The Dice are Silent
Posted By Kathleen David on March 4, 2008
I found out through a friend that Ernest Gary Gygax had lost his saving throw verse death (2nd edition rule of course). This news stunned me. I knew through the grapevine that he had been in poor health for a while now. He had some serious medical problems that he seemed to be dealing with for the most part but still considering the number of medical problems that he had been having, it surprises me that I am not writing this sooner.
This is not really about Gary Gygax. I met him a couple of times over the years. I was inarticulate the first time because he was fri’king Gary Gygax. I was better subsequent times that our paths crossed. He loved the fans and listened to so many tales told of things that happened in people’s campaigns and to their characters. I admired his patience with people even when you could tell he was really tired.
This is about what Gary Gygax did for me. The first game I played that he created was Chainmail which was the precursor to D&D. I was introduced to Dungeons and Dragons through my high school science fiction club and a party that we threw that some gamers came to by invitation and we all arranged to get together and game. They brought the box set of D&D and ran us through the basic rules. My first character was a pretty generic fighter that got killed about half way through the dungeon. But I had a lot of fun. We agreed to get back together in two weeks and try it again. And we started gaming about every two weeks.
I remember the excitement when we found out about Advanced Dungeons and Dragons. We went to the “Sword of the Phoenix” when the books were released and got a set. Which put a gamer back a pretty penny but the system was a beautiful thing. We passed the books around and learned the new rules and got out our dice to try it. That was the real beginning of my love for role-playing games.
Gaming became a touchstone for me. I can’t tell you how many friends I have made over the table. I can’t tell you how many games or campaigns I have been a part of. Gaming became a part of me and still is.
One of the longer campaigns that I played, I had a ranger who was pretty kicking stats-wise. But he had no luck what so ever or rather my dice hated me for a time. He ended up with a dragon shaped scar on his face and left arm which was critical for an adventure but really knocked the hit points down. Then there was the night that we were talking about homosexuality because of some stuff that had happened on campus that week. So we figured out the statistical probability of being gay and rolled for each of our characters. And all of the sudden I was running a gay ranger. I still have a fondness for that character. Heck, I probably still have his sheets. But that is D&D, you create and play in the world of your creation with the rules as set down in the rule books.
Yes, I made the dice bag that my original dice are still housed in. I branched out from D&D and did some play testing over the years for GuRPs and the original Vampire; The Masquerade way back in the late 80s and early 90s. I have played a lot of different role playing games in my day but it all comes back to D&D for me. That was my first love.
My sympathies are with Gary’s family and extended family.
I got to thank him for giving me such a wonderful creative outlet and for that I am grateful. I think I’m going to see if I know where my dice bag is and, if my brother hasn’t already taken them, get my books from my parent’s house which included the Deities and DemiGods that was recalled along with the original box set and a very old copy of Chainmail. He created something very special that will live on far into the future.
Game On!
I haven’t played in years. Haven’t had the time to do it right. But I’ve still got all of the editions I’ve ever bought. Some dating back to 1981.
Some old friends and I have been talking about “the old days” and playing that game for days straight ever since the news broke. I wonder if even he really knew how many lives his creation touched.
I haven’t played D&D in years. Haven’y had the time to do it right. But I’ve still got every book, every single dice and every single figure that I ever got for that game. Some of ’em dating back to 1981.
Ever since the news broke, I’ve been exchanging emails with long time friends talking about “the old days” when we would play that game for days on end. I wonder if even he actually knew how many lives his creation touched.
Sorry, it didn’t go through the first time (I actually had the comment section up and no comment to be seen) and then they both went through together.
??????
~8?C
I hadn’t known that you were a gamer, Ms. David. I have been playing some sort of regular game since ’85. For dice bags, I’ve usually used those bags Crown Royal comes in, though they’re hard to come by: I don’t drink and neither do most of my friends.
I was going to make some sort of comment about it being unfortunate that resurection spells don’t work on people who died of old age, but I don’t have the heart to to it properly…
God: Gary, roll saving throw vs. Death.
[clatter]
Gygax: Um, does a “2” save?
God: No. You’re dead.
Gygax: What, no Resurrection or Raise Dead?
God: Not in my campaign world.
. . . . .
Sigh. Good times. I wonder if there’ll be a “GAME FOR GARY” panel or event at Dragon*Con.
I didn’t learn the game until college. It was an all-girl school, and the games were ruthless. I have all my original books, and some of my original dice and figures still survive the wrath of my kids. I still have all my sheets. At one point I had a 10-year old ‘fighter’ who bludgeoned a monster with a bag of hard candy. 20 years later, the smart-ášš playing a blind bard kept annoying the DM by passing him notes in Braille.
While I feel the complexity of the current rules detracts from the fun – you shouldn’t need a math degree to role a character – I’m glad to see my kids pick up the slack. What a sadder, duller place my life would be if I hadn’t been touched by the Gygax world.
If I had made a nerd-joke about a recently deceased celebrity on your husband’s board, I assume I would rightly be slammed for crudity and insensitivity to other people’s loss. How your jest is in any way different is a mystery. Would your loved ones be amused by references to Gamma Bombs and purple trousers if someone from your family were to die? In your place, I would find it rather crass.
