BruceVC

A joke is meant as coping mechanism to breach a subject without or with limited consequences, it isn't meant to be taken seriously or to be a reliable source of information. Of a joke the only thing you can accurately say is whether is funny or not. The jester was the only one allowed to tell the king the truth and get away with because he was joking, if the king was so offended by the joke that he killed the jester it was an unspoken confirmation of it being true. Might I say that people who seem to have an issue with a joke getting too real should really stop killing the jester and try to fix some ****. Fair enough but a joke can also be used to demean or ridicule a certain demographic or social issue. And I still fail to see how that's funny?

To be honest that joke is about the fact that India has a major problem with rape, its almost inculcated in some parts of the culture. So that joke is highlighting this problem Its not the same type of joke about rape or abuse of women I am referring to which makes light of this serious issue. For example there is "joke" I have heard that goes " what do you tell a women with two black eyes" ..."nothing, she has already been told twice" That's tasteless and not funny

I suppose you could have been offended by what he said to her and the way he dismissed her. As I mentioned it wasn't just a " no I don't like you " it was a personal and malicious rejection of her attention. I was offended and annoyed by his comments Were you just as offended by the lady's rebuttal argument that did the same to the guy? Not in the slightest, it was obviously a reaction to his initial vituperative comments. I'm glad someone responded accordingly Besides he has a good career and nice car and that's what really matters in his world.

Nah, tasteless would be making a joke on South Africa and one of the kinds of crime it's known for. Yes Malc, that's right. Jokes about rape are never funny under any circumstances. I'm glad you have finally realized that.

Nah, that doesn't sound right Also I'm not sure why you think that just because someone is a lawyer that makes them an expert on the semantics of the words tactics and strategy in the context of an RPG. I don't think the two are connected ....but what do I know

Honestly can you explain how he was trolling? I don't understand how you guys can throw this term around when it comes to some people...NKKK said Bundy was racist. Why is this trolling? 'Trolling' is a subjective term to a large degree. I'll admit that it is not the best of terms to describe what he was doing, because of it's subjectivity. What one person may view as trolling another may not. If it pleases you I'll redefine my view of what he did with his initial post, as in light of his later post it's easier to do this. NKKK initially just came into a thread discussing the problems, trials, and tribulations of the Bundy Stand-off in Nevada and what all has lead to it, and where it might be going, etc, to make a statement that Bundy was racist (something that even if he is has zero bearing on the issues discussed), and because of this he lost of sympathy for Bundy (so it's ok for racists (real or perceived) to have their rights run over and be subject to what's basically military action within the U.S. borders? And someone thinking this thinks others have hate issues?). This added zero to the discussion being had, and was initially unsubstantiated (which adds nothing good to the conversation), hence me using the term 'troll', as it is part of the m.o. of a forum troll to make posts that add nothing good to the conversation and attempt to derail it. An aside. It's mildly ironic that a guy going by the moniker NKKK, is accusing other folks of being racist. New Ku Klux Klan? I don't think so, but he's wide open for that misinterpretation. I'm sorry but the fact he is an ignorant racist is relevant to me, it leads directly to the sympathy I might feel for Bundy and also his own credibility. Did you read his comments? They are embarrassing This whole affair has been presented like some "David vs Goliath". Supporters of Bundy see him as a poor hard working farmer just trying to eke out an existence from the interfering Federal government on land that should belong to Bundy due to the historical context He was seen as a victim of some sort of tyranny and he galvanized support from various groups across the USA as he had the moral high ground. But now that moral high ground is gone, he is a racist and that immediately undermines his position IMO. He should address his own bigotry and insecurity first before attacking what the Federal government is doing

Drinking potions and casting spells in order to beat the almighty roll machine does not a game make. Or maybe its does not a fun game makes. It isn't tactics definitely. So if you don't think taking potions or casting buffs can be considered an acceptable combat strategy then how do you prepare or win battles with difficult enemies?

