jail, get the government to seize my house, etc.

OK, what country are you in?

I do not smoke marijuana and never have. But in my city it's essentially legal to possess and consume in small quantities, and I know of no state or county or city in the U.S. where possession or consumption of a small quantity by a guest in your house would lead to you going to jail, or your house being seized.

 

[Malacoda]

It may be a quirk, perhaps, but then, I think drinking is as much of one. If it's not worse, when it becomes a disease. Which I suppose could happen to my "quirk" at some point, but until I do something like start breaking into Saloon Halls to smash them up with an axe or nominating myself to be the Prohibition Party's candidate for President, I don't think it represents such.

This all seems to be about risk avoidance. We all engage in it, likely on a daily basis. It is late at night and the light by the ATM is out. Do I stop anyway? The guy in this checkout line is eyeballing me weird, do I go to another? People sometimes don't behave properly when drinking, do I hang out with them?

It seems to me, Bumbles, that the reason this thread has gone on for so many pages is that most people here find your level of risk avoidance to be...odd. I am guessing there are a number of people who find your level of risk avoidance to be very odd. I have to admit I am one of them. I am not fond of spending my life in a clean room. Sometimes weird things happening are worth it just for the story you can tell later.

But, hey, if it makes you happy, more power to you. I just think it is somewhat clear at this point that a lot of people won't be able to relate.

 

[Scribble]

Yes. By pretty much any measure you want to use, it's healthier to drink three bottles of beer during the game session than three bottles of the sugary soda pop of your choice. Further, there's not enough alcohol in those beers to alter the behavior of anyone beyond the legal drinking age in the slightest.

Again, people can do whatever they want at their own tables. I just find it to be a very weird hang up.

As to drugs... The illegality is a very big deal. 30 somethings with a spouse, kids, and careers do not need to have people bringing drugs into their house or to go to houses with drugs.

Umm... why are you attributing arguments to me that I never made? All I was doing was pointing out that there have been studies about soda linking it to health risks.

I don't really care WHAT people do at their own tables.

Someone can have a mad drunken roman orgy at their table for all I care so long as their group is ok with it.

Personally I only get annoyed when someone does soemthing that causes a disruption in the game- that includes ANYTHING like drinking/smoking too much listening to music that gets too disruptive, texting, talking too much, being the "jerk character that just wants to kill NPCs for no reason" watching TV, surfing the net, building a new character, etc...

I don't however have any issues with anyone until they're actually doing said things. And again- only when it's my table/group.

If it's some random gamer down the street? Whatever floats his/her boat man.

 

[Bumbles]

Please don't call me names because you were unclear. Take responsibility for your mistake.

I'm sorry you feel that was name-calling. I was just explaining the situation, namely each of us believes the other to be at fault. You think I wasn't sufficiently clear. I think you made unwarranted assumptions. My attempt to explain it has convinced you that I was calling you names.

I'm sorry, but I just can't proceed from there. It's clear I am unable to communicate with you without excess conflict, so I'm stopping.

 

[Bumbles]

It seems to me, Bumbles, that the reason this thread has gone on for so many pages is that most people here find your level of risk avoidance to be...odd. I am guessing there are a number of people who find your level of risk avoidance to be very odd. I have to admit I am one of them. I am not fond of spending my life in a clean room. Sometimes weird things happening are worth it just for the story you can tell later.

Really? I think it's because I'm foolish enough to keep replying when I know better, and am not strong-willed enough to avoid this conflict which just leads to things like this. Unfair characterizations of me, from people on the internet who would rather judge and condemn me, without seeing the log in their own eyes.

I've had people complain that I was "taking it far too safe" when I refused to drive the car until they buckled their seat belt. I've had people complain of my being some "eco-fruit" when I safely disposed of some oil instead of pouring it down the drain like they did. Y'know what I learned? People who want to think bad of me can keep thinking bad of me. If they want to make things a personal issue, if they want to attribute to me all sorts of psychiatric disabilities and play arm-chair psychologist...I'm not going to listen. They tell me more about themselves than they know about me.

And no, I don't find such behavior to be at all odd. I find it disappointing, but not unusual.

So thanks for your feedback, but if you want to make it a personal matter, between people, get a job as a therapist and keep that stuff to your patients.

But yes, this decision it is about avoidance of the risk of a certain conflict in a game. That's correct. I wonder why anybody would expect it to be otherwise when I've said so several times. I suppose I've used different language like "I prefer to avoid the consequences of dealing with drinking" or whatever I said, but that there's some inability to conceive what it is to me, well, I find it baffling. But I don't mind. It's when you go further, and try to characterize that decision that there's a problem. I see that as less constructive and more derogatory. YMMV.

