Guapo wrote:I wonder if that's why Russ made a bet he had no intention of paying up on.

Except of course I do fully intend on paying. Unfortunately, at the time I made the bet I wasn't expecting to be unemployed for going on 15 months now. So excuse me if things like putting food on the table and clothes on my kids is more important then paying you. Which is also why I haven't offered any more bet on the race. You @#$! @#$! prick.

What about when I gave you an out after Daniels left?

No, because your stupid prideful arrogance got in the way. I offered you the lower amount. YOU took the higher amount. I offered you an out after Daniels left the race. YOU said no. So, excuse me...

Heck, I would have taken a simple acknowledgment that I was right and you were wrong in lieu. But you decided to go the other way, and act more hostile to my rightness. So, over the last 6 months (since Huntsman dropped out) I waited. I played nicely. But since it seems we're airing grudges, now, in this thread, I figured it was my turn.

Hey, I thought your libertarianism was bananas before I encountered Vince in RG and before I saw the way you behaved with GMs and as a GM. I had hoped that despite your clear wrongness on politics and society you'd both be fun guys to play a game with, but was sorely disappointed.

We've already had plenty of intellectual debates about libertarianism, perhaps before you and your brand of guerilla commenting arrived they had more depth. I'll admit to being tempted by anarcho-syndicalism and other left-libertarial creeds, but they have significant flaws based on a fundamental misunderstanding of human nature and underlying assumptions that don't match reality. At least they tend to be less sociopathic than anarcho-capitalist varieties.

The way I behaved with GMs and as a GM? Give me an example please. As far as I know you've only GM'd 1 game of mine, and I don't recall GMing any games for you. I'd like to know specifics please.

Yes, it's true that I offend people. Most of the time I don't know it. But I do find it hilarious that a group of men are so goddamn sensitive.

So please explain to me what I've done to offend you.

Guapo wrote:Steve, oh, Steve. Still bitter because I quit RG? Please. You benefited from it, and that was specifically part of the reason I left. The main reason, however, was because of the disgraceful management and subjective, biased rulings. As you can see from the recidivism rate, I wasn't alone.

Just because Steve benefitted from it doesn't make it right. I benefitted from Vince's non-play in round 2 and that didn't make me happy about it, because I know it could have happened to anyone.

I didn't feel that the way RG was run was that bad at all. I had some sympathy for your point in one case, but I didn't feel it was all that egregious a decision.

The main reason for people not returning was the way that the site was unpredictable for a few months before it was relaunched. There'd also been a general decline in numbers for the previous team-based tournament over the years.

Wow, this thread is turning into a Festivus ceremony. When do we move on to the Feats of Strength?

Guapo wrote:So please explain to me what I've done to offend you.

Did you not go AWOL as a GM? After causing an almighty ruckus about someone GMing another game you were in?

Problem is, it doesn't have to affect me directly for me to be offended. If someone is behaving like a jerk, whether I benefit, lose out or it's neutral, they are still being a jerk.

Maybe this is why you seem to embody the right wing libertarian ethos to me. If something doesn't affect you directly, you don't see why you should care about it.

I'll admit to being tempted by anarcho-syndicalism and other left-libertarial creeds, but they have significant flaws based on a fundamental misunderstanding of human nature and underlying assumptions that don't match reality. At least they tend to be less sociopathic than anarcho-capitalist varieties.

Wow, and that isn't a drive-by? It's statists who have a fundamental misunderstanding of human nature. As far as being sociopathic...which anarchists do you see robbing, caging, and imprisoning people? I think that the word "law" shuts down the empathy portion of the brains of statists.

We can't move on to the Feats of Strength until we're done the Airing of Grievances.

So, you don't think that the decision was egregious enough for me to quit, but quitting is egregious enough to hold grudges for 2 years?

I don't agree with that reasoning, and it was my time to invest or not invest--not yours. I didn't sign a contract, and I didn't abandon. I did what I could to help the situation that I was no longer interested in being in.

And I disagree on your assessment as to why the site is faltering. It has nothing to do with my <2500 posts over 6 years. Well, maybe Golbe quit because of me, but please.

Ha! Speaking of which. When I chose him for a PG team, he abandoned his position and quit without a word to me or anyone else. That was the first time I came across the silliness of some of you people.

danivon wrote:

Guapo wrote:So please explain to me what I've done to offend you.

