The story behind Forest is that there were new races never seen on the old lands... then the dirty humans conquered their islands, forcing those creatures into the deep abyss of the Forest.

No you cant change that fact, I dont care if you're Kai or Gryffon or whoever... why? Because I made it that way. It is how Forest was made.

Fair enough.

Understand that I am not arguing against new races per se. I am arguing against a lack of regulation, where players are free to invent those races for themselves.

Daveons were created as part of a small attempt at a subkingdom on 2k1. Dustari, who pretty much controlled RPing on 2k1, agnowledged this group, if only shortly because it fell apart. My character was the only one who STAYED with that backstory.

Oh, and inspiration- People already argue about whose character is best for every other reason (skills, social class, etc), so why not race? While your daveon-killer breath may keep in the spirit of not being unbalanced, let's compare and contrast. I'm a Daveon. It means I basically have the attributes of an Elf with a desert culture. This is just mixing a CURRENT ability (virtual immortality) with cultural differences. I don't have some uber godmodding murder-breath. THAT breaks general standards of RP balance in the official servers.

I don't see how this goes against anything that I said.

The fact of the matter is he has a character that is different. It isn't omniscient, it isn't God, it can't destroy the world in a blink of an eye, so shut the hell up.

If other people want to make their character into a God and disrupt the RP by doing exactly of what you've ranted on and on about for the past 2 pages, then let them. You can turn and yell at them for being idiots who probably enjoy the use of autoing.

The fact is the RP is FREEFORM, he can do whatever the hell he wants in a confine of mannered RP, plain and simple. Until his char blows up every other island then necromances the dead souls -- his character does nothing more then suit his fancy, and expand his RPing ability.

The fact of the matter is that he has a character designed to be special (which in itself is bad practice), one that makes new assertions about a world that has to be shared between all of the players, so shut the hell up.

As of now he's like every other player, his past is "special."

He was like that in his own world, Obsydon or whatever, and then came to Graal. So it doesn't have to be shared between all players since he's the only one from there.


Not saying I agree with it, I just don't see the big deal since it has no factor in game. People in game probably don't even know about it, it's just something he likes.

Then he is special. A character's history is a part of what he is.

Now you're just equivocating. The term 'world' was not meant in the planetary sense.

Well, I hope you will someday manage to resolve that problem.

OH MY SPEAKING FRENCH NOW ARE WE?

This thread is crazy :(

In what little is written for an official backstory of Kingdoms, it mentions that the refugees from the original kingdoms fled the bomies and founded new kingdoms on the Archipelago. This means that the Archipelago is not the entire world, which means that there is leeway for other races from other lands that may not have been heard of by the cartographers of said Archipelago. Other than that, there is no canon backstory to encompass the entire world, so one person really can't bring up the claim that you're not allowed to use your imagination.

I certainly don't see a problem with Gryffon's character, as the racial difference merely seems to affect his character's personal values. Gryffon acts in a certain way and says certain things, because of the values of his culture.

It's really no different than two Humans, both raised in Human villages, except one was raised in a village of thieves, and therefore, acts radically different from the Human raised in a normal peaceful village. Though this difference isn't racial, they still have culture differences, and their actions have to be explained by the revelation of their past, just as how Gryffon's actions are explained through the revelation of his race. Two different ways to set a character apart from GENERIC RP CHARACTER A, but both just as valid.

Well, I do not think you are the most impartial of judges. What species is your character, again?

Except that thieves already exist in the gameworld, and don't need to be invented. Such a backstory would be well within the realm of believability, and wouldn't require any major modification of the shared universe.

ROLEPLAYING ANYTHING modifies the shared universe. It changes what has happened. Kaimetsu, it's not that you don't Rp on Thursdays- that's not germane to any kind of real point- it's that you don't roleplay on Thursdays in a certain room with certain people. That IS important- you know nothing of the actuality of how THAT GROUP roleplays.

Did you notice that I used the word 'major'? And I didn't even need to go back and edit my post ^_^

1) "nothing"? Lil' bit of an exaggeration, don't you think? You think that playing GK is the only way to get a sense for how people roleplay therein?
2) How they do roleplay is irrelevant. This is about how they should roleplay.

I can see where Kai is comming from though. I don't think any kingdom, not just forest, should have a bunch of people running around saying they are [insert a bunch of crazy names here] when the kingdoms have specific races. Like Forest, they had Dwarfs, Elves, humans, and even some Orcs on a small island. (I might of forgot one e.e)

But anyway, there should be some regulation I suppose?

