Political attack on an Orc Rogue - what's your response?

Post by Dragalthor

For instance, if you peruse the forums and identify the WoW players who repeatedly make posts that complain one class is too strong and should be "nerfed" to make it "fair", the vast majority of them would identify with the democratic party.

Players who would identify with republicans may acknowledge that one class poses a higher degree of challenge, but that there is also a way to defeat that class with a combination of tactics and skill.

And how, pray, do you apply this to the millions of players that are not American and don't identify with either party.

OT: I don't believe that playing on-line video games is any different to many other hobbies that other politicians have and that they should not be attacked for enjoying them

Post by 134377

This post was from a user who has deleted their account.

Post by Dilbo

Obviously. Likewise if one plays golf, as Tom Martin (Lachowicz's contestant) does. Likewise if one hunts as a hobby, as Sarah Palin did.

Golf and Hunting are both social activities that do not requires hours of daily effort to keep up with, unless you are trying to be a pro golfer. Bad analogies.

If you think playing WoW is in the same category as doing an illegal drug, you're severely deluded and either on completely the wrong website or ashamed of one of your hobbies.

It certainly can be for a lot of people. It's an escape from reality - that is the same underlying reason that many people take drugs. They want to filter out the things in their lives that make them unhappy. WoW can definitely form a cycle of addition and lead to depression if it is not taken in moderation.

Edit: Not to mention, I'm fairly sure she didn't even bring up, her opponents did. As it turns out, it's not smart to advertise that one's opponent plays video games, since her campaign has attracted a significant amount of attention and donations since (chump change for the Kochs or Romney, to be fair).

Actually no...most of what was said was her own words. Anyone supporting someone because they play WoW or any other game is a sad reflection of society.

Fascinating analysis chum. Let me guess: dual major in psychology and politics?

Neither; if I was an educated drone I'd probably be blindly agreeing with everyone else for fear of "offending" someone.

Are you seriously suggesting that “the vast majority” of people who claimed low-level Hunters and Rogues should have been nerfed in Cataclysm, or claimed that Holy Pallies should have had Holy Shock nerfed after patch 5.0.4, or claimed that Priests should have had Penance nerfed ... must have “identif with the democratic party”?

Yes, because the thought process is along the lines of "Someone has it better than me so I want the 'establishment' to bring them down to my level so it's fair." In politics the establishment is the government, in the game it's Blizzard.

Dude, asking for class balance in the PvP of a MMORPG is not a partisan characteristic.

The very nature of having classes relies on individual imbalances to make group play more engaging. Think about it...if there were no classes in the game and all players could do the same thing, no gear other than vanity items because that would create imbalances, same abilities, same everything. Would that be a game you want to play?

The ideology that mirrors political views is how things are balanced. People on the left, democrats and liberals, want balance to mean bringing everyone down to the same level. People on the right want all people to have abundant opportunities to prop themselves up.

So at a glance what you're saying sounds reasonable but when you examine it more carefully you may notice that 'balancing classes' not as clear-cut as you say.

And even if it was, I'm siding with whoever thinks class balance is a good idea. The suggestion that we should condemn anyone who dares to criticise extreme class imbalance is simply staggering.

It's interesting and funny that you consider being labeled as a democrat a type of condemnation. If I could give you +rep for that comment I would.

Would you also brand Bobby Fischer as a democrat if he complained that his side of the board was missing both Knights at the start of a game? Would you tell him to get over it and enjoy the challenge?

You mean like republicans having to constantly deal with a "journalistic" media that is heavily biased against them, and does everything in their power to keep the spin positive for the liberal/democrats while portraying the republican in a negative light? Depending on his attitude he would either have to make due without the knights OR demand that the other player have his knights removed as well - his choice.

(Your example isn't a direct 1:1 comparison because in chess both "players" are identical and follow the same sets of rules. In WoW, the rules that apply to you change to a degree based on the class you select.)

