EPTOn May 26 2012 08:28 wherebugsgo wrote:
So this is going to be a little game irrelevant, but it's true for me.
this is a game, a game based on logic, information, emotion, and a variety of other things.
Players like Palmar and I (among others) are quite aggressive in our approach, yes. I mention Palmar because he's probably the player I played most similarly to, simply through the number of games I played with him and the effectiveness of his style (though I didn't necessarily try to emulate his play). It's a style I use in debates as well; I'm not afraid to attack moral implications of certain beliefs or worldviews because I have a strong conviction for standing up for what one believes in. So far this game, though, I've refrained from using this style because newer players on the forum don't always respond the same way to it that older players did, and it renders the style somewhat ineffective.
Up till about three pages ago I hadn't done anything in my normal style. I've been attacked on meta grounds for not being aggressive before as town. DFM2 comes to mind. LI comes to mind. Those are my recent town games.
This game I wasn't attacked on meta grounds but I have been attacked for apparently being aggressive when I haven't been (which has made me really amused). It means one or a mixture of three things; I'm somehow aggressive without trying to, or I've cracked and I've started letting things slip, or I'm being misrepresented.
I think it may be a mixture of all 3 but up till about 2-3 pages ago I don't think I had done anything to provoke anyone, until I called VE's argument trash and then the half brain comments.
So this is going to be a little game irrelevant, but it's true for me.
this is a game, a game based on logic, information, emotion, and a variety of other things.
Players like Palmar and I (among others) are quite aggressive in our approach, yes. I mention Palmar because he's probably the player I played most similarly to, simply through the number of games I played with him and the effectiveness of his style (though I didn't necessarily try to emulate his play). It's a style I use in debates as well; I'm not afraid to attack moral implications of certain beliefs or worldviews because I have a strong conviction for standing up for what one believes in. So far this game, though, I've refrained from using this style because newer players on the forum don't always respond the same way to it that older players did, and it renders the style somewhat ineffective.
Up till about three pages ago I hadn't done anything in my normal style. I've been attacked on meta grounds for not being aggressive before as town. DFM2 comes to mind. LI comes to mind. Those are my recent town games.
This game I wasn't attacked on meta grounds but I have been attacked for apparently being aggressive when I haven't been (which has made me really amused). It means one or a mixture of three things; I'm somehow aggressive without trying to, or I've cracked and I've started letting things slip, or I'm being misrepresented.
I think it may be a mixture of all 3 but up till about 2-3 pages ago I don't think I had done anything to provoke anyone, until I called VE's argument trash and then the half brain comments.
But this isn't a schooldebate. In a schooldebate pissing off the one you discuss with may work in your favour, as he get put off his game. This is why politicians can win debates simply by being better at domination techniques, while all they say is complete and utter nonsense. In this game players have to work together, at least to a certain degree. And pissing off and alianating players lead to a crappy environment. This happend to Cephiro in Liar, he got pissed off. He was right about Palmar all the way, but people picked on him, until he got infuriated, and then he was all of a sudden the bad guy. Same with Sheth, he was threatened that he should be banned because he "played against his wincondintions". I don't think they had a great experience in that game, and I don't think town got anything usefull out of them by this kind of attitude. I could mention many others incidents like it, but these are the most recent.
Host can't and shouldn't do anything about it, the players should, because the only faction that gain anything from calling anyone dumb, or a case dumb is scum. Because a townie should explain why it is wrong, and not take the easy way of saying this is dumb, as it implies the person writing it is dumb, and shouldn't be listened to, shouldn't bother posting, shouldn't even play. A townie should encourage everyone to write, and write as open as they can, so the town can get a read on, and possible cooperate with the one writing. If someone think a person is writing something that is wrong or false or made up, beat them with arguements, not with cheap insults.