Where would any RP go if nothing new was inserted? Dwarves, Elves, hell, mythology itself was at a time new, and yet it's commonly used in RP now, so why not his idea? :|

You can't have everyone making their own races, just think about it.

People want to be different. Deal with it.

With some limitations, they can.

And what if people would be interested in this particular race?

I'm not saying that there's anything fundamentally wrong with the idea. I'm saying that unregulated roleplaying is a bad thing. Letting individuals make drastic changes to the shape and history of the world is dangerous.

My 2 cents....I hate it when every player uses an amnesia backstory, but I don't mind at all when people use it rarely. Kai is talking about a theoretical danger, that everyone could as it stands, be a bunch of wierd made up races that result in a very disjointed community where no one knows what the heck anyone else is.

However, this has not happened in practice. Gryf is a rare unique race, and that can be consistant as long as rare and unique races in general are rare and unique. If and only if they become commonplace, is it an issue.

Also, the fear of everyone wanting crazy rp based powers as demons that can destroy whole cities - that is not happening either.

Considering that all of Kai's issues are with hypothetical problems that COULD occur, and given the number of literal and existing problems with RPing in GK today that DO occur and still persist and are problematic, I think the argument should be dismissed on the 'you are worrying about what?' note.

If everyone wanted a unique race, yes that would be annoying. However, its rare and he's been playing this character since 2k1.

Why is that, exactly? I mean, I feel the same way, I'm just wondering what you'd give as your reasons.

There's that fox guy, I think? I'm sure there would be others if the average Graal RPer actually bothered to design a backstory. Currently they're not doing that, so we don't see too many objectionable origins. But would you agree that designing an identity and history for your character is something to be encouraged? If we are hoping to have more people undergoing this process, it makes sense to agree on some ground rules beforehand.

I dunno. Have you read this thread?

What other problems am I capable of addressing?

Heil mein fuhrer Kaimetsu, apparently.

Telling people who participate in an activity you don't, in a group setting you're not a part of, how to do something seems like you're making some mighty big assumptions (pardon the southern diction). You ASSUME you know the problems that riddle this particular community. You ASSUME you know the best ways to solve them. Most of all, you ASSUME that everyone follows one unwritten set of laws. Wow, Graal as a Roleplaying community dosen't, "uniques" are the minority, not the majority as all of your assumptions would have us believe, the higher ups of the community seem to be in agreement- you are the most overbearing link, goodbye.

Uh-oh, you broke Godwin's law. I hope you understand the implications.

Person A likes to roleplay while wearing a three-metre-wide purple hat. He uses the name "SSJGOKUSSJJJJSJ123" and persists in asking other characters who they think will win American Idol. Is this bad roleplaying?

Ah! Don't answer just yet! First, ask yourself if you've ever roleplayed while wearing a huge purple hat.

I do? As I recall, I've only talked about one: You.

No, that's just a matter of general gaming experience. I know what breaks up believability and irritates other people, because these things are common to all types of roleplaying. Wearing a hat or playing on Thursday doesn't change basic human psychology.

Where? You seem to be giving me a lot of imaginary assumptions. I've merely been talking about good roleplaying protocols, I haven't asserted that people tend to follow them.

Only if their community as a whole is opposed to Rping in that fashion.

Belivability? In a world filled with go-karts, hockey, archaic knights, fish-based incarnations of ancient roman society, battle potatoes and where an ancient fuedal warlord system decides who wins a war by an Out-Of-Character trial by events masters?

Yeah, being a foreigner from a foreign place that seems unique REALLY kills believability there.
No, but you've asserted that they SHOULD follow them. You're being horribly imperical about enforcing YOUR standards on a scenario THEY DONT APPLY TO.

So you would say that there is nothing which could be considered universally bad roleplaying?

Yeah, pretty much. I've already told you: Realism isn't the same as believability. Why can't you grasp the difference?

How is that the same as asserting that they do?

Whatever Kaimetsu. What you think/say has no bearing on the community. The people OF THE COMMUNITY have voiced their opinion, mostly in my favor, and you can do nothing to disaude this alluvion of opinion. The fact that you do HAVE the power nor right to inforce these arbitrary stereotypes of what is and is not proper roleplaying makes me happy. As a matter of fact, I'd venture to say that it makes me feel downright tingly.

So you are saying that the majority opinion of any arbitrarily chosen set of people is automatically correct?

