The complete guide to IP proofing OR how to survive and enjoy your campaign.

[Lycanthromancer]

there you go, trying to be rational with Sunic -- have you not been paying attention to this guy?  What made you think rationality and congeniality were among whatever redeeming qualities he might have?  Despite whatever virtues he actually may have, he is incapable of anything resembling good-faith due-diligence when it comes to social interaction.

Whether or not I try and be rational, polite, and congenial has absolutely nothing to do with how the other person responds. If I have something to say, I'll say it in a rational, polite and congenial manner because I am (or try to be) a rational, polite and congenial person.

I only spoke up again in this thread because it was my original suggestion in the first place and I felt a bit of responsibility for it. I also am a bit anal about the proper labeling of logical fallacy. I had something to say, and I endeavored to say it in a manner that feeds no trolls.

What fallacy was in my post? Nearly everything he says is full of bile and trolling, no matter how useful it might otherwise be. I have a lot of patience, but he's worn it down to nothing, and I don't respect people who hold no respect for anyone else (including me). Ergo, I hold no respect for him or the things he says.

[wotmaniac]

... such as to say that it simply isn't worth all the dumpster-diving required to actually get to anything substantive he might say?

[bearsarebrown]

Just leave it all the fuck alone. Sunic is mean, we know. 

[wotmaniac]

Just leave it all the fuck alone. Sunic is mean, we know. 

[genuine]

there you go, trying to be rational with Sunic -- have you not been paying attention to this guy?  What made you think rationality and congeniality were among whatever redeeming qualities he might have?  Despite whatever virtues he actually may have, he is incapable of anything resembling good-faith due-diligence when it comes to social interaction.

Whether or not I try and be rational, polite, and congenial has absolutely nothing to do with how the other person responds. If I have something to say, I'll say it in a rational, polite and congenial manner because I am (or try to be) a rational, polite and congenial person.

I only spoke up again in this thread because it was my original suggestion in the first place and I felt a bit of responsibility for it. I also am a bit anal about the proper labeling of logical fallacy. I had something to say, and I endeavored to say it in a manner that feeds no trolls.

What fallacy was in my post? Nearly everything he says is full of bile and trolling, no matter how useful it might otherwise be. I have a lot of patience, but he's worn it down to nothing, and I don't respect people who hold no respect for anyone else (including me). Ergo, I hold no respect for him or the things he says.

It wasn't a terribly egregious fallacy. Look at the difference between these two statements: 1) He is a jerk, so nothing he says is worth listening to.
2) He is a jerk, so it's not worth the effort to listen to him.

The first says that because he is a jerk then nothing good comes out of his mouth. This is fallacious, as even jerks can have something true/accurate/good to say. Specifically, it is the ad hominem fallacy - because the speaker is bad, unlikable, etc. you don't have to respond to the arguments. The second is not fallacious, as you're not discounting that truth may possibly fall from his lips; instead you're saying that the worth of those truths doesn't justify wading through the bile. I'm sure you can see that the line can be incredibly fine. It's even possible to say 1) but mean 2).

Now, this isn't as fallacious as some strawmen arguments I've seen (i.e. "Sure, that developer from Wizards said that a dragonborn warforged can have a plating feat, but do you really want to trust the guy who designed the CW Samurai?), but it's still right there on the line.

[The_Mad_Linguist]

That's not actually a strawman - it's an ad hominem instead

[wotmaniac]

That's not actually a strawman - it's an ad hominem instead

'tis true

[Lycanthromancer]

there you go, trying to be rational with Sunic -- have you not been paying attention to this guy?  What made you think rationality and congeniality were among whatever redeeming qualities he might have?  Despite whatever virtues he actually may have, he is incapable of anything resembling good-faith due-diligence when it comes to social interaction.

Whether or not I try and be rational, polite, and congenial has absolutely nothing to do with how the other person responds. If I have something to say, I'll say it in a rational, polite and congenial manner because I am (or try to be) a rational, polite and congenial person.

I only spoke up again in this thread because it was my original suggestion in the first place and I felt a bit of responsibility for it. I also am a bit anal about the proper labeling of logical fallacy. I had something to say, and I endeavored to say it in a manner that feeds no trolls.

What fallacy was in my post? Nearly everything he says is full of bile and trolling, no matter how useful it might otherwise be. I have a lot of patience, but he's worn it down to nothing, and I don't respect people who hold no respect for anyone else (including me). Ergo, I hold no respect for him or the things he says.

It wasn't a terribly egregious fallacy. Look at the difference between these two statements: 1) He is a jerk, so nothing he says is worth listening to.
2) He is a jerk, so it's not worth the effort to listen to him.

The first says that because he is a jerk then nothing good comes out of his mouth. This is fallacious, as even jerks can have something true/accurate/good to say. Specifically, it is the strawman fallacy - because the speaker is bad, unlikable, etc. you don't have to respond to the arguments. The second is not fallacious, as you're not discounting that truth may possibly fall from his lips; instead you're saying that the worth of those truths doesn't justify wading through the bile. I'm sure you can see that the line can be incredibly fine. It's even possible to say 1) but mean 2).

Now, this isn't as fallacious as some strawmen arguments I've seen (i.e. "Sure, that developer from Wizards said that a dragonborn warforged can have a plating feat, but do you really want to trust the guy who designed the CW Samurai?), but it's still right there on the line.

Except I said I didn't respect him or anything he said. I never said there wasn't anything useful there. With the way he presents information, there is no respect shown, so there is no respect given.

