Are gamers really that pathetic?

[Nisarg]

No. Gaming's fundamental problem is that people game with folks they don't like, and then they bitch about it as if the hobby owes them a social life.
That is the essence of facile rants about how awful Those Gamers are. The singal to noise ratio in idiots declaring each other to be antisocial nerds is so high that the real hardcases are easy to lose sight of -- and they don't seem to be any worse than in any other marginal pursuit.

Yes, it is a foolish and contradictory behaviour to say that the hobby owes you a social life, while gaming with people you dislike.

But are you implying that people should game only with people who are already in their social circle? Or just that they shouldn't complain?

My own perspective is this: I don't game with anyone I dislike, but the majority of the people I game with are at the same time people that I feel no need to include in the rest of my social life. I don't need them to be in other parts of my life, because I fill the other parts of my life with other social pursuits. Thus, I don't feel the need for gaming to give me a social life.

To me the fundamental problem is not gaming with strangers; it is allowing other gamers to do things to you or others or your group that you would never tolerate in other social situations, out of a misguided idea that you can't "pick on" a fellow gamer or that your gaming group/club/FLGS/convention would fall apart if you held gaming to the very same social standards that you would any other kind of group/club/place of business/convention.

The problem is not complaining that gaming doesn't give you a social life, its depending on gaming to do so in the first place; which in turn makes you unwiling to do anything that might threaten the peace of your "social family" of gamers.

And you know what? It bothers me not one whit that there are Cat Piss Men. They're in every hobby. I don't bother with them. I don't even bother with people who aren't CPMs who I just don't feel like gaming with or talking to.

Thus, the idea of "enforcing standards" strikes me as an ill-witted escapade that I associate with poorly socialized people desperately looking for some form of camoufalge. I don't care about standards that apply to people I will never interact with in any way. I have no need to describe and enforce universal standards.

It's lame.

Well then I really do have to wonder why you are even posting to this thread?

Nisarg

 

[Desdichado]

Thus, the idea of "enforcing standards" strikes me as an ill-witted escapade that I associate with poorly socialized people desperately looking for some form of camoufalge. I don't care about standards that apply to people I will never interact with in any way. I have no need to describe and enforce universal standards.

It's lame.

That strikes me as an ill-concealed, unjustified and unjustifiable ad hominem "argument."

 

[Zimri]

I dunno. I know a fair number of "jock athletic types" that smell bad and abuse their wives. NBA basketball players probably shouldn't run around doing drugs and having questionable sexual contact with female fans, It would probably be a huge boon to the clergy if priests et al stopped abusing young parishoners. So yeah it seems to me like just about every group allows it's members to break laws/social conventions. I personally would much rather hang with "cat piss man" than someone that actually hurts people.

 

[Olgar Shiverstone]

Well as a 25 year old virgin who's never so much as kissed a girl and lives at home with his parents. I know I meet the criteria.

Don't feel bad; you're well below the norm -- when I was out on recruiting duty a few years back, the average age kids in the US left home was 26. No idea what the virginity stats are, though.

I suspect much of the pressure to move out is cultural. I'd be curious as to what people's thoughts are on the influence the expansion in the American west had on the decline of the extended family. With all that available space to "make one's fortune", it would seem to work against the extended family staying together -- might as well have your own ranch next door; there's plenty of space.

I suspect there are as many people like me around roleplaying as there are catpiss men. Perhaps some of the catpiss men started out here and fell into a pit of apathy, no longer caring how they appear to others.

Why's everyone so down on CatPissMan? I game with CatPissMan! He's not that bad; just make sure the fan is blowing in his direction.

 

[eyebeams]

That strikes me as an ill-concealed, unjustified and unjustifiable ad hominem "argument."

The topical content of this thread consists of an ill-conceived ad hominem argument. In what ways are "Gamers who bitch about the behaviour of gamers are losers" and "Gamers who don't fit my criteria are losers," qualitatively different?

People who simply confine their ire to real interpersonal situations instead of broad categorizations would, of course, have no reason to take offense from the former.

