Reply to thread

Message

<blockquote data-quote="Manbearcat" data-source="post: 5983785" data-attributes="member: 6696971">That would fall under &quot;some other form of catharsis&quot; - So D.&nbsp; Posting or saying an opinion for the sake of hearing yourself talk or &quot;just to be social&quot; is just catharsis.&nbsp; Given the track record for volatility that it clearly engenders with the opposition at this point, the only &quot;constructive end&quot; that it could serve is A (legitimate effort to compel or persuade).&nbsp; I could willfully denigrate someone or their tastes in a callous manner (for the sole purpose of &quot;just opining&quot;) but I'm pretty sure I should be held accountable for gratuitously inciting an emotional response and causing conversation to devolve (thus bad faith).&nbsp; Lack of awareness or aloofness, specifically in a medium that is designed as an &quot;exchange within the arena of ideas&quot; and specifically not amongst grown adults who are entrenched within the culture of the hobby, is not an exit strategy for the label of &quot;bad faith.&quot;&nbsp; Perhaps the first time one could claim aloofness or lack of awareness as a reasonable exit strategy, assuming the user is truly naive to the implications, the connotation, and the cultural establishment.Regardless of all of that, the question of the post was not; &quot;How should a 4e advocate respond to a detractor using the phrase 4e is just/merely a Tactical Skirmish Game - hence not an RPG?&quot;&nbsp; That is a useful question but easily answered - &quot;Take the high ground&quot; - as you stated.&nbsp; The post is asking a different question in order to take the temperature of the room/gain the perception of the receiver when the question is asked.</blockquote>

[QUOTE="Manbearcat, post: 5983785, member: 6696971"] That would fall under "some other form of catharsis" - So D. Posting or saying an opinion for the sake of hearing yourself talk or "just to be social" is just catharsis. Given the track record for volatility that it clearly engenders with the opposition at this point, the only "constructive end" that it could serve is A (legitimate effort to compel or persuade). I could willfully denigrate someone or their tastes in a callous manner (for the sole purpose of "just opining") but I'm pretty sure I should be held accountable for gratuitously inciting an emotional response and causing conversation to devolve (thus bad faith). Lack of awareness or aloofness, specifically in a medium that is designed as an "exchange within the arena of ideas" and specifically not amongst grown adults who are entrenched within the culture of the hobby, is not an exit strategy for the label of "bad faith." Perhaps the first time one could claim aloofness or lack of awareness as a reasonable exit strategy, assuming the user is truly naive to the implications, the connotation, and the cultural establishment. Regardless of all of that, the question of the post was not; "How should a 4e advocate respond to a detractor using the phrase 4e is just/merely a Tactical Skirmish Game - hence not an RPG?" That is a useful question but easily answered - "Take the high ground" - as you stated. The post is asking a different question in order to take the temperature of the room/gain the perception of the receiver when the question is asked. [/QUOTE]

Verification