No apology warranted. Next time post the links with your accusation. Come on Vals, you called his bluff and he proved you wrong. You need to have the maturity to apologize or at least say " I am wrong, you were right" I have said this before but there is a serious problem on these forums with some people not being able to accept they are wrong on any point or concede that someone may be right about something that they dispute There was no bluff called. He came here initially trolling and I called him on it. To his credit he came back and took off his troll outfit. Honestly can you explain how he was trolling? I don't understand how you guys can throw this term around when it comes to some people...NKKK said Bundy was racist. Why is this trolling?

Wow, so much for Bundy being this great hero who stood against the Federal government. He is nothing but an ignorant racist

No apology warranted. Next time post the links with your accusation. Come on Vals, you called his bluff and he proved you wrong. You need to have the maturity to apologize or at least say " I am wrong, you were right" I have said this before but there is a serious problem on these forums with some people not being able to accept they are wrong on any point or concede that someone may be right about something that they dispute

I really glad you raised the point about a referendum in Eastern Ukraine. That is the obvious solution and I missed it. But it needs to be monitored by Western and Russian observers so its credible. Not like the joke of a referendum in Crimea And you are right, by attacking pro-Russian supporters they are doing exactly what Putin wants and now he has a pretence to invade and basically annex what parts of Eastern Ukraine "Russian speaking citizens are being attacked in" Putin is a brilliant strategist I'll give him that

I suppose you could have been offended by what he said to her and the way he dismissed her. As I mentioned it wasn't just a " no I don't like you " it was a personal and malicious rejection of her attention. I was offended and annoyed by his comments

Dismemberment of the Ukrainian state, subjugation to Russia, continued economic deterioration, restoration of Yanukovych oligarchy, you know, the works. You got me. If Ukraine once again becomes part of the Motherland, I stand to gain a promotion to Senior Colonel with the FSB for my valiant efforts in the Obsidian Entertainment Forums, and you know what that means—I'll actually get to use the restroom instead of pissing in a bucket when nobody is looking. Seriously though, I haven't the slightest idea how to solve this at this point. But I'm going to go out on a limb and suggest that sending in the army is not the best solution (assuming it's a solution at all). There's also the irony that these uprisings are A-OK to crush under a soldier's boot, but those in Kiev a few months ago weren't. As I mentioned I also don't have the best solution. For example a federal solution for parts of eastern Ukraine won't be accepted by the Ukrainian government and I can understand why. But then we need to ask " is it worth raising the military tensions with Russia over Ukraine" or getting to the point where there is full blown civil war in Ukraine between Russia and the current Ukrainian government. This is where it is leading http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2014/04/23/russia-ukraine_n_5199344.html Exactly what myself and others predicted is happening. Russia is fermenting tension in the East and then they will invade to "protect there citizens" This is the worst outcome because what will the West do? I hate to say this but would it not just be better to accept that eastern Ukraine is part of Russia after this invasion. Because after Russia annexes certain parts of Ukraine the only thing that would deter them would be Western military intervention....and do we really want that? But then the West needs to put the stake in the ground and any further annexation of other parts of Ukraine by Russia needs to absolutely prevented at all costs. This may sound like the historical appeasement of Hitler but the context is different

Thanks for the compliment but I'm not trolling, I'm serious about what I say and believe around Romance But are you serious as cancer? In this case yes, cancer is real and my view on Romance is real

Thanks for the compliment but I'm not trolling, I'm serious about what I say and believe around Romance

Dismemberment of the Ukrainian state, subjugation to Russia, continued economic deterioration, restoration of Yanukovych oligarchy, you know, the works. that made me laugh but I don't he is that pro-Russian In fact its a much harder question to answer than a person may realize . I am nervous to guess myself because there are consequences for any of the outcomes so I really am interested in what 2133 and any others think should be right solution if you could somehow just enforce it.