Post by Adamsm

Anyone supporting someone because they play WoW or any other game is a sad reflection of society.So...what about supporting someone because they are a movie star/celebutard/pro-sports player etc etc etc; really, who gives a flying &*!@ what someone does with their spare time, when it has nothing at all to do with their job. The entire thing that makes this entire 'discussion' in regards to the woman, is that someone heard her say, in game mind you, that she enjoyed the Rogue class for the backstab elements...so does that mean anyone who plays a shooting game is obviously someone who wants to go out and do that in the real world?

This is just political stupidity once again, since apparently they can't find a real reason to bash the woman, so they'll go to the scape goat of the late 90's and early 2000's; video games are bad m'kay.

Post by Dilbo

Your credentials, please. Or, at the very least, tell us why the heck any of us should believe such blanket statements.

You shouldn't be too eager to believe what I or anyone else tells you. I'd rather people think critically and analyze issues deeper rather than forming views/beliefs based on headlines and bumper-sticker platitudes.

And how, pray, do you apply this to the millions of players that are not American and don't identify with either party.

Because no matter where you go people are going to find that they either agree with the left or the right. They don't need to be extremists to either end, nor should they be.

The left claims to offer an egalitarian society through big government, where the government assigns itself authority as it sees fit - and this is why throughout human history most people have lived an oppressed life.

The right encourages individualism, and when applied moderately, allows for a highly productive (albeit competitive) social structure that generally leads to prosperous results and true freedom.

This is why throughout American history it has been the democrats who systematically opposed any "right wing" ideas like the civil rights movement or abolishing slavery (in America).

Dilbo's opinion sounds like a fair analogy of US politics viewed through a WoW prism though. Note his use of inverted commas "nerf" and "fair". Nerf is a bat right? "fair" rather than just fair implies that it isn't really fair at all. Enforcers with bats versus co'operation, tactics and skill, in a class context? I think he's got his left and right wing mixed up.

Fair has a set meaning, but in the context of WoW or in life, fair takes on a meaning dependent on the perspective of the person using the word. Some people think "fair" means diminishing a person they perceive to be better than them...either by nerfing the class they play or by over-taxing their income should they become wealthy in life.

Post by Monday

I don't even know what is going on here. The amount of derp is staggering.

Post by Atik

Golf and Hunting are both social activities that do not requires hours of daily effort to keep up with, unless you are trying to be a pro golfer. Bad analogies.

I, personnally, know several 'social' hunters.

On average, they'll be gone for days on hunting trips, sometimes once a week.

A couple hours spent on WoW? I can't see that as detrimental.

I would personnally like to see her win, as the more like her we get in office, the less likely we are for another SOPA scare.

Do I neccisarily agree with all her stances? No, but noone can ever really agree with everything a single politician stands for, trying to do that is crazy. But by getting more internet-savvy people into government, they can stop worrying about bills like SOPA, and maybe get something important done.

Post by HiVolt

I don't even know what is going on here.

I'm at a loss for words.

Post by Adamsm

I don't even know what is going on here.

I'm at a loss for words.

It's expected when politics involve World of Warcraft....and it's not about lore based stuff for the game itself lol.

Post by gamerunknown

Golf and Hunting are both social activities that do not requires hours of daily effort to keep up with, unless you are trying to be a pro golfer. Bad analogies.

Neither golf nor hunting are necessarily social. Multiplayer gaming almost certainly is.The prospective state senator no longer even plays, so the analogy is particularly apt. No one needs tally up amount of time dedicated to whichever hobby for any politician, unless they're running with that as part of their platform.

It certainly can be for a lot of people.

This is veering into the "Just Asking Questions" or trolling territory. Under the principles of falsifiability, it is certainly possible that Ann Romney's comments about Mitt indicate that he could be suffering from schizophrenia. However, there's not a scrap of evidence that he is, so we can disregard that hypothesis. Likewise, there's no evidence - at all - that this presumptive state senator is dependent on World of Warcraft as individuals are addicted to illegal drugs. She held down a job, she fostered a child and she no longer even plays.

It's an escape from reality - that is the same underlying reason that many people take drugs.

It's also the same underlying reason that many people read fiction.

