Edvyn

chinese cartoons

ranting in private is fun ranting in public is fun if they brought chatlogs it's all good the chatlogs never lie if someone is shit and you must blog about them, say nothing let them speak for themselves 8-)

my character thinks the glass is stupid

lEjeC4wR8Fo

QTY2fC3RLUE WAmOKLpffkQ JDePkbgwYFU vAIDxmQgz-s

not far off

vSnkSu0HTcE mpcebueoq_s wKpiT5GKU3s dark dnb best dnb

Wee ooo~ wee oooo~ wee ooo~ Everyone run, it's the fun police. -jcojxeMibA WOOP WOOP

If she did eat toast, what would she spread on it? That's the real question that needs answering

Well, what does your character spread on their toast? Mine uses Blackberry jam!

this is kinda fun to read if im going to be honest

isn't that exactly how discussion works though? Not really though. I mean I have no idea wtf Flynt is talking about regardless, but nitpicking individual bits is a bad way to discuss things. An argument is like a complete thing, you need to attack the entire beast. Pulling specific sentences out and tearing them apart ignores the context in which they were written. For example: ( I don't necessarily agree with this point) "Marriage is an economic and legal matter more than a romantic one. I oppose gay marriage, and feel that going down the road to allow it is wrong and a waste of time. Marriage should be controlled by religious institutions, and not dictated by the government. However the legal, tax, and benefits of marriage should instead be transferred to civil unions, and be a completely secular manner." Someone could pull out, " I oppose gay marriage, and feel that going down the road to allow it is wrong and a waste of time. Marriage should be controlled by religious institutions, and not dictated by the government" And tear that apart, a statement which by itself, does not really represent the argument that paragraph is making. what if you pull out each sentence individually and kill them one by one to make your response easier to read/process? like internet debate space invaders? that's basically tackling the entire argument

isn't that exactly how discussion works though?

it takes only a single spark to start a fire

emoting things like reading a book are pretty unreliable ways to get people to RP with you - they're far too passive and require other people to take initiative to interact with you rather than the other way round. it'll work for certain people, sure, but the average joe roleplayist doesn't want to go out of his way to chat with every person who stands by themselves reading a book in a bar.

walkups are pretty much a matter of patience and timing. watch people's conversations, and wait for an opening. something your character can reasonably comment on. rp needn't start with "hello hi how are you", it often starts out of people reacting to things that are said or done around them. pick out something to react to, react, hey presto you're rping. make sure you're not just emoting idle things that people can't really react to, because - surprise surprise - they won't react to it. people can't do much in response to someone smirking whilst drinking a beer, for example. pretty much all my random rp starts with random shit i say to people. 8-)

if something is pointless why is it bad to call that thing pointless? would it be considered reasonable to say "this has no point"? because that's what pointless means anyway what about asking "where is your point"? or "i don't see a point"? this also pretty much means the same thing pointless shouldn't be considered a rude word, even if used frequently - it's a valid descriptor in many cases, and people who are offended by being told their post was pointless should probably get a clearer point

10 is not a big enough number to determine a consistent pattern with, on which decisions like banning someone permanently are then made

the 20 warnings a year = permaban rule is crazy, especially considering how easily someone can incur a warning. do we really need to cull people who say things other people don't like on an occasional basis? don't the warnings themselves work as incentive for that user to settle down? people should not have to fear being banned for pulling silly shit every now and then, but under this rule they can be banned permanently for doing exactly that! there was no need for a crackdown in the first place, and now we're getting into witch hunt territory where everyone who is even slightly not-nice must be removed because otherwise they're avoiding justice or some other nonsense

i come across this kind of situation a lot thanks to the kind of character i play - when this happens, the "you are trying my character's patience" and desire to fight tends to also be coupled with the desire to fight outside. they don't want to battle and cause a mess in the middle of the quicksand! so, like any reasonable and mature adult, i say "sure thing, you first". then i leave them outside. then i go back inside, proclaiming i won. 8-)

iWAdw5YEO3w

kooky kabuki is a pretty cool dude and knows many internet jokes 8-)

pale w/ black hair irl, pale w/ black hair in videogames i just like vampiric-lookin people ok

the erpford institute of roleplayology welcomes you with open arms, esteemed fellow professor of the imaginary fun times. indeed, you do present a bamboozling conundrum! how can people judge things if the judgist cannot judge in the conjecture argumentation defined factually logic dictates that we, using the scientific method, philosophy emotions reiterated thus; 1. an empirically systematic deduction process theory, 2. rectal methane expulsions, when combined with dihydrogen monoxide in liquid form, are colloquially understood to be called "wet farts" therefore, ye olde roelplayeth :?