True. The absence of proper roleplaying regulations means that you can damage that element of the server in whatever way that you want. You can freely abuse whatever power you have in order to make yourself feel special. Like the script kiddy that abuses security flaws in order to grant himself power, you are quite able to boast about other people's inability to stop you. Kudos to you!

You seem pretty arbitrary.

Kudos to you, Kaimetsu. Your one skill seems to be arguing. I daresay I could hold a red pen up to you and listen to you lecture for two hours on how the pen is really blue. Things are what they are. The server is no worse the wear for my character being slightly unique yet not overpowered. There are bigger RP-damaging fish to fry, such as samurais named PoPo, Samurais period, angruy rastaffarian merchants that decide to turn elvish sans provocation, and a slew of noobie RPers who don't know IC from OOC.

I have been Daveon for three years. The server has yet to have a major gang-bang of uniques. Ghost Pirate's character was arguable more unique than mine- HE WAS DEAD. Yet he was a great Roleplayer, influenced both servers for the positive. I'm not going to pretend I've done his level of work for the ecosystem of Roleplaying, but I'm not going to sit here and let some verbose little debator slander me for wholy unfounded causes.

Given your inability to answer my question, I'm inclined to think you don't know what it means.

My one skill? Do you really believe that's accurate?

I think you missed a couple of words there. Didn't you mean to say "Things are what I say they are"?

According to you. See?

Why are those bad things? Because you say so? Maybe you're just not wearing the right color of hat. If you mean to imply that those things are universally bad then you're just contradicting yourself. If you're saying that the majority think they're bad then you'll need to provide evidence. Do you have statistics? If such things are so commonly disliked, why do they still exist?

Indeed, but that didn't require him to modify the universe in any significant way. Anybody can die, and we already know that there are undead creatures in the world.

Little? >:O

When its overdone its annoying, and is often a lazy way to become mysterious or not think of a backstory. If Gryf had chosen an unknown race at a time that 'everyone was doing it' and didn't think it out at all, that would annoy me too. Its just not the case.

There have been a few Furres in Dustari, most with well thought out backstories. Of course, rp character backgrounds are 'good' regardless of how mundane or 'special' they are. As for the process, usually the kingdoms regulate themselves, when a person has a question on what sort of backstory to write, they ask the advice of the King/Queen or an Rper in a senior rank. I helped many people write decent ones. When they work, then it helps RPing work, and if someone's story seems difficult, it works itself out and will likely get modified. In any case that is what kingdoms are for. If there are genuine inter kingdom problems 'ground rule' wise, they are worked out by the leaders if they are any good at engaging with the community as a whole.


Doesn't seem to be very encouraging of the idea of having demonic origins, its sure not an endorsment of that by any means. If anything it supports what I am saying.

[/QUOTE]
Use your brain for that one.

Just a side note, about the 'not RPing on Thursdays' and such, you are making bad comparisons here. Same with the purple hats. What determines relevance of experience is participation within the community that it is in regards to. No one says "you don't rp so you don't know" or "you don't rp here so you don't know how" people are saying "you don't rp with this community, and it explains why your theories about this community are wrong and ill informed".

The thing is, we ARE in agreement that people don't want everyone having random races. If a few people added that element to their RP histories, their kingdom community would offer suggestions, and if it looked like it was becoming a fad, the kingdom community would directly discourage it. You are wrong to think it is all chaotic free-form. There is not supposed to be a centralized RP Rule Of Law dictator, the kingdoms are supposed to have good leaders that work with the members to help keep a good consistent community that works fluidly with the other communities. If that is flawed, its another discussion.

Well, yeah. But I asked why you find it annoying.

Excellent, I commend you on your efforts. But what if other kingdom leaders fail to do the same, or do it in a way that encourages bad practices? I mean, wasn't Gryffon once a king? Self-regulation is great, but only when it's done properly.

That's not what it's supposed to demonstrate. Rather, it is an indication that people are engaging in this kind of unbalancing make-believe, and that more active discouragement might be a good thing. Certainly we could do without ex-kingdom-leaders setting a bad precedent.

Well, that wasn't a very mature response. If you cannot think of any then just say so.

I'll say to you what I said to Gryffon: Why? Because you say so? Who gets to draw the line between absolutes and relatives? Do you not agree that some things are universal?

So, what, is it first-come-first-served? Or I'll-let-you-be-special-because-you're-my-friend? How is either of those fair?

But is that actually the case? If not, it is chaotic.

