Jump to content

Fluffle

Members
  • Content Count

    931
  • Joined

  • Last visited

  • Days Won

    9

Posts posted by Fluffle


  1. I have however read somewhere that your marshmallow-wereness, as it were, does not spread to a "victim" if they are consuming you in a cup of hot dark chocolate... :biggrin:

     

    That might be true, but if you put me in a cup of hot dark chocolate, I'll soak up the chocolate, bloat, and become a gigantic hot, dark Gensou-devouring chocolate cube :o

     

    You know in that state, I'm like Minsc in Berserker Mode, I cannot tell foe for friend :o


  2. I hope we won't have to much drop outs when the $8 will be actual checked.

     

    I doubt it will be checked, it's a honor system, not a "custom forum title" addon.

     

    If you ask for proof it's no longer a honor system, and even with just about 600 members it would be quite a task to check everyone, I use different email addresses for forums and kickstarter/amazon, for example. So you had to check whether I have access to both email accounts, others might have pledged $10 extra just because they like round sums, you had to make sure they don't get a set of cards when the survey comes, etc.

     

    When someone wants to cheat "the system" in such a petty way, I hope he's proud of his forum title, that will show him he's a jerk whenever he sees one of his own messages.

     

    Actually those people that do such a thing, think themselves of being quite clever and tend to compliment themselves for being so clever.

    They would rather laugh at us that we cannot control and won't notice. Trust me, nobody who cheats in a way like that, will feel bad about it.

    Then he wouldn't have done it in the first place or he would feel bad and add the 8$ afterwards.

     

    But we should stop talking of this, since we agree that we cannot control anybody on paying his pledge.

    If we keep talking about this we will end up in being suspicious of each other.


  3. Then show me the way :o

     

    You guys dont want me to devour our weak members, and tell me to devour the enemy instead.

    I would do so, but who is our enemy? Where is he? How many is he?

     

    Does he even exist? And if he does, why not? :o

     

    So many questions and only one thing seems certain:

    So long as Fluffy's stomach stays empty, chaos shall reign!


  4. Since Merin said s/he cannot help me anymore on this.

    Could anybody else help me please on this?

     

    Because I really don't understand.

     

    He meant that it's not acceptable to use the "let Obsidian make the game they want" line as a reason for asking someone to shut up. Which is true.

     

    Yes it is true. Uhm... I don't see where I have done that?

    If so I did not mean it that way. :/


  5. The act of shooting.

    And the opinion why he thinks he can do that.

    Are two very different things.

     

    But why the example with shooting in the first place?

    (Shooting = hurt)

     

    You said "I'm sure we're all old enough not to be hurt by a piece of text on the internet."

    And yet your example with the shooting shows at least to me, that

    you are indeed hurt by "dumb" ideas from other people.

     

    You are that hurt that you cannot even bear it, and then you have to hurt them in return.

     

    You equal somebody's else opinion with being shot (mere pain/hurt).


  6. I'm sure we're all old enough not to be hurt by a piece of text on the internet. Are you the cyber bully police?

     

    More often than not the sharpest critics do back up their distaste. However, not all the time. Here's why:

     

    A) The opinion / suggested seems so ridiculous to their perspective that they believe it was a troll, so they don't reply with more than a snide remark.

    B) They already explained their stance before-hand and the topic is just yet another repeat regurgitating a topic for the N-th time (romance, anyone?)

    C) Some opinions are wrong and dumb. This is a fact. What if my opinion was that the sky is red or that shaking babies was the bee's knees? Why treat outright false opinions as anything more than drivel?

     

    You are entitled for believing the sky is red.

    You are entitled for expressing this opinion.

     

    I will simply say "I disagree with you on that"

     

    Now, where does the need for additional insult/attack come from?


  7. Except that Obsidian asks for donators to give their opinions. They are soliciting wants, likes and dislikes. They repeatedly say how happy they are with being able to communicate directly with us and being able to base decisions on the backers and not on the publishers.

     

    So, when you advocate "let Obsidian make the game they want" as a way to make someone NOT talk about a given feature...

    you are advocating AGAINST what Obsidian explicitly wants.

     

    Q.E.D.

    But I'm afraid you demonstrated nothing. How does Obsidian asking for opinions make an opinion invalid? "let Obsidian make the game they want" is a perfect response to Obsidian asking about opinions. It means "I trust you and believe that the game will be better if you develop it the way you indended." Furthermore, why would saying "let Obsidian make the game they want" automatically mean that you don't want someone to "talk about a given feature?". If I say it, I don't mind that the discussion continues after that. I stated my opinion. That's all I wanted to do.