WoW can definitely form a cycle of addition

Now that's just peachy. I'm glad a politician could get some numeracy hints from the game and realise that reducing the amount put into the guild coffers will not result in more money for repairs (and perhaps that it wouldn't be a good idea to engage in two simultaneous raids while reducing the amount put into the guild coffers in the first place).

and lead to depression if it is not taken in moderation.

You've utterly failed to even provide a definition of "moderation", let alone demonstrate that Lachowicz has exceeded it. To address the substance of your post, there's as much evidence that Lachowicz has a dependence on WoW as she has excessive sexual drive (which, while not recognised by the DSM, is recognised by the WHO's ICD) and just as classy to pry into.

Actually no...most of what was said was her own words. Anyone supporting someone because they play WoW or any other game is a sad reflection of society.

Her own words, which were explicitly not part of her campaign until her opponent decided to employ some Rovian rat#$%^ tactics in an attempt to smear her. Unless you have a cite to prove otherwise.

Edit:

The left claims to offer an egalitarian society through big government, where the government assigns itself authority as it sees fit - and this is why throughout human history most people have lived an oppressed life.

Ever heard of Somalia? Ever read Homage to Catalonia?

Neither; if I was an educated drone I'd probably be blindly agreeing with everyone else for fear of "offending" someone.

You're precious.

Knowledge-Based Education – We oppose the teaching of Higher Order Thinking Skills (HOTS) (values clarification), critical thinking skills and similar programs that are simply a relabeling of Outcome-Based Education (OBE) (mastery learning) which focus on behavior modification and have the purpose of challenging the student’s fixed beliefs and undermining parental authority.

You shouldn't be too eager to believe what I or anyone else tells you. I'd rather people think critically and analyze issues deeper rather than forming views/beliefs based on headlines and bumper-sticker platitudes.

Yes, just as long as you don't seek an education. Particularly not in history, it appears:

This is why throughout American history it has been the democrats who systematically opposed any "right wing" ideas like the civil rights movement or abolishing slavery (in America).

Educate yourself (if you dare).

Civil Rights

Bayard Rustin. Asa Randolph. Martin Luther King Jr. Howard Zinn.

For the opposition:

Lee Atwater. William F. Buckley Jr.

More here. Personally I admire the libertarian noble opposition. They have no bones with opposing the civil rights act, no pretensions to race blind politics. They rightly recognise the civil rights movement as a major victory for socialism in the United States and oppose every facet of it with their core. No hagiographic revisionism for them.

Slavery

Is a little more complex. The classical liberal position, based on relatively recent developments in capital, was of free movement of labour and fixed capital. The concept of the welfare state was absent and this was prior to income taxation (there were the necessary concentrations of wealth for capitalism at the time). Lincoln held that wage slavery was better than chattel slavery (cite), if not by much, and that its superiority was founded on the fact that one could escape the grasps of wage labour in the North and become autonomous. As Jefferson said "Dependence begets subservience and venality, suffocates the germ of virtue, and prepares fit tools for the designs of ambition" (in reference to wage labour).

That said, the pre-enlightenment conservative view was of undivided labour and adherence to a feudalistic hierarchy. Though democratic secession was pretty radical, even if only the propertied white males voted for it.

Here are some more resources if you're interested in learning.

Post by Apodictic

You mean like republicans having to constantly deal with a "journalistic" media that is heavily biased against them, and does everything in their power to keep the spin positive for the liberal/democrats while portraying the republican in a negative light? Depending on his attitude he would either have to make due without the knights OR demand that the other player have his knights removed as well - his choice.

You watch WAY too much of one mainstream media channel. You need to educate yourself more rather than just assume everything that Fox News (or any other mainstream TV news) says.

That's literally the crap that Fox pounds into people every day. I know because I keep an eye on multiple sources (including Fox) and do my own research.

Edit: Diversifying your sources is extremely important, and it becomes more important by the day in these times. Mainly because of the bias and the thought process pushed even further than before by the 2-party system (i.e.: defend your ""team"" at all costs). This extends to many parties outside the 2-party system, as this thought process has been going on for a while now... but is extremely useful in the "divide and conquer" strategy.

