Reply to thread

Message

<blockquote data-quote="Umbran" data-source="post: 6728927" data-attributes="member: 177">You know that it is literally impossible to rewrite an open culture in a *closed* subset community, right?&nbsp; Within a closed group, you can at best rewrite the culture of the closed group.&nbsp; This is obvious in how the Forge *utterly failed* to rewrite all game culture.&nbsp; The world today plods along rather like it did before the Forge, just with a few extra game designs out there.&nbsp; And, as already noted, I don't see how your current approach is really any different than theirs.&nbsp; You don't seem to allow any room for dissent either.&nbsp; Your writing is very, &quot;my way is the only Truth,&quot; much like Edwards was before he realized his own model was not his favorite any more, which kind of put the lie to how his theory was The One.With respect, you are not the accepted arbiter of history.&nbsp; Many people have pointed out how your view of history is inaccurate.&nbsp; Moreover, you have failed to establish that, even if your history was accurate, that this history forms the definitions we need to use forevermore.&nbsp; It is just as (and likely more) reasonable to say that in the early history of RPGs, the authors actually knew very little about the subject, as it was new, and we would be best served to apply the greater understanding time has granted us to inform our designs and play going forward.This is a largely anonymous community - how do you know you're not referring to someone here?Let us be very clear on this - calling people liars is generally a Bad Move.&nbsp; You don't seem to allow for the difference between &quot;being duplicitous&quot; and &quot;being wrong&quot; or the even less problematic, &quot;have a different opinion/preference in a space with no objective fact&quot;.&nbsp; You speak as if anyone who disagrees with you actually knows you are correct, and is lying - you need to do a lot of work to establish that guilt before throwing around such accusations.</blockquote>

[QUOTE="Umbran, post: 6728927, member: 177"] You know that it is literally impossible to rewrite an open culture in a *closed* subset community, right? Within a closed group, you can at best rewrite the culture of the closed group. This is obvious in how the Forge *utterly failed* to rewrite all game culture. The world today plods along rather like it did before the Forge, just with a few extra game designs out there. And, as already noted, I don't see how your current approach is really any different than theirs. You don't seem to allow any room for dissent either. Your writing is very, "my way is the only Truth," much like Edwards was before he realized his own model was not his favorite any more, which kind of put the lie to how his theory was The One. With respect, you are not the accepted arbiter of history. Many people have pointed out how your view of history is inaccurate. Moreover, you have failed to establish that, even if your history was accurate, that this history forms the definitions we need to use forevermore. It is just as (and likely more) reasonable to say that in the early history of RPGs, the authors actually knew very little about the subject, as it was new, and we would be best served to apply the greater understanding time has granted us to inform our designs and play going forward. This is a largely anonymous community - how do you know you're not referring to someone here? Let us be very clear on this - calling people liars is generally a Bad Move. You don't seem to allow for the difference between "being duplicitous" and "being wrong" or the even less problematic, "have a different opinion/preference in a space with no objective fact". You speak as if anyone who disagrees with you actually knows you are correct, and is lying - you need to do a lot of work to establish that guilt before throwing around such accusations. [/QUOTE]

Verification