The "I Didn't Comment in Another Thread" Thread

Status
Not open for further replies.
Confused Kind GIF by ABC Network

I mean, I do my best not to kink shame!

Which makes me think ... if you're*, you know, really into getting shamed .... sucks to be you.

I suppose you could always just eat pineapple pizza in public?

*The universal you, not you, you.
 

log in or register to remove this ad

Apropos of nothing on EN except a review thread, genealogy searching just turned up that my GGGGG grandmother was a Sandman (Anna Catharina Sandman from Lohne, Vechta, Germany). I also didn't know that the name "Sandman" in regards to sleep was from German folklore.
 

I mean, I do my best not to kink shame!

Which makes me think ... if you're*, you know, really into getting shamed .... sucks to be you.

I suppose you could always just eat pineapple pizza in public?

*The universal you, not you, you.
Well ... That kinda depends on whether your kink is being shamed, or being kinkshamed, doesn't it?
 




"I don't agree that these people with different personalities, skills, language, and appearance actually have free will and are people, and I want to use them as always-killable mooks in my games. I don't think they're people, so they should be always killable. Also, it's just not the same when they get to choose to be evil (like bandits, cultists, or politicians) or are robots/undead/demons; them being alive people that are always evil makes it so much more satisfying to kill them."

How . . . how does someone not see the problem with that? Even if they're not intending to be malicious, seriously, how do they not see how uncomfortable that is? Even if it's justifiable in a fantasy setting . . . that doesn't mean it's a good solution, especially when there are other, just as good solutions to the Mook Problem™.
 

"I don't agree that these people with different personalities, skills, language, and appearance actually have free will and are people, and I want to use them as always-killable mooks in my games. I don't think they're people, so they should be always killable. Also, it's just not the same when they get to choose to be evil (like bandits, cultists, or politicians) or are robots/undead/demons; them being alive people that are always evil makes it so much more satisfying to kill them."

How . . . how does someone not see the problem with that? Even if they're not intending to be malicious, seriously, how do they not see how uncomfortable that is? Even if it's justifiable in a fantasy setting . . . that doesn't mean it's a good solution, especially when there are other, just as good solutions to the Mook Problem™.
The easy solution, of course, is to say these people are evil, or corrupted, or otherwise killable without moral penalty or qualm, but those people are not. It's ... kinda distressing, really, how many people prefer not to take the easy solution.
 

So I, took a lot of time off around the Labor day holiday. And I came back, and I see all the arguing, and the people booted over the last week, and I realize I have something to say.

Yeah, this needs to be in spoilers. Because I need to get this off my chest.

Between the threads getting locked, and the contentious topics, I need to put in my two cents ....

For real, I need to lay into this. It's time to let all y'all know what I really think.

rickroll-roll.gif
 


Status
Not open for further replies.
Remove ads

Top