     

    Yep, that what I tried to say, I think you explained it better than me xD

     

    Your opinion being "let Obsidian make the game they want" isn't invalid.

     

    Telling people to stop asking for things with your reasoning being "let Obsidian make the game they want" isn't valid.

     

    If you can't see the difference, I can't help you anymore than this.

     

    Since Merin said s/he cannot help me anymore on this.

    Could anybody else help me please on this?

     

    Because I really don't understand.


  8. When there is a dumb idea. You don't have to call it dumb.

    It is not dumb anyway. It is just your opinion.

     

    There may be people who agree and people who disagree.

     

    And for sure you absolutely don't have to say worse things to the one presenting his/her idea.

     

    Attacking and insulting somebody who posted a dumb idea (in your opinion)just to make

    sure the developers will recognize that this idea is dumb when they browse the forum.

     

    Now that's dumb, in my opinion.


  9. werehuman could be anything that shapeshifts into human form :o

     

    marshmallow-were is more specific :o

     

    Uhm no... you see that is why I am special!

    I'm not a mainstream marshmallow-were.

     

    I don't make someone a marshmallow-were by biting them. I have to make them bite me!

    Then they will turn into a marshmallow-were.

    That is reversed marshmallow-wereism!

     

    Just like I took a bite from a marshmallow-were a long time ago... :o

    • Like 1

  10. Except that Obsidian asks for donators to give their opinions. They are soliciting wants, likes and dislikes. They repeatedly say how happy they are with being able to communicate directly with us and being able to base decisions on the backers and not on the publishers.

     

    So, when you advocate "let Obsidian make the game they want" as a way to make someone NOT talk about a given feature...

    you are advocating AGAINST what Obsidian explicitly wants.

     

    Q.E.D.

    But I'm afraid you demonstrated nothing. How does Obsidian asking for opinions make an opinion invalid? "let Obsidian make the game they want" is a perfect response to Obsidian asking about opinions. It means "I trust you and believe that the game will be better if you develop it the way you indended." Furthermore, why would saying "let Obsidian make the game they want" automatically mean that you don't want someone to "talk about a given feature?". If I say it, I don't mind that the discussion continues after that. I stated my opinion. That's all I wanted to do.

     

    Yep, that what I tried to say, I think you explained it better than me xD


  11. The problem is that "let Obsidian make the game they want!" is also an opinion. Someone may honestly believe, that the game will be the best it can be if backers let Obsidian do the game they intend to do. Otheres may disagree, but it doesn't make that opinion any less valid. It's the point a discussion. To present and support various ideas related to a subject.

     

    Except that Obsidian asks for donators to give their opinions. They are soliciting wants, likes and dislikes. They repeatedly say how happy they are with being able to communicate directly with us and being able to base decisions on the backers and not on the publishers.

     

    So, when you advocate "let Obsidian make the game they want" as a way to make someone NOT talk about a given feature...

    you are advocating AGAINST what Obsidian explicitly wants.

     

    Q.E.D.

     

    If Obsidian wants likes and dislikes, I could still tell Obsidian that I dislike that they want likes and dislikes.

    Nothing keeping me from doing so.

     

    What's the matter about advocating against what Obsidian wants?

    They want agreements and disagreements.

     

    By advocating against what they want you disagree.


  12. I think it's this -

     

    When someone creates a thread (or posts in a thread) advocating for their own personal tastes in what should (or should not) be in a game, acceptable (read: productive, in the spirit of the forum, worthwhile) responses can range from "Yes, I need this" to "don't care if this is in or not" to "For the love of all that is holy, don't include this!", as well as "this is how I'd like to see it" to "okay if like A, not okay if like B" to "it is always bad - examples C-F"...

     

    but what OP is saying (and I tend to agree with) is that the response to every suggestion being "don't ask for that thing!" to "let Obsidian make the game they want!" to "I sure hope Obsidian DOESN'T listen to the forums at all!" are all against the spirit of the forums.

     

    Disagreeing with a suggested feature is not only okay, but encouraged.

     

    Disagreeing with features being suggested, however, is not okay.

     

    See the difference? 8)

    The problem is that "let Obsidian make the game they want!" is also an opinion. Someone may honestly believe, that the game will be the best it can be if backers let Obsidian do the game they intend to do. Otheres may disagree, but it doesn't make that opinion any less valid. It's the point a discussion. To present and support various ideas related to a subject.

     

    It's perfectly possible to disagree without attacking.

    The OP didn't say anything about aggressive replies.

     

    The OP spoke of disagreement with other people.

    And for some people this is defined as replying in a rude, aggressive way.

×
×
  • Create New...