We had our major software vendor discuss new features on one of there products we support. Afterwards they took us for dinner and drinks so it was a good early evening

Yes it does matter if its not true...obviously ? We are talking about how great or terrible BSN is so its directly relevant as it goes towards the character of people who frequent BSN

There was an incident where a mob tried to storm a National Guard base, in which 3 pro-Russians were killed. The National Guard is a reserve unit that's been created by the Kiev government, with crap training, and chiefly comprised of volunteers—the idea was originally to incorporate already existing militias into a structure fully under the command of the government, but I don't know to what extent this has been accomplished. So far, when regular army units have been involved, they have either defected, handed over their hardware, or just plain turned around: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=7A_Xcs-Mjkk (doesn't help that the poor tank sounds like it's dying) Tell me something 2133 what in your opinion is the most effective way to resolve the Ukrainian crisis? What needs to happen to restore peace?

Okay please provide the links directly from BSN and I'll believe it

Sorry Sarex but I reject this type of comment as nothing but Bioware bashing propaganda. The thought that you are suggesting that there are people on BSN who think incest could be considered normal or realistic is ludicrous. If people did say this they were trolling or joking but this does not reflect what people on BSN think is a normal Romance option in any respect. This is just taking the whole " BSN people are weird " too far and I have to dispute this insinuation While I don't think everyone in those threads were serious about it, I think some were very, very serious about it. As mentioned, its why I quit Bio's boards (not that anyone cared, I was by that point mainly a lurker). To be honest I respect your opinion on most matters so maybe it is true? But what makes you think people were seriously suggesting incest should be included and why do think anyone would consider incest to be realistic when we know its illegal in every country in the world and births through incest are susceptible to genetic deformities ...so its not realistic in any respects...so why would anyone argue it is when there is no precedent to compare it to?

Sorry Sarex but I reject this type of comment as nothing but Bioware bashing propaganda. The thought that you are suggesting that there are people on BSN who think incest could be considered normal or realistic is ludicrous. If people did say this they were trolling or joking but this does not reflect what people on BSN think is a normal Romance option in any respect. This is just taking the whole " BSN people are weird " too far and I have to dispute this insinuation

And then there's the third annoying group of people, the ones who constantly whine about them, thus making the romances the universally most discussed and polarizing aspect of the games, way out of proportion with what their actual role ine the games is. You are a clever man, very insightful

You also got some loot and XP out of the romance-triggered encounters. The Yochlol ambush was pretty cool. Wasn't there something with Harpers too? Funny how actual consequences and integration have gone down, while ego stroking and fan service have gone through the roof. I seem to remember that Isabela's actions at a critical point in DA2 were also influenced by romance, but I'm not sure if that was necessarily locked to the romance—only played that game once. You also got some loot and XP out of the romance-triggered encounters. The Yochlol ambush was pretty cool. Wasn't there something with Harpers too? Funny how actual consequences and integration have gone down, while ego stroking and fan service have gone through the roof. I seem to remember that Isabela's actions at a critical point in DA2 were also influenced by romance, but I'm not sure if that was necessarily locked to the romance—only played that game once. Hi 2133 Where have you been, you have been conspicuous by your absence

The fact that people want Romance in RPG is no more obsessive than people who want multi-levelled dungeons, interesting armour, varied questing, realistic monster ecosystems and dozens of other things I could name that define the RPG experience for a person. Remember Monte that we never should presume to tell others what is acceptable content around there RPG experience, its very subjective Everything is subjective. Which is why saying it's subjective is, essentially pointless. I find Bioware's status as romance-purveyors of choice in their games unacceptable. There, I said it. I also strongly believe many of the wiser heads at that studio know full well the cul-de-sac that decision has trapped them in. Bioware has been hoisted on its own petard, imagine if one of their designers wanted to make a totally romance-free product? They couldn't. They are trapped. Bwahahahahahah. You say you think Bioware made a bad strategic decision by implementing Romance and they possibly regret it. Maybe so, we will never know. And I agree if they tried to remove Romance options from there games this would be a very unpopular decision and lead to an unprecedented furore. But I do know this. Bioware has millions of committed fans and tens of thousands of fans who support and enjoy Romance. These fans support the various RPG franchises that Bioware produces financially and Bioware generates large amounts of revenue through these fans of Romance. So the reality is I'm sure Bioware sleeps fine at night, I know I would