 

[catsclaw227]

If that were the case I'd be cool with not having beer with dinner. I'd ask again if you were allergic to beer and would therefor like a steak without marinade.

I'd pass on the steak to be honest. But my dietary restrictions and preferences are none of your concern, so I'll refrain from further details. You don't need to know what I eat or why, and if you want, you can imagine whatever reasons you like.

See, now this might be another reason why some of the posters aren't groking your explanations.

(In addition to reason brought up that you haven't provided any examples for us to hang out hat on, instead providing vagaries and simply asking us to take your word for it)

Above, Imperialis was offering the suggestion that he would take the beer-marinated steak off the grill for you and give you a different one instead, which is a polite and respectful response. You replied with, essentially, that you won't eat the steak and it's nobody's business what you eat. Just a bit of an over-response, don't you think?

And if you are at a BBQ, and the host is providing food, well.... it kind of IS their business what you eat, since they are feeding you. The reasons why aren't anyone's business either, but then responding in a weird, possibly over-reactive way about it will only get odd looks. It's possible that when someone asks why, it's just a conversation starter.

 

[Mistwell]

I'm sorry you feel that was name-calling. I was just explaining the situation, namely each of us believes the other to be at fault. You think I wasn't sufficiently clear.

You AGREED you were unclear. Were you being facetious?

I think you made unwarranted assumptions.

Explain how it was unwarrented, given we were in a thread about alcohol and gamers, you mentioned gamers with a similar problem, you didn't say the similar problem was not alcohol related, I made it clear that there is a good reason to specify if it isn't alcohol and yet you still didn't mention it was not alcohol. In what possible way was my assumption not warranted?

You know, in all communications SOME assumptions are required. It is impossible to communicate, in any language, without some basic assumptions about some words being made. So yes, I made an assumption. But in what way was it unreasonable given the context?

My attempt to explain it has convinced you that I was calling you names.

You say "has convinced you" as if it's a subjective issue. Let's be clear. You called us both asses. In what world is calling someone else an ass not name calling?

I don't care if you want to call your approach passive-aggressive or just outright aggressive, but this approach of yours of saying one thing ("I was unclear"..."[your assumption] made an ass out of you...) and then later denying it ("you made an unwarranted assumption"..."has convinced you I was calling you names") is insulting.

I'm sorry, but I just can't proceed from there. It's clear I am unable to communicate with you without excess conflict, so I'm stopping.

If you are capable of saying "I'm sorry" in general, I am sure you are also perfectly able to say "I'm sorry I was unclear, your assumption wasn't unwarranted I just should have mentioned the other situation was not about alcohol" and "I'm sorry for calling you an ass".

Don't tell me you are "unable" to communicate with me after behaving that way. You're perfectly able to communicate without behaving that way. You've CHOSEN to behave inappropriately, and to not own up to your bad behavior once it was pointed out. It's the sort of choice that apparently you do not tolerate in other people. I wish you would just own up to it now so we could move on and discuss the other aspects of this issue.

 

[malraux]

OK, what country are you in?

I do not smoke marijuana and never have. But in my city it's essentially legal to possess and consume in small quantities, and I know of no state or county or city in the U.S. where possession or consumption of a small quantity by a guest in your house would lead to you going to jail, or your house being seized.

In AR, possession of 1 oz or less of weed is a misdemeanor with up to 1 year of jail and a 1000 fine. I honestly have no idea what the law as applied is. That said, since my wife is subject to random drug screens, that would be worse.

edit: oh, and I'm within 1000 feet of a school and a church which adds an enhancement to drug crimes.

 

[Malacoda]

Really?

So thanks for your feedback, but if you want to make it a personal matter, between people, get a job as a therapist and keep that stuff to your patients.

Yeah, really. A lot of what came later likely stems from that one point.

You can take it personally, but believe it or not, I didn't really mean it that way. I will even apologize for the clean room comment. But that doesn't change the fact that most people find your level of risk avoidance odd, and some find it very odd. You can take that personally, but I don't think it is helpful to do so.

I am an atheist that lives in Idaho. I know that vast majority of the people I encounter on a daily basis would find my view point to be odd, and some would find it very odd. They couldn't relate. I wouldn't take that personally.

I am not arguing that no one mistreated you in this thread, or that you shouldn't take that personally. That's different. But it seems fairly clear that most people can't relate to your point of view, and I can't imagine that in of itself, that should be taken personally.