Cruel Doubt - D&D = drug use

[DanMcS]

On a less-flame-war-y note, my mind tries to parse the title of this thread as an equation every time I see it, and confuses me. Let's see, if you don't play D&D while watching this movie on the Lifetime channel, you're on drugs?

A more equationistically-accurate title might be:
Cruel Doubt: D&D = drug use
which could parse along the lines of "If Cruel Doubt is true, D&D equals drug use".

Please, think of the mathematicians and us poor engineers when naming your threads!

 

[Mercule]

No, the trick is NOT to breathe. That stuff ends your fun in a very pure way.

Seeing as how I can barely recognize the referrence and I wrote it, I was trying to spoof 2001.

 

[Tom Cashel]

Back in the college days, we'd pull out the Blue Dragon (made by Graffix, of course) after the game session had ended.

During the session? No way. Would have stopped everything cold. After? Hells yes...we'd spend hours chatting and laughing about what we'd just done.

Good times.

 

[Kahuna Burger]

Hi, KB.

I didn't start the thread. Lifetime arguably started it, by creating a hostile vibe in their airing of a show that makes slanderous and factually inaccurate accusations about D&D.

I apologize for creating a hostile vibe with my parodical post regarding Lifetime, but if you were hoping for a link to an actual review of the movie, then you obviously haven't visited this forum very often. Saying "If you don't like something, don't say anything about it" works well at cocktail parties, but in a forum devoted to discussion and with a fairly high tolerance for borderline off-topic posts, it's somewhat disingenuous.

the thing is, the thread isn't about lifetime, its about one single movie aired on lifetime (which the thread didn't even give enough info about to tell if it was a lifetime produced film). And nothing thats said even implied that it had any of the "lifetime features" you refered to. So my problem wasn't bashing the film, or even making an offhand comment against the station for making/airing it, but that somehow a huge amount of the threads content became about completely unrelated issues on the same channel that happened to show the film...

I have never seen a thread on this board about a single "problem product" degenerate so quickly into a flamefest about the originating media source with completely off topic complaints. The closest thing was the link to the landover baptist site making a off the cuff comment about what "those people" believed... which was closed by the time I saw it... This was not a par for the course discussion, or a par for the course mod response.

oh and

my mind tries to parse the title of this thread as an equation every time I see it, and confuses me. Let's see, if you don't play D&D while watching this movie on the Lifetime channel, you're on drugs?

yeah, same problem every single time... took me forever to convince myself that wasn't a minus sign, though I thought it meant "If there was no D&D in this film it would just be a standard film about drugs..."

Kahuna burger

 

[Darrin Drader]

And nothing thats said even implied that it had any of the "lifetime features" you refered to. So my problem wasn't bashing the film, or even making an offhand comment against the station for making/airing it, but that somehow a huge amount of the threads content became about completely unrelated issues on the same channel that happened to show the film...

As far as I'm concerned, a station is very much responsible for the programming it decides to show, let alone the movies that it makes on its own budget. If the executives think that its OK to prtray gamers and gaming as this, then they are clearly misguided in many ways, which does in fact pull the rest of their programming into question.

Personally, I think the channel is a total piece of crap. The day I defile my TV by allowing it to play in my home is the day I give away my entire gaming collection - All of it!

 

[takyris]

the thing is, the thread isn't about lifetime, its about one single movie aired on lifetime (which the thread didn't even give enough info about to tell if it was a lifetime produced film). And nothing thats said even implied that it had any of the "lifetime features" you refered to. So my problem wasn't bashing the film, or even making an offhand comment against the station for making/airing it, but that somehow a huge amount of the threads content became about completely unrelated issues on the same channel that happened to show the film...

I agree that it happened. I suppose my issue was with being quoted as the first or worst offender. Again, allow me to apologize for giving offense. I didn't intend for my post to be sexist or insulting. Heck, I thought that putting the half-orc barbarian and friends in there was dragging it a bit back towards the topic -- which was D&D and its portrayal in a given "D&D is bad" movie. I was skewing it to be "What if Lifetime actually produced an original D&D movie?" for humorous purposes. Or not.

I have never seen a thread on this board about a single "problem product" degenerate so quickly into a flamefest about the originating media source with completely off topic complaints.

The thing is, I didn't see my post as a flame. I consider a flamewar to involve an argument, and until you posted, I didn't see much in the way of argument. I differentiate between a bunch of people saying "this is lame" and a bunch of people getting into an argument about something. I agree with you that many of the comments about Lifetime are somewhat unfair. I was throwing up a parody/satire, and it was somewhat off-topic, but again, I've seen threads drift more, and as long as it's not drifting into argument, I don't usually mind.

I apologize for giving offense.

 

[Kahuna Burger]

I agree that it happened. I suppose my issue was with being quoted as the first or worst offender.

Ah, I didn't mean to give that impression, yours was merely the longest, and as of the time I started the response, most recent.

"flame" doesn't have much of a set meaning, but I guess I pocket define it as a disproportionally venemous response to something. Though flame wars are common, I think you can have unilateral flames.

kahuna burger

 

[Kahuna Burger]

I agree that it happened. I suppose my issue was with being quoted as the first or worst offender.

Ah, I didn't mean to give that impression, yours was merely the longest, and as of the time I started the response, most recent.

"flame" doesn't have much of a set meaning, but I guess I pocket define it as a disproportionally venemous response to something. Though flame wars are common, I think you can have unilateral flames.

kahuna burger

 

[Orius]

Yes, but you know what? A movie that happens to have drug-using gamers does not constitute an implication that people need to drugs to game - unless you're the kind of sod who believes one data point constitutes a trend.

Don't blame Lifetime for the implication. Blame the lack of critical thought in the populace that leads to the idea that a dramatic presentation of singluar events should be taken as a representation of all other events with token similarities.

Lifetime should be blamed. I seriously doubt they didn't intend the implication to be made in the first place. That's the kind of crap they program in the first place, horrible movies that grossly overgeneralize social issues, and infomercials to fill in the remaining time. That and I just utterly hate the network.

 

[Orius]

The generally mocking attitude towards Lifetime, has nothing to do with it being "Women's programing". It's that Lifetime's programing seems to ONLY show men as evil, violent, selfish, sex obsessed monsters and believe it or not most men don't appreciate being depicted only as monsters.

Which is exactly my slant. I'm not opposed to women's programming, I simply don't care. I'm not a huge television watcher to begin with. But Lifetime does seem to like to take the radical "all men are potential rapists" slant, which I find offensive. So naturally, when they air a movie that is probably meant to imply my favorite hobby is a gateway drug, I'll take the opportunity to bash them.

Besides, D&D isn't a gateway drug, it's a gateway RPG.