Same reason other people find it annoying - when everyone is doing it usually its a quick solution to not having any other ideas. It rarely contributes something unique and creative.
Um, he is the current leader of Forest, unless I missed something recently. When its not done properly, we all post threads about how much the kingdom of such and such sucks and how its ruining GK. Search for references to KJ etc, you'll get the idea.
Its only a bad precedent if there is a problem, and it has not. If there was a pandemic of people rping as unsual creatures I could consider agreeing with you, but that would be a stretch. For instance, paladins are rare there is only able to be one Paladin of Dustari, and if he did that job well, would he be encouraging a problem of lots of people wanting to play paladins who are not in Dustari? Gryf, as one of a very few who play unsual species is not causing a problem any more than one good paladin would.

What determines the problem or level of unbalance is not myself or you, but whether the community is caused problems by it.
I can, I just don't have any interest in discussing them. I have already in many posts.

Its by loose consensus of the community as a whole.
Usually its first come first serve, because when something is unique and creative it contributes to the community in a novel way, but when someone tries to do something that has already been done before that just doesn't fit at all, its a drag on the community. That is perfectly fair, because its about what works and what doesn't. Ironically, you are proposing that no one be allowed to, even when it doesn't cause any problems, which is unfair to people who are currently playing such characters.

It is not so chaotic that everyone is playing some strange race from beyond the known lands. It is managed to a degree, and certianly can be better. However, improvement will be based on fixing the problems that bother the community, not fixing 'problems' that you, who does not RP with the community feel exist on a theoretical level.

So you just get annoyed by things that happen frequently? Does the amnesia thing do any real harm?

I probably misinterpreted something. Of course, I only see what is posted to the board.

Um. A precedent is something that precedes something else. The point isn't such much what has happened, but what might. If kingdom leaders are doing something, it kind of sets the message that it's okay.

Yeah, but:

1) That's Dustari. One kingdom - one that's probably managed better than most of the others. If those mechanisms aren't in place in other kingdoms then it makes sense to empathise now that elaborate, dramatic, super-special world-altering backstories are something to avoid.
2) Choosing a paladin is much different to choosing who gets to invent a race. You can do it based on merits and objective factors like experience, length of membership, etc.

Then you can't really use that point.

That answer doesn't make any sense. If a polarised group of people selects the absolutes then they're just not absolute anymore.

Okay. Should/will the devil guy get to keep his origin story? If not, why not?

Wah. Maybe they'll need to invent characters that don't make them feel so special. Maybe they should've done that in the first place.

But what is stopping them from doing that? I mean, sure, some of the kingdoms oppose it, but they could always just move to another one.

This is always such a lousy copout. Like you can't fix more than one thing at once?

When lots of people adopt it it breaks the suspension of disbelief and it limits the creativtity. So I wouldn't say 'yes it does' but 'yes it can' and it is thusly discouraged. People aren't told they can't, its just pointed out to them how common it is and if they are looking for something more original they should keep trying ideas or at least add something into the amesia story.

Its been mentioned on this board a lot.

I know what precedent is, and the thing is that it IS okay for Gryf because its not overused. Bad, would be setting a precedent about using something that IS overused.
You base this on?
He's from an obsure race, it has no world altering super special elements. OMG a different humanoid exists...so what? He isn't more powerful for it.
Being a paladin has more influence than having a special race.
I think you would agree that I can, if we use a slightly different example. For instance, if someone read that the town you live in has a low rate of church attendance, and no one in that town cares, and the town was facing other issues of economics and safety. Does the fact that you don't want to name the specifics of the economic issues prevent you from making the observation that out of towner's grevience is of little importance compared to other issues?

There are no absolutes of rules, only a loose desire for everyone to be happy with how things go.
Its not up to me, I assume they'll "see how it goes" and all that.

Wah, maybe you need to find something that concerns you to get upset about.
They want a story that works with the group they play with. If the group says they feel it doesn't work, then most of the time they will get suggestions on how to refine it.

This ain't broke.



This is really dumb and kinda simple: Gryf and a few people have unusual races, which at this time don't have any negative impact on the game. Other things, yes, these factors, no. You are against the idea in general, and are worried that there are no safeguards. Well, we haven't needed those safeguards yet, and the fact you don't like the idea doesn't mean much to the majority of the community here, who are more than content with this elements. You made your point, it wasn't that well recieved, no one wants to adhere to your suggestions. Enough said.