Post by Azrile

I am not voting for her because she is gemmed wrong for her spec.

Post by Atik

I am not voting for her because she is gemmed wrong for her spec.

She's... a rogue....

Don't all their specs gem the same?

Post by gamerunknown

Sarah Palin told Romney to go rogue. Maybe the Democrat pre-empted them?

Edit: Dilbo complaining about the state of Enhancement in PvP. Because unlike entitlements like marriage (article 16 of the Universal Declaration of Human Rights, to which the US is a signatory as per Article 2, Section 2, Clause 2 of the Constitution), food (article 25) or the capacity to join a union (article 23), we have a right to equal outcomes in video games.

Post by Adamsm

And Wowinsider has a lovely interview with the lady in question.

Post by Thror

Politics are the dirtiest game of all. Nothing new here. In my country, politicians keep digging up what their opponents did during the era of socialism (which ended 1989) and throwing it at each other. If they had an opponent who would play WoW, they would jump at it immediately. Funny thing is, in a small country like this, a political campaign against WoW could actually have an impact on how the general public sees WoW players.

Also, major trolling by Dilbo lol. What a disgraceful exhibition of flawed logic. You people should get more trollproof.

Post by 517094

This post was from a user who has deleted their account.

Post by Adamsm

She's since hit 85 Abcat; they found the post from her when she was lower level.

Post by Dilbo

Neither golf nor hunting are necessarily social. Multiplayer gaming almost certainly is.

No more, no less than golf or hunting.

This is veering into the "Just Asking Questions" or trolling territory.

The word that's eluding you is "speculating".

Under the principles of falsifiability, it is certainly possible that Ann Romney's comments about Mitt indicate that he could be suffering from schizophrenia.

Now that's a stretch and it's what we call "veering off topic".

Likewise, there's no evidence - at all - that this presumptive state senator is dependent on World of Warcraft as individuals are addicted to illegal drugs. She held down a job, she fostered a child and she no longer even plays.

So the bar has been lowered to being able to "hold down a job" and "reproduce" as the benchmark for what qualifies as acceptable? Fits with the liberal 'mediocrity for everybody' agenda I suppose.

It's also the same underlying reason that many people read fiction.

Reading books does not have the tendency to lead to obsessive anti-social behavior.

You've utterly failed to even provide a definition of "moderation", let alone demonstrate that Lachowicz has exceeded it.

That would be because moderation has a definition.

To address the substance of your post, there's as much evidence that Lachowicz has a dependence on WoW as she has excessive sexual drive (which, while not recognised by the DSM, is recognised by the WHO's ICD) and just as classy to pry into.

Why do people always talk about "evidence" when they know they're on the losing side of an argument...but when they think they have the upper hand they claim their points of view to be "fact"?

Do you think citing third party references somehow bolsters your point when you yourself are incapable of actually rebutting what I've said? If all you got is "show me evidence" then you don't gotz anything.

Her own words, which were explicitly not part of her campaign until her opponent decided to employ some Rovian rat#$%^ tactics in an attempt to smear her. Unless you have a cite to prove otherwise.

No doubt that it is an attempt to undermine her reputation - and rightly so. She would be the one who has to defend herself - that is not my job and I don't know why you think it is yours either.

I don't need to cite anything because I'm simply putting forth my own opinion...and anything you cite is debatable and/or open to interpretation so despite what you think, you are not adding credibility to anything you say.

Neither; if I was an educated drone I'd probably be blindly agreeing with everyone else for fear of "offending" someone.

You're precious.

I'm also correct.

Knowledge-Based Education – We oppose the teaching of Higher Order Thinking Skills (HOTS) (values clarification), critical thinking skills and similar programs that are simply a relabeling of Outcome-Based Education (OBE) (mastery learning) which focus on behavior modification and have the purpose of challenging the student’s fixed beliefs and undermining parental authority.

This is so much worse than the liberal approach of dumbing students down by lowering standards until "everyone is an overachiever" and allowing teachers' unions to continue existence. No child left behind, right!