I believe you may have your fallacy-wires crossed a bit.

[genuine]

That's not actually a strawman - it's an ad hominem instead

  Now I feel like an idiot. Thanks ML, for pointing that out. I'd call it a brain fart except it wasn't.

[Sunic_Flames]

Ignoring more Fail.

I refuse unworkable suggestions, I do not refuse suggestions. For example, before the Fail train derailed, there were quite a few things by Endarire, and even Lycan (who is quickly becoming a high level fuckwit) that would have been added.

And yes, this thread should be locked. It's not serving any purpose but encouraging people to whine and flail about me. While admittedly no one is doing so at this exact moment, that is liable to quickly change.

You give respect to get respect, and you spew vitriol to get it in return.

This is obviously a lesson you eschewed like you do anything you don't agree with.

And you are most certainly a person I no longer respect in any way shape or form, and your opinion of me means even less. Disagreeing with others' ideas is fine, but you're quite probably tied for the rudest person I've ever met online, given the sheer amount of vitriol and ignorance of common courtesies (and that's common courtesies; y'know, the kind that is generally received from the 'mouthbreathing fuckwits' you think are so unpleasant) you spew in nearly every post I've read from you.

Now that I've said that, I'm through. Flame all you want, Sunic. I'm out.

Paizil Fallacy.

Bye Welcome

Assuming this is what you're talking about, that's actually a strawman fallacy (Sunic is a jerk, ergo nothing he says is worth listening to), not Paizil. As I understand it, Paizil fallacy is listening to fact and statistics and claiming that it is just opinion.

It's Paizil Fallacy, because he claims the reason I did not listen to it was because I did not agree with it. And also that the problem with the things being ignored is merely that I disagree with them and not that they are objectively wrong. While he did not use the o word, everyone knows full well what he meant, just as when you say darn or heck, everyone knows what you really mean.

It's too bad, really. I originally suggested this handbook as an educational device. But instead of discussing why disguise is fail, you just complained about flailing and left. Personally, I agree with you about the disguise issue being to-easily-beatable to work well. But looking over the thread I'm seeing questions about its interactions with spot, whether Knowledge skills really help, and what other methods overcome it.

I did mention why Disguise was fail. At least a half dozen times. The fuckwit army ignored my repeated pointing this out, and why, in favor of wanking off to some goddamned Maugs some more.

But instead of responding to a polite question (i.e. isn't it valid at low levels at least? You know, before true sight is common or easy...), you just got pissy and gave up. For that matter, you could have given your answer and ignored further discussion of it. You could have even included a FAIL-Post, where you list attempts at IPing that fail, and why they fail, so that people don't just keep posting about factotums and disguise.

Things that are valid at low levels only are not valid, else we wouldn't so viciously mock Fighters, now would we? And the fuckwit army ignored my posts right there, so what makes you think they'd listen to one at the beginning of the thread? Exactly, they wouldn't.

As for respect, non fuckwits can has it, and the rest can fuck off. Unfortunately, at the current time, non fuckwits are in a minority. Even so all you have to do is not fail at life to be treated decently.

Non complete list of people here that are not fuckwits: bearsarebrown, BeholderSlayer, Dictum Mortum, Ithamar, Kajhera, RelentlessImp, SeekingKnight, Shiki, Solo.

[SeekingKnight]

Lock thread please.  Sunic is not doing it and discussing him on a handbook thread is dumb.

[Sunic_Flames]

Lock thread please.  Sunic is not doing it and discussing him on a handbook thread is dumb.

How the hell am I supposed to lock it?

[Anarchy_Kanya]

Lock thread please.  Sunic is not doing it and discussing him on a handbook thread is dumb.

How the hell am I supposed to lock it?

Not you, stupid, the mode-... Ooohhh, I see what you did there.

Non complete list of people here that are not fuckwits: bearsarebrown, BeholderSlayer, Dictum Mortum, Ithamar, Kajhera, RelentlessImp, SeekingKnight, Shiki, Solo.

You didn't include yourself. Does that mean you're a fuckwit?

[Sunic_Flames]

Lock thread please.  Sunic is not doing it and discussing him on a handbook thread is dumb.

How the hell am I supposed to lock it?

Not you, stupid, the mode-... Ooohhh, I see what you did there.

Non complete list of people here that are not fuckwits: bearsarebrown, BeholderSlayer, Dictum Mortum, Ithamar, Kajhera, RelentlessImp, SeekingKnight, Shiki, Solo.

You didn't include yourself. Does that mean you're a fuckwit?

Hi Welcome

[Anarchy_Kanya]

Lock thread please.  Sunic is not doing it and discussing him on a handbook thread is dumb.

How the hell am I supposed to lock it?

Not you, stupid, the mode-... Ooohhh, I see what you did there.

Non complete list of people here that are not fuckwits: bearsarebrown, BeholderSlayer, Dictum Mortum, Ithamar, Kajhera, RelentlessImp, SeekingKnight, Shiki, Solo.

You didn't include yourself. Does that mean you're a fuckwit?

Hi Welcome

Then I can assume the answer to the question is "Yes".

[Solo]

Doesn't the word "non-complete" imply...

[Lycanthromancer]

_

[Anarchy_Kanya]

Doesn't the word "non-complete" imply...

What? That he don't remember any other non-fuckwits? He should remember himself, right?

_

Um... What?

[Lycanthromancer]

_

Um... What?

'Twas the wrong thread.

So very, very wrong.

[Sunic_Flames]

Right... well Jarona, you done failing yet?