Did you not go AWOL as a GM? After causing an almighty ruckus about someone GMing another game you were in?

What game are you talking about? The only time I've abandoned a GM position was during RG. I could be wrong, but I don't think I am.

danivon wrote:Maybe this is why you seem to embody the right wing libertarian ethos to me. If something doesn't affect you directly, you don't see why you should care about it.

Aha! We're getting somewhere. I think this is key. I think your disdain for those who believe that they can do it on their own, without daddy government, shines through. It amplifies your bias and reaction to perceptions.

If something doesn't affect you directly, you don't see why you should care about it.

After all these years, you still have no idea what libertarians think. I used to be a statist, so I at least know where you are coming from. However, I outgrew the childish idea that giving a group of people a monopoly on violence will reduce violence.

I oppose the killing on people I will never see
I oppose the robbing of people I will never meet
I oppose the caging of people I will never meet.

For statists...it's "Bombs Away" if you live between the wrong lines on a map and "Throw away the key" if you live in a way different from what a group of politicians believe.

theodorelogan wrote:Wow, and that isn't a drive-by?

Hey, this thread waas set up to tweak the noses of Romney supporters, and has gone all over the place, but to be honest I didn't want to open up yet another fractal discussion...

It's statists who have a fundamental misunderstanding of human nature.

Yeah, right. Which is why there are all these successful libertarian communities showing us 'statists' how it can be done...

Guapo wrote:I don't agree with that reasoning, and it was my time to invest or not invest--not yours. I didn't sign a contract, and I didn't abandon. I did what I could to help the situation that I was no longer interested in being in.

Case in point. It also affected other people. You only appear to care about the effect on you, not on others. You think I shouldn't care because I wasn't directly affected. You don't recognise social contracts, community mores, stuff like that. You may not have signed a piece of paper, but you did give assent to abide by the rules of the game and the competition, but hey, who cares as long as you have freedom to do whatever you like. you. you. you. you. you.

And I disagree on your assessment as to why the site is faltering. It has nothing to do with my <2500 posts over 6 years. Well, maybe Golbe quit because of me, but please.

I don't think it was just you who helped Min X to make teh decision to go. But that was not my assessment. I don't blame you, half as much as I think that had Chad been able to maintain the old site, or get the new one fully operational quickly, a lot more people from the old days would still be around. I can understand why Chad couldn't do that, I don't blame him personally, but that's where we are

What game are you talking about? The only time I've abandoned a GM position was during RG. I could be wrong, but I don't think I am.

That's the one. It was less than 2 years ago, by the way.

Aha! We're getting somewhere. I think this is key. I think your disdain for those who believe that they can do it on their own, without daddy government, shines through. It amplifies your bias and reaction to perceptions.

Oh, grow up yourself. It's not just 'government' or 'individuals' you know. There are all kinds of groups in a society, with their own ways and rules (written, unwritten). What individuals do affects others. I don't object to you being a jerk during the RG games because I want the firm hand of the Nanny State to care for me. It's because I like playing Dip, I quite like the tourney, and I don't want jerks messing it up with ego trips. Just because it didn't affect my game when you did it (although Vince's gunboating did), doesn't mean I don't disapprove on the basis that such stuff is going to annoy others.

It's called 'empathy'.

theodorelogan wrote:I oppose the killing on people I will never see
I oppose the robbing of people I will never meet
I oppose the caging of people I will never meet.

Wow, you are so noble compare to us. Shame you can't even be bothered to email people in a Play By E-mail game, huh? Then we might not get the idea you were some kind of superior jerk.

No, it's called being a busybody. Look, Owen. You'll be a lot happier in life if you require less of other people. I mean, seriously. Quitting a game is super-egregious? Where are your priorities?

I didn't disrupt anything. I'm not the only one who quit. So why is everything focused on me? Was I just supposed to ignore what I saw as a complete disregard for the actual rules? If you remember correctly, I wanted the rules to be followed as they had been written.

The same logic could be applied to the RG dictators. Had they had any respect for the rules THEY set up, then there wouldn't have been a problem.

I blame Vince. It's all his fault. He's the one whose orders shouldn't have been counted. :P

I also noticed that it was the dictators of the tournament who occupy the highest positions in the tournament. Hmmm... nothing fishy there.