Yes, just as long as you don't seek an education. Particularly not in history, it appears:

Oh here we go...

Educate yourself (if you dare).

**snipped wikipedia links***

Personally I admire the libertarian noble opposition. They have no bones with opposing the civil rights act, no pretensions to race blind politics. They rightly recognise the civil rights movement as a major victory for socialism in the United States and oppose every facet of it with their core. No hagiographic revisionism for them.

Cutting and pasting wikipedia is a sign that you don't know what you're talking about...which begs the question...why are you still talking?

interested in learning.

Blah blah blah. Look dude, you're not an intellectual because you excel at paraphrasing and suggesting that we "learn" which is code for "buy into your way of thinking".

Try to stay on topic, k?

Post by Dilbo

You watch WAY too much of one mainstream media channel. You need to educate yourself more rather than just assume everything that Fox News (or any other mainstream TV news) says.

Ignorant people need to stop suggesting that intelligent people "educate" themselves...and you also failed to argue the point I raised. Mainstream media leans left - there is no question about that and if you think otherwise then I guess you're too "educated" to see it for what it is.

That's literally the crap that Fox pounds into people every day. I know because I keep an eye on multiple sources (including Fox) and do my own research.

If you were doing your own research we could conclude that you would have been able to intelligently refute the original statement I made, which is that mainstream media is liberal and leans far to the left. The vast majority of college professors self-identify as liberals - it's no surprise...but I guess you think that uniformity is actually a reflection of the "diverse" base that makes up the left.

Edit: Diversifying your sources is extremely important, and it becomes more important by the day in these times. Mainly because of the bias and the thought process pushed even further than before by the 2-party system (i.e.: defend your ""team"" at all costs). This extends to many parties outside the 2-party system, as this thought process has been going on for a while now... but is extremely useful in the "divide and conquer" strategy.

People can either be right, left or somewhere near the middle - but nobody can ever really be dead center. If you think you are, you're lying to yourself.

Sarah Palin told Romney to go rogue. Maybe the Democrat pre-empted them?

WoW joke noted; the word 'rogue' existed long before the game.

Edit: Dilbo complaining about the state of Enhancement in PvP. Because unlike entitlements like marriage (article 16 of the Universal Declaration of Human Rights, to which the US is a signatory as per Article 2, Section 2, Clause 2 of the Constitution), food (article 25) or the capacity to join a union (article 23), we have a right to equal outcomes in video games.

This here lefty keeps trying to weave his political agenda into his replies...now we're to equate a video game's mechanics with gay marriage...and yet it is the most asinine comparison because if you read the post you linked to, you will note that it is merely my observations of the current state of the spec vs how it was before. I still enjoy playing as enhancement now (though to a lesser degree due to the changes they made).

Also, major trolling by Dilbo lol. What a disgraceful exhibition of flawed logic. You people should get more trollproof.

You're going to have to do better than that...also let's stop throwing the word "trolling" around when the conversation is over our heads.

The problem is, sometimes they're not trolling. And, sometimes, they do actually 'think' that way.

Yes some people are independent thinkers who are not preoccupied with having their views mesh with the collective.

I'm a right-winger, but I am regularly astonished at the extraordinarily clueless comments that other right-wingers make.

Speaking of clueless comments - you just made one. Your comment that attempts to paint "right wingers" as all being the one and the same is no less ignorant than stating that you don't want to be next to a black person because you're worried that they'll steal your wallet.

That and you're a liberal; stop pretending.

Remember the comments of Republican Senate candidate, Todd Akin, a few weeks back, where he claimed that it was a medical fact that a woman who has been the victim of a “legitimate rape” cannot get pregnant as a result of that rape? THAT is some indication of just how ignorant and out-of-touch some of these people are.

Remember when Obama said that Louisiana didn't get federal emergency money after it was flooded because the white house didn't want to help black people? Well he didn't say that outright; he just made strong implications during one of his speeches to a predominantly black audience. At least Akin isn't the US president.

Political attack on an Orc Rogue - what's your response?

Post Reply