tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-3871409676946408069.post6626745494465865333..comments2023-10-14T03:58:59.333-06:00Comments on The Tao of D&D: OnetruewayismAlexis Smolenskhttp://www.blogger.com/profile/10539170107563075967noreply@blogger.comBlogger9125tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-3871409676946408069.post-80165196864843733272008-12-11T15:32:00.000-07:002008-12-11T15:32:00.000-07:00BDSM and D&D - here I thought I was the only o...BDSM and D&D - here I thought I was the only one who thought that more kinky people should also be gaming. Now I know why!<BR/><BR/>(If you have a profile on FL, I have one under this same name.)Michael S/Chgowizhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/02052820400496340137noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-3871409676946408069.post-36060224646106810932008-10-08T17:35:00.000-06:002008-10-08T17:35:00.000-06:00Experencing speach/reading is subjective, but if y...Experencing speach/reading is subjective, but if your in a life or death situation, your going to really, really bloody try to understand the other guy. Because to have your own little interpretation might end up making you cold meat on the floor. Sorry to put it in gruesome terms, but that's where the meaning of words come from - dealing with life and death situations.<BR/><BR/>However in our cosy little first world, were so far away from that that the words are retarding. Politicians and lawyers use words like knives, which ironically provides the sort of threat words were meant to deal with in the first place (life and death situations).<BR/><BR/>One of R Scott Bakkers books mentions a symantic apocolypse. I wonder if it's plausible?Anonymousnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-3871409676946408069.post-49172388578140606462008-10-06T17:03:00.000-06:002008-10-06T17:03:00.000-06:00Pud-pounding is all we do, if my simplistic interp...Pud-pounding is all we do, if my simplistic interpretation of Post-Structuralism is anywhere near correct. And according to Post-Structuralism, because it's my interpretation, then it must be.<BR/><BR/>I thought the Ivory Tower of academia was for people who weren't interested in getting a real job. From personal experience, you have to be pretty damned good at reading instructions to stay there.Original_Carlhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/03521777462227997158noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-3871409676946408069.post-16450845176208967982008-10-06T16:29:00.000-06:002008-10-06T16:29:00.000-06:00Jeez. Post-structuralism. Are we pounding our pu...Jeez. Post-structuralism. Are we pounding our pud now or what?<BR/><BR/>Sorry, moved out of that particular ivory tower long ago. It's a place for people who can't read instructions.Alexis Smolenskhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/10539170107563075967noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-3871409676946408069.post-1709807561545329682008-10-06T16:01:00.000-06:002008-10-06T16:01:00.000-06:00BrokenMArrow is reminding me of a brief forray I t...BrokenMArrow is reminding me of a brief forray I took into the examination of Post-Structuralism. In that school of thought, there are words, which have a universal meaning, and the speaker of the words which determines their intended meaning and the hearer of the words which determines their actual (subjective) meaning.<BR/><BR/>I decided I'm still an Existentialist, but I'm open to the idea that the meaning of language and by extension everything is a subjective experience, regardless of the intention of the person using language to convey a particular meaning, or the accepted definition of the words used by the speaker.<BR/><BR/>Maybe I shouldn't huff so much glue.Original_Carlhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/03521777462227997158noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-3871409676946408069.post-58843593608162228292008-10-06T00:59:00.000-06:002008-10-06T00:59:00.000-06:00It doesn't really matter if your afraid or not. If...It doesn't really matter if your afraid or not. <BR/><BR/>If you physically stand in proximity to someone, with a quick whip of a blade they could do you harm whether you chose to be afraid or not. You have to decide if your going to stand near them, being brave or afraid or calm wont change what they can physically do. Same goes for trust - if you really talk with someone, you grant them some trust - and they can use trusts 'proximity' to do damage. Being a braveheart wont matter. Not being afraid of being taken over doesn't grant you some magic protection from it.<BR/><BR/>That or you don't extend trust and aren't talking with them, your just spouting the safe lines your used to. But in that case, yeah, there is no soft point where you can be manipulated.<BR/><BR/>That's the arena as I understand it. Not saying that to ask you, just displaying this info in case it's of use latter.<BR/><BR/>"Your comment contains no actual substance--did you notice that? Just arguments about protocol."<BR/>Do you have to tell me what my words mean?<BR/><BR/>It was relevant. Whether you want to get within the range of trust, whatever. Just don't bother with having a bet both ways, where you don't really have any trust, but you still try and have a conversation. It doesn't work, I think.Anonymousnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-3871409676946408069.post-52599573700178665022008-10-05T07:46:00.000-06:002008-10-05T07:46:00.000-06:00brokenmarrow,MY place, YOUR place, the place...the...brokenmarrow,<BR/><BR/>MY place, YOUR place, the place...these are petty distinctions, fought over by nitpicky people who have a lot of "fear." Fear of being ignored, fear of being pushed out, fear of inadequacy.<BR/><BR/>I never think about who "owns" a conversation, or whether someone is conversing "in good faith" because I'm not really afraid of being "taken over." Nor do I feel concerned when others accuse me of doing or not doing these things. Again, they are <I>petty</I> complaints. Your comment contains no actual substance--did you notice that? Just arguments about protocol. When and how people should act. Risk and fear and "spaces." None of those things actually matter.<BR/><BR/>There is no law in the arena, my friend. Toughen up or die.Alexis Smolenskhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/10539170107563075967noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-3871409676946408069.post-67010075521437336922008-10-05T03:11:00.000-06:002008-10-05T03:11:00.000-06:00I think with genuine conversation, you create a pl...I think with genuine conversation, you create a place which is neither their place, nor your place. That way, no one can be told to get the fuck out out of thier place. You can stop talking/creating that place, but you can't tell someone to get out of it.<BR/><BR/>But some people begin conversations as if they own conversation and can tell you to get out. Particularly on the internet, because a swift smack in the face isn't such a risk when behaving that way.<BR/><BR/>The dreadful thing is that if you conversed in good faith, you created a space you didn't own - when they grab it, they do indeed take it over. It's really disappointing, because you'll end up going along with them for fear that they are acting okay and if you do anything, your the one taking over. It's a curious pothole in communication, I think.Anonymousnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-3871409676946408069.post-59155148964795360092008-10-02T16:18:00.000-06:002008-10-02T16:18:00.000-06:00"Making a distinct, definitive statement about how..."Making a distinct, definitive statement about how a thing is done is not, as it is so often accused of being, a detraction on the way others are doing a thing."<BR/><BR/>Too true. I wish that more people understood that.<BR/><BR/>Great post.KenHRhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/11613789646908929989noreply@blogger.com