I was judging from this thread. I couldn't bear to read through the entire thing, but the gist seemed to be that he had been denied leadership. Presumably it didn't end that way, but these details are irrelevant. That he is currently a kingdom leader only strengthens my point.

...

You recognise that the present and the future are different things, right?

Occasional observations. The Pirates, Samurai and Zormite seem to come under fire more often than Forest and Dustari. If I am mistaken, please let me know.

World-altering: It posits the existence of an entire race. That doesn't alter the world?
And it's not special to be a centuries-old dewinged-bird-turned-redeemed-elf creature?

When was that ever the issue?

It is also more likely to involve wearing a shiny hat. What's the relevance?

You're begging the question. Here's a better example:

A: "Hey, we shouldn't be worrying about (saving the rainforests/achieving world peace/finding a clean energy source/etc) while there's so much other stuff to be concerned about!!"
B: "Like what?"
A: "Um. I don't feel like answering that question"

Should we heed A's objection?

If there are no absolutes then the hat thing stands. If all rules are relative to the situation then you have absolutely no idea how to roleplay while wearing a huge purple hat. How could you? You don't have the experience.

Should/will the devil guy get to keep his origin story?

Haha, please try to stay on topic.

Who does? Every roleplayer in existence? And are all the kingdoms strict about what 'works'?

Or, rather, on your enjoyment of the game.

Man, my objective here isn't to convert people like Gryffon. I'm just not that optimistic. This whole thing is primarily a fun debate, but there's a slim possibility that some of you will actually think about what's been said here, and if that leads to improvement then all the better. Just don't think that I'm depending on it.

You are just compounding the obviousness of your ignorance to the current affairs of the community. Who is to say when you need direct experience to offer advice? When the fast majority of the people you are offering advice to decide to tell you to stop babbling and go away is a good start. There are exceptions, but this isn't one of them.

...
Duh, and I do understand what you are saying, I got it a few posts ago. What you are missing is that the only precedent gryf is setting is to be creative. If people all 'do what he did' they would do something original and creative, which would not include starting a fad of a million unique races.

Hey I was a king once, if I close my eyes when I sleep, and I setting a precedent for people to think its fine to close their eyes while driving? Can you see how your argument breaks down yet?

And yet you can't even tell us who the current leader of Forest is. Forgive me if I find your research to be... not beyond reproach.

Unless 'they' invade or something I would say 99% of the graal world wouldn't even notice any impact without meeting him. I doubt anyone would say 'BIRD RACE??? CRAP!! YOU RUINED IT!!! I AM QUITTING THIS GAME!'
You have to measure impact when someone adopts a new type of rp element. If he was a fallen god who could turn people to stone with his finger nail clippings that would be something to get bothered about.

To roleplay with a paladin, you can assume his word is trusted and he has influence over many in the church, gets special treatment, and has advantages other players do not. There is more impact on other players to play with a paladin than with Gryf's characterr. That is the relevance.

Sorry, did you mean to say 'dumb' example? Think for two seconds,
rainforest = current problem
wars all over the world = current problem
energy polution = current problem

then we have...
Kai is worried one day, even though it hasn't happened yet in the last 3 yrs that gryf has been a strange race, that everyone will want to be some strange race and it will eventually impact RPing negatively on the server = theoretical problem only you feel is likely to occur

Get the picture yet?
Where do you get that deductive result? I know you are smarter than this, just try to review it for a moment. The purple hat...if a person has other traits in their RP style to which any hat is irrelevant then you can talk about those and have credibility assuming you do have experience that is relevant.

Hat types...not relevant. Contemporary experience with the community in question...very relevant. If you have roleplayed, you have probably worn enough variety of hats anyway that a purple one is not a significant variant anyway. There is absolutely nothing for you to hang that argument on.

If you want to know what the absolutes are, the absolute bottom line is 'are people having fun rping or not?'

How should I know? Without talking to the members and all that, I can't tell what the group wants.

Please don't take snipes at players you don't even play with.
The individual with the story. I use 'they' in place of 'he/she' for singular at times. Not all kingdoms are as strict or even consistent but the issue then is if cross-kingdom conflicts arise, and they do at times, but if the leaders are decent they get worked out.

No, not mine. I am talking about the communitys' enjoyment.
Perfect, then we can say 'alright you lost' and all get on with other topics.

Oi, the ad hominems begin again. Unless you can show that knowing the current leaders of all the kingdoms is a prerequisite for understanding good roleplaying practices, your argument reduces to a desperate, petty attack.

Well that's a pretty stupid argument.