These complaints don't speak to a special case in gaming. They speak to something like one of the running gags in Seinfeld.

You ever see the episodes where Jerry is dating and is looking for some rationale to dump his girlfriend? It's like that; looking for the funny voice or the slightly irritating habit or whatnot to justify the fact that you just don't see eye to eye.

The problem, at heart, is that people treat gaming like some sort of collective blind date.

Being in a good gaming group is more like being in a band. You don't tolerate poor performance and personal incompatibility, but you can recognize talent elsewhere.

 

[eyebeams]

Yes, it is a foolish and contradictory behaviour to say that the hobby owes you a social life, while gaming with people you dislike.

But are you implying that people should game only with people who are already in their social circle? Or just that they shouldn't complain?

Nope. You make connections through the hobby based on whether or not you're going to get along with a person. You actually talk to this person and meet them like a normal person, instead of as a response to a want-ad.

My own perspective is this: I don't game with anyone I dislike, but the majority of the people I game with are at the same time people that I feel no need to include in the rest of my social life. I don't need them to be in other parts of my life, because I fill the other parts of my life with other social pursuits. Thus, I don't feel the need for gaming to give me a social life.

I prefer to game with well-rounded people instead.

To me the fundamental problem is not gaming with strangers; it is allowing other gamers to do things to you or others or your group that you would never tolerate in other social situations, out of a misguided idea that you can't "pick on" a fellow gamer or that your gaming group/club/FLGS/convention would fall apart if you held gaming to the very same social standards that you would any other kind of group/club/place of business/convention.

We do not disagree, except that the mechanism has nothing to do with camaraderie in the scene. There is virtually no sense of fellowship in the scene.

The problem is not complaining that gaming doesn't give you a social life, its depending on gaming to do so in the first place; which in turn makes you unwiling to do anything that might threaten the peace of your "social family" of gamers.

The mistake here is letting someone into that group in the first place using the lame blind date method.

Well then I really do have to wonder why you are even posting to this thread?

Oh, this "Nebulous Group of Other Gamers Sucks, Part XXII" theme is a pet peeve of mine, because it's the effect of a dysfunctional standard that is far more destructive to the health of the hobby than gamers who are actually wacky and smelly.

 

[Lichtenhart]

Joshua Dyal and ledded, since you disagree so much with Dr.Strangemonkey, could you please add your own views on the matter? I'm still curious.

ledded, I looked for the statistics you talked about: according to Unesco 98% of italians and 97% of americans reach the end of secondary school. I could find no direct confrontation about domestic violence rates, only general criminality rates that I guess won't help our discussion.

Nisarg, eyebeams, we managed to keep the thread civil so far, let's all take a deep breath.

 

[Desdichado]

I suspect much of the pressure to move out is cultural. I'd be curious as to what people's thoughts are on the influence the expansion in the American west had on the decline of the extended family. With all that available space to "make one's fortune", it would seem to work against the extended family staying together -- might as well have your own ranch next door; there's plenty of space.

I suspect it's earlier than that; even before they went west, most families that immigrated to America in the first place were anxious to get away and start something new; "make their fortune" so to speak.

Frankly, I'm more interested in the more recent relative devaluation of the nuclear family, personally.

 

[Desdichado]

The topical content of this thread consists of an ill-conceived ad hominem argument. In what ways are "Gamers who bitch about the behaviour of gamers are losers" and "Gamers who don't fit my criteria are losers," qualitatively different? .

Y'know, I don't completely see eye to eye with Nisarg and his point of view, but at least I don't so blatandly mischaracterize what he's actually saying.

And I'll refer you back to my earlier post (about three or four pages ago) on the dubious "virtues" of pathological tolerance.

 

[Tinker Gnome]

As much as I love the people I game with, I cant stand them for more than a few seconds. Well, most of them. Anyways, I do not think gaming owes me a social life, hell I do not want a social life. I could care less if I am ignored. As of current I am a Junior in high school, and I have never once been picked on. I am mostly ignored, which suits me fine.

I do shower everyday, I cant remember the last day I did not shower.