Grognard good...grognard bad

[Gort]

Yes, 'cause that's exactly what I meant.



. . . or maaaaaaaaybe that's not what I was talking about at all?



(Hint: "Long live the dead! Long live the war! Long live military gamers!")

Then I guess my point went over your head somewhere.

 

[Piratecat]

Gort, please see the above warning.

 

[Umbran]

To me, the whole concept of calling oneself, (self-identifying), a [gaming] grognard sets up an antagonistic stance.

In my personal experience, someone self-identifying as a grognard is basically self-depricating as an "old coot". Yeah, he may prefer Abbot and Costello to your newfangled Denis Leary, and he's gonna complain and grumble about the kids on his lawn, but he's mostly harmless - he's grouchy, is all. All in all, it's someone identifying as having been around for a long while.

The grognard is an old warrior. I think you're stressing the warrior, when you should be stressing the old.

In the end, what happens when someone self-identifies as... pretty much anything... depends more on you than on them. Whether or not he intends it to be antagonistic means nothing if you don't take it as antagonistic. It takes two to tango, remember?

He's a veteran. Thank him for his service, listen to his wisdom (if any), and move on.

 

[Bullgrit]

In the end, what happens when someone self-identifies as... pretty much anything... depends more on you than on them. Whether or not he intends it to be antagonistic means nothing if you don't take it as antagonistic. It takes two to tango, remember?

This . . . makes no sense. If I identify as a good ol' boy, "what happens" depends more on you, than on me?

I'm a long-time D&D gamer. I'm among the oldest and longest playing people on this forum. But I specifically do not consider myself a "grognard" because of the confrontational tone that name gives -- in my opinion, based on what I've read others say they are claiming with that term.

All in all, it's someone identifying as having been around for a long while.

Simply saying, "I've been around for a long while," is not the same as including:

Yeah, he may prefer Abbot and Costello to your newfangled Denis Leary, and he's gonna complain and grumble about the kids on his lawn, but he's mostly harmless - he's grouchy, is all.

Regardless of being "mostly harmless," do you enjoy hanging around with someone who is "grouchy"?

So you are basically in agreement with me about the feel of the term, "grognard" -- it's more than just "long-time player".

Bullgrit

 

[billd91]

This . . . makes no sense. If I identify as a good ol' boy, "what happens" depends more on you, than on me?

I think you've been illustrating Umbran's point all along. While I've been pointing out the wargaming use of the term, which Umbran correctly identifies as being self-depricating old cootishness, you've been pretty consistently seeing it in a negative light. Your perception of what a grognard is has been overriding anything else anyone else has said around here about its positive or good-natured uses. From my point of observation, that's exactly what's been happening.

You probably don't want to know what "good ol' boy" connotes to me and the people I interact with in Wisconsin. I'm going to bet it's not nearly as positive as your self-labeling connotations.

 

[Bullgrit]

correctly identifies as being self-depricating old cootishness, you've been pretty consistently seeing it in a negative light.

Dictionary.com:
coot -- a foolish or crotchety person, esp. one who is old.

You both are equating "grognard" with "coot", and you're saying this is a good thing?

I'm agreeing, that yes, from what I've read, especially here, "grognard" is similar to "coot," but I don't see how that is a positive definition.

Bullgrit

 

[Umbran]

This . . . makes no sense. If I identify as a good ol' boy, "what happens" depends more on you, than on me?

Yep. At least, in terms of what goes on in internet forums.

You've made a self-identification. The reason to do that is to set some expectations. But, the expectations are in my head, not yours. What effect that identification has on our conversation going forward depends on what I think of good old boys, not on what you think of them, and on how I want to react to you with the new information, now on how you want me to react.

Basically, your self-identification is a chance for me to engage my prejudices. So, what happens next is up to my prejudices.

My prejudices against grognards (and good old boys) are mild to non-existent. Your identification doesn't fill me with a whole bunch of expectations of problems. I'm going to wait for you to blatantly act like aggressive jerk, rather than assume you are one, and read those things into your writing.

If I'm not looking for confrontation, I am notably less likely to find one.

That's something folks on the various sides of "style wars" often fail to recognize - you generally find whatever you're looking for. If you are looking for a fight, you'll find a fight. If you're looking for someone with a different set of preferences and tastes to learn from, you'll probably find that.

So you are basically in agreement with me about the feel of the term, "grognard" -- it's more than just "long-time player".

I think I've been pretty clear - what it means is in the ear of the listener. It is most certainly not universally defined as one thing. To some it is more, to some it is less. Some have never heard the term, and for them it is meaningless jargon.

 

[Umbran]

You both are equating "grognard" with "coot", and you're saying this is a good thing?

Yep. I've done some of my best learning at the knees of coots.

Did you see the Pixar film, "Up". The main character, Carl Fredrickson, is definitely an archetypal coot, and he was a good person.

 

[Bullgrit]

You've made a self-identification. The reason to do that is to set some expectations.

Is this not exactly what I’ve said about self-identifying as a “grognard”?

Our whole discussion here is not:

Me: The term means ABC.

“You”: No, the term means XYZ.


Our discussion seems to be:

Me: The term means ABC.

“You”: No, the term means ABC.


How do I end up getting into arguments with people by saying things they apparently agree with?

Yep. I've done some of my best learning at the knees of coots.

I have learned (and can still learn) a lot from older and more experienced persons, but I find I have little to learn from “foolish and crotchety” persons.

Bullgrit

 

[renau1g]

crotchety doesn't mean that they have little to teach or pass on. Many, many highly educated people I know are crotchety, but that doesn't mean if I don't listen to them I'm not missing out on a huge learning opportunity.

crotchety [ˈkrɒtʃɪtɪ]
adj
1. Informal cross; irritable; contrary
2. full of crotchets (2 a : a highly individual and usually eccentric opinion or preference)
crotchetiness n