The Magic-Walmart myth

[missstella]

My. There is like 9 pages of discussion over the term pokemount. I'd never even heard the term before. But then I'm not online much.

*sulks back into the corner and eavesdrops on the conversation*

 

[Shadeydm]

I don't play many video games (fewer than 1 a year average), so "point & click" might have some significance that I am missing. But it seems more like one-stop-shopping to me than it seems video-gamey. Perhaps ShadyDM could clarify what he meant?

What I was refering to is people in this post who claimed that they can as players open up the dmg and pick stuff from the list that they want to buy and DMs who said they basically allow it nothing more nothing less. It actually has nothing to do with Amazon where I do actually shop online or video games which I did play for quite a long time.

 

[Odhanan]

But is that detrimental reaction the responsibility of the original poster or the one reacting?

My point is that the responsibility ultimately does not matter. Do you want to be the virtuous one who's right in the conversation, or do you want to actually share a conversation? That's the only meaningful choice you've got in the matter.

If you want to pinpoint responsibilities, whether you are right or wrong in the matter, the discussion itself comes to a stale. If however you want to really exchange opinions, you try to understand where the other person's coming from and you avoid terms that may be misunderstood.

 

[Primitive Screwhead]

... If however you want to really exchange opinions, you try to understand where the other person's coming from and you avoid terms that may be misunderstood.

Or, given that a particular poster may not be aware that the term being used is 'less clear' than intended, perhaps all involved should try to understand where the other person is coming from and avoid assuming that your 'reader filter' view is what the poster intended?

As the saying goes, when you AssUMe....

After all, ten pages of posts dedicated to the sidetracks of the OP's question is a bit excessive...even for EnWorld. The last thread I participated in that went this long was/is the Meta-Troll {which is due for a re-emergence me-thinks }

The worst part is that there may be individual posts buried under the landslide of fuss over politically correct terminology that actually addresses the underlying problem facing the OP and others..... but digging them out would require a new thread that does not carry over the sidetracks of this one.



And, missstella ...welcome to the boards!

 

[Doug McCrae]

Moreover, demanding that the other person refrain from using the terminology that they are comfortable with can easily be taken as an elitist attitude in and of itself.

It's not a demand. It's a recommendation.

 

[Primitive Screwhead]

Doug McCrae, Personally I don't read 'eliminated with prejudice' as a recommendation... in the military world those words have an interesting connotation...

The writer has the responsibility to make sure their intention is communicated effectively to as many people as possible. If they fail at this task, then they are not a very good writer.

If "MagicMarts" doesn't communicate to the reader what you want it to communicate, it is bad communication, and should be eliminated with prejudice as detrimental to the entire point of written communication, which is to convey the writer's ideas in a way the reader can understand.

Of course, the above quote could be dissected for insults if I were to bother, as it directly states that those writers who fail at communicating effectively through the use of bad communication, such as misleading terms such as 'MagicMarts', are not good writers. Therefore I am not a good writer since I have used the term 'MagicMarts' in my posts.

Knee jerk reaction: Who is KM to say who is a good writer? Oi.. he must have an elitist attitude and I should be insulted!

Proper reaction: KM is attempting to discussing how communication can be dampened through the use of imprecise or misleading terms that often carry a weight of reader perception. This is not a world of hours crafting a carefully prepared and reviewed speech...its hammering out a response at midnight when you really should be asleep. Give the other guy a break and step away from your own prejudices for a moment.


YMMV... etc,

 

[Hussar]

I don't find them offensive (not that you asked me). However, some terms do raise a red flag to me that I'm dealing with a partisan person in an edition war thread and I have a tendency to lower my expectation of having a civil conversation when I see them.

"Magic Wallmart" IMO is much more foolish than "MagicMart" (which is a fine term IMO). "Wallmart" is almost totally useless when taken literally. The issue certainly isn't that someone has a store in their campaign world named "wallmart". And there's no real identifying characteristic of wallmart, as opposed to Sears or whatever that indicates why that word was used. The reason it is used IMO is because it's a snide jab - it doesn't really make any sense to me otherwise. IMO MagicMart is perfectly fine - and doesn't introduce a distracting and poorly-applied analogy to a real-world store.

Pokemount is similarly confusing and inflammatory. There's no reason AFAIK that the 3.5E Paladin Mount is any more similar to Pokemon than it is Summon Monster V, mechanics wise. But it's not called "Summon Monster Mount" because, like "Magic Wallmart", the analogy has connotations that goes beyond the simple reading of the rules. As pointed out above, "Pokemon" was chosen intentionally as a jab because of things that have no obvious connection to the 3.5 rule.

So if someone calls you an "ogre", we can probably weasel our way to some sort of explanation, based on an rational examination of body hair and size issues. This sort of thing is especially easy to do on the internet where I can make all kinds of ridiculous statements without have to look anyone on the eye and tell them that I seriously don't get why "ogre" is insulting. Just because I can construct some theoretical crazy person that can take offense to my use of the word "carrot" doesn't mean that it makes sense for me to call people ogres and act like I don't know what's going on or that their reaction is not my problem.

Which is a much better way of saying what I've been trying to say for 9 pages. Thank you. Well done that man/woman.

I can see that insulting a person would be insulting.

I do not see that expressing distaste about a game mechanic/flavour text is insulting to a person. Unless you are the person who created that game mechanic/flavour text.

The distinction between insulting a person and expressing distaste for an idea is a significant problem in your analogy, IMHO.

