Vedr. Re: In Defence Of A Goddess - A

From: Stewart Stansfield <stu_stansfield_at_6SzVOMWouaLHMUf03xcoOUkke0qybR9WL881ZbLrwhBnrrfyhPEsE4rclFqFq>
Date: Tue, 15 May 2007 08:12:37 -0000


I've not said anything on the nature of Vinga, and have no intention of doing so.

I've never really liked the dichotomy some suggest between criticising the person and criticising the idea. My ideas are a big part of who I am. They are a product of my imagination, knowledge and critical faculties, and if worked into something more substantial, quite possibly a lot of love and effort, too. I may be biased, but I'm quite favourable to them, and can get put out by such ideas/efforts being knocked, over and above being called a tosser or a jerk.

If someone criticises your ideas/efforts as regards Glorantha, it doesn't just occur in a single 'imaginary' frame of reference. There's a wider social dimension, in that we exist as game/storyplayers  and -creators with our own sensibilities. Actions go beyond Glorantha and can offend people. It doesn't really matter if people mean to or not, sadly -- them's the breaks.

Given the nature of Gloranthan commentary and publishing, with the interaction of various communities, it's just something we have to deal with these days.

In a private e-mail a few years back, regarding these matters, someone made the apposite comment 'Social Skills, default 6'. I'm not saying it's necessarily that bad, but a little extra EI/EQ (Dave; all soundmen are called Dave) to go with all the IQ might help.

Some might say a lot of this is actually due to people being oversensitive. Me? I'm not so sure, and I think past experiences -- and, sadly, there are a few -- support the opposite argument.

Cheerio,

Stu.            

Powered by hypermail