A: "Hey, kid, I'm gonna sanction your act of murder this time because you were really really angry"
B: "But judge, doesn't that set a bad precedent?"
A: "What? No. The only precedent it sets is to make law rulings of some sort, which is good!"

You can't pick and choose, man. Every aspect of everything he does is included in this precedent. The nature of the 'creativity' is just as important as the nature of A's ruling.

Don't be ridiculous. Complaints about RPing are far more common than threads about new leaders. If I read random threads, it's to be expected that I'll see more of the former than the latter. Since the latter neither concerns me nor affects the debate, there's no reason to raise it.

Again: If I am mistaken in my assessment of the kindgoms, please correct me. Is Dustari below average in terms of management, then?

Well, it would be nice to imagine a world where nobody ever has to meet him, but I don't think that's entirely viable.

Agreed. But that wasn't the basis on which I was criticising him. You don't gain any ground in this debate by arguing against points that I never made.

Yeah, probably. And again, the paladin has a shiny hat. Neither factor relates to the issue of letting people invent kooky backstories.

I doubt that A would agree. But, of course, you're automatically right because you say so? You cannot simply assert that something isn't a problem and expect your word to seal the debate. The whole point of the thread is to determine whether or not that's the case.

And this still doesn't change the fact that your allusions to greater problems mean diddley-squat if you don't actually specify them.

Sigh.

By saying that the purple hat makes no difference, you are positing the existence of absolutes - factors that are true regardless of your current attire. You also tell me that these absolutes are decided by a polarised group of roleplayers, making them strictly relative, according to your logic. If they're not absolute then who's to say that wearing a purple hat doesn't modify the experience beyond your comprehension? If they are absolute then you need to show how you determined them, and show that the process wouldn't work equally for me.

Summary: If you can dismiss hats as irrelevant as a matter of assertion, I can do the same with arbitrary GK details.

You take a survey every time you want to make a decision? When was the last time?

What snipes? I identified a subset of players. If anybody is in that subset of players then they are in that subset of players, and my comment applies to them. If not, it doesn't. There's nothing personal about it. Would I be sniping if I said "murderers should be in prison"?

And would they? If one kingdom were letting players be incarnations of gods, what would the others actually do about it?

Ah, you took a survey?

Oh man, now you're breaking Godwin's laws. You people clearly need more practice at this.

As usual you use a series BS claims in how everyone else's arguments are flawed, and when you are called on it you just break down the reply with a series of quoted one liners that are even less coherent. The only three possible outcomes are to drop the topic, find the thread locked, or run out of disk space.

Sure, I could be tempted to point out that Godwin's Law applies to **** references, which I did not make, and unless there is some obscure corollary your invocation of it is completely in error. However, even though I could make a point of that, it doesn't matter - even if you were right and I am breaking Godwin's Law by saying "Perfect, then we can say 'alright you lost' and all get on with other topics." its entirely ancillary to the debate. Its deflective on your part, as are most of your 'points' that you make. I really don't care about Godwin's Law, its somewhat cute, but of little relevance.

If you can't see your purple hat idea is completely flawed that's fine. I am not going to debate a gorilla about fiber optics and if you can't figure out what is obvious to others about your own comments that is really your problem.

Your judge/murder thing - how can you say something that flawed without it being a baiting ploy?

To be honest, I really suspect you just enjoy baiting people and making arguments you know are flawed, just to see how long you can keep people going. That is the most logical explination given - it is really hard to believe you suffer tunnel vision to the depth displayed here unless you have an ulterior motive.

No, you do! I don't have to prove it, I just have to say it!!!

Man, he has more than one law. Did you notice that I already invoked his most famous one in dealing with Gryffon, when he likened me to a ****? Don't you think that shows that I know what it is?

What was I deflecting? Your arrogant, self-righteous claim to victory? Sorry, but if you make such unwarranted claims then you don't get to complain when your opponent gives you a flippant answer. You weren't contributing to the debate, so why should my reply?

If you can't see that your everything-is-relative idea is completely flawed, that's fine. I don't expect that I can change your mind without laboriously teaching you the meanings of all the relevant words.

Your he's-not-setting-a-precedent thing - how can you say something that flawed? Like, at all? You must be the flawingest guy in the world.

What a coincidence! I was gonna say the same to you. In fact, I will!

To be honest, I really suspect you just enjoy baiting people and making arguments you know are flawed.

Sorry if it seemed like I deflected all of your valid debatey points!!