Ok, let's look at it this way. By adding the "poke" prefix you are setting up a connection between Pokemon and whatever you added to the prefix to. Pokemon is a children's cartoon - marketted as such and the games as well. The implication here is that any element with the "poke" prefix is also a children's thing, and, as such, only appeals to those whose tastes are the same as a child's. Or, to put it another way, anyone who likes the "poke whatever" lacks maturity - his or her tastes are equivalent to a child's.

In the same way, if I add Tolkienesque to something, the implication is that anyone who likes it is more mature since Tolkien is geared for a more mature audience.

By using hot button words like these, you are not simply expressing a distaste for an idea. You are saying, effectively, that anyone who disagrees with you must like the very thing you hold in distaste. There is a world of difference from saying "I think that the 3.5 paladin mount's mechanics are very poorly done and take away from the game" and "The pokemount is bad."

 

[Hussar]

Doug McCrae, Personally I don't read 'eliminated with prejudice' as a recommendation... in the military world those words have an interesting connotation...




Of course, the above quote could be dissected for insults if I were to bother, as it directly states that those writers who fail at communicating effectively through the use of bad communication, such as misleading terms such as 'MagicMarts', are not good writers. Therefore I am not a good writer since I have used the term 'MagicMarts' in my posts.

Knee jerk reaction: Who is KM to say who is a good writer? Oi.. he must have an elitist attitude and I should be insulted!

Proper reaction: KM is attempting to discussing how communication can be dampened through the use of imprecise or misleading terms that often carry a weight of reader perception. This is not a world of hours crafting a carefully prepared and reviewed speech...its hammering out a response at midnight when you really should be asleep. Give the other guy a break and step away from your own prejudices for a moment.


YMMV... etc,

But, there is a difference here. KM is not using vague terms to describe his opinion and then expressing shock when people misinterpret what he says. He's directly saying that good writers write effectively. You can disagree with that, fine, but, there's no misinterpretation here.

When someone uses vague language that is chock full of connotations, it's not surprising when they get misinterpreted. Expecting someone to actually attempt to present their point of view in a clear manner is hardly the same as giving someone a free pass whenever they decide to start chucking out loaded terms.

No one is saying that you shouldn't present an opinion. No one is saying that you shouldn't do so in as strong a manner as you feel warranted. What is being said here is that using sloppy shorthand, hot button terms is a bad idea. Say what you mean without relying on whatever buzz word happens to be floating around and we can have meaningful conversations.

 

[Shadeydm]

Which is a much better way of saying what I've been trying to say for 9 pages. Thank you. Well done that man/woman.



Ok, let's look at it this way. By adding the "poke" prefix you are setting up a connection between Pokemon and whatever you added to the prefix to. Pokemon is a children's cartoon - marketted as such and the games as well. The implication here is that any element with the "poke" prefix is also a children's thing, and, as such, only appeals to those whose tastes are the same as a child's. Or, to put it another way, anyone who likes the "poke whatever" lacks maturity - his or her tastes are equivalent to a child's.

In the same way, if I add Tolkienesque to something, the implication is that anyone who likes it is more mature since Tolkien is geared for a more mature audience.

By using hot button words like these, you are not simply expressing a distaste for an idea. You are saying, effectively, that anyone who disagrees with you must like the very thing you hold in distaste. There is a world of difference from saying "I think that the 3.5 paladin mount's mechanics are very poorly done and take away from the game" and "The pokemount is bad."

No the word Pokemount denotes an individuals dislike for lazy/weak game design and does not in any way refelect on the people playing the game. The rest of this stuff about how its offensive to people who use the 3.5 paladins mount is uneeded embellishment on your part to try in win an argument nothing more. I don't like the Pokemount I think the person who decided to change the rules in this manner did a crappy job yet I still use it when I play 3.5 DnD therefore by your logic I have insulted myself right LOL.

 

[Raven Crowking]

Ok, let's look at it this way. By adding the "poke" prefix you are setting up a connection between Pokemon and whatever you added to the prefix to. Pokemon is a children's cartoon - marketted as such and the games as well.

Agreed

The implication here is that any element with the "poke" prefix is also a children's thing, and, as such, only appeals to those whose tastes are the same as a child's.

No. There is no such implication.

Or, to put it another way, anyone who likes the "poke whatever" lacks maturity - his or her tastes are equivalent to a child's.

Again, there is no such implication.

In the same way, if I add Tolkienesque to something, the implication is that anyone who likes it is more mature since Tolkien is geared for a more mature audience.

And, again, there is no such implication. Tolkienesque is a style. IMC, I use some Tolkienesque elements, some Howardesque elements, and some Burroughsesque elements. Tolkien is a more mature writer than either Howard or Burroughs (IMHO, at least), but that doesn't mean that the elements I use from each of these authors are more or less mature than each other.

By using hot button words like these, you are not simply expressing a distaste for an idea. You are saying, effectively, that anyone who disagrees with you must like the very thing you hold in distaste.

If I say, "I think this sucks" and you say "I do not think this sucks" that implies that you may (and probably do) like the thing that I hold in distaste. But, as I have said for several posts now, there is no connection between you liking something I don't and you sucking. I like liver. Lots of folks hold liver in distaste. That doesn't mean that they hold me in distaste for liking liver.

There is a world of difference from saying "I think that the 3.5 paladin mount's mechanics are very poorly done and take away from the game" and "The pokemount is bad."

What, exactly, is the difference between "I think that the 3.5 paladin mount's mechanics are very poorly done and take away from the game" and "I think the pokemount is bad"? Apart, of course, for the second statement containing some clue as to why I think the 3.5 paladin's mount mechanics are poorly done and take away from the game?

And when are you going to tell me under what circumstances MagicMart would have value as a descriptive term?

RC