You know, Frawley, it’s pathetic enough that you have this compulsion to haunt my website and find new and increasingly ridiculous reasons to bìŧçh about everything I say. But now you feel the need to spread your obsession to my WIFE’S board? That’s just repulsive. Hey: Why not scoot over to http://www.colbernation.com and excoriate Stephen Colbert for saying, “Gary Gygax is dead. How do I feel about that?” and then rolling dice and saying, “It’s a twenty.” Or is that not worth your time even though that went out to millions of people?
The fact is that Gary’s family and friends made similar comments. It is, in fact, a perfectly reasonable thing to say, especially when it is merely the preface to a lengthy and heartfelt commentary such as Kath wrote.
And in response to your nasty and mean-spirited little jibe, Kath fully expects that when I go, people will say things like, “Don’t make Peter dead. We don’t like him when he’s dead.” Humor is a reasonable response to sad things. Different people have different coping mechanisms with life. Normal people cope by making jokes. You cope with life by finding reasons to attack me and my family. At least one of those is a healthy outlet.
PAD
PAD, I was under the impression your wife was an adult who maintained a blog, rather than an idiot child you had to protect from mean guys. Actually, I still feel that way – It’s just that her husband doesn’t seem to think so. Be honest for a moment (I imagine that’s not impossible): If I had made a crack about doubling cubes and guidebooks as a joke about a recently deceased person on YOUR blog, you know very well you’d call me on being an áššhølë. Your crap about “His family talks JUST that way” means nothing. The man himself is dead, has no opportunity to speak for himself as his relatives supposedly have, and deserves more respect than a nerd joke.
Let’s personalize this for a moment. I don’t like or respect you at all; If I heard of your passing it would mean nothing at all to me, but I would never think of trivializing your family’s loss with poor jokes about any of the fictional characters you’ve written.
Jeffrey, you are in very serious danger of surpassing Mike as the biggest jáçkášš on the board. You may have already done so; Mike can’t help himself and, at least, really does crave Peter’s approval, making his presence here at least understandable. What you are getting from this is anyone’s guess.
Although this will probably fall on deaf ears, defending one;s wife against unfair aspersions on her character is not the same as assuming she is “an idiot child”. It’s the perfectly reasonable response of a loving husband, especially when the attack is most likely just collateral damage in some weird personal agenda.
Honestly–you don’t like PAD, you don’t seem to like most of the regulars here on the board and you’re rapidly gaining a reputation as someone whose posts are best skipped–what exactly is it you are getting from this? The satisfaction of hanging out with people who would rather you leave? I don’t get it.
Jeff,
You really are proving yourself to be the lowest of the low.
Kath,
It’s not really my place, but, if I may, I’d suggest you delete Jeff’s posts, the responding posts including this one of mine. I came back by to see what others had added and was finding the thread to be a really nice little tribute to the man and his creation. Then I hit Jeff’s posts. And I kinda contributed to it by sending an email to several regulars with a “look at what the idiot is doing now” tone to it. This would be a crappy way for a thread dedicated to Gygax’s memory to go into the archives. Or anyone else for that matter.
It’s not “a really nice little tribute to the man and his creation” to trivialize Gary Gygax’s death with “saving throw” jokes. PAD has every right to disagree with me and to wish no one every disagreed with his wife – but none to expect it. To believe her posts must be met with nothing but adoring agreement or respectful silence is patronizing and foolish. PAD does not expect such lockstep agreement on his own site: To do so here suggests he thinks his wife is a delicate flower who has to be protected from her own idiocy, rather than a thinking adult. Well, that’s a lot more offensive than my daring to disagree with her. She’s an adult who maintains her own blog, forms opinions on her own, and is strong enough to survive disagreement.
You’re not fooling anyone, Frawley. Well, maybe yourself. This has nothing to do with poor taste, trivializing tragedy, or anything other than your unhealthy obsession with me (and now my family) and your twisted need to find ways to attack me.
Hey. Look. Mark Evanier said that he hoped Roy Scheider’s real death was as well-choreographed as it was in “All that Jazz.” Sounds pretty tasteless. And Bob Greenberger on his blog not only referenced it, but linked to the clip. How monumentally insensitive and tasteless. Whereas Kath’s comment preceded a lengthy and heartfelt remembrance, Mark and Bob’s reference to “All that Jazz” was pretty much the entirety of the posting.
Where is your righteous indignation over that?
Nowhere to be found.
Big shock? No shock.
You present yourself as some sort of vigilant defender of good taste, but it’s obviously just monumental bull. Your ONLY incentive is to harass myself and my family. To put it delicately, you are in desperate need of psychological help. To put it indelicately, you are the idiot child here, and every word out of your cyber mouth proves that.
And by the way, idiot child, Kath doesn’t need defending. She just obviously feels that you are not worth her time. I am henceforth going to follow that lead. You are, as far as I am concerned, permanently shrouded on my blog. When you show up again there, as you inevitably will, I will never respond to you or even acknowledge your existence, because it’s become abundantly clear that you will never, ever deviate from your obsessive hatred for me and there is simply no reason to feed the beast anymore.
PAD
Jeffy’s getting exactly what he wanted: attention. This thread is now about him.
It shouldn’t be. It should be about Gary Gygax. He was a man who shared his fertile imagination with us. He provided us with the tools, the framework, and the inspiration to release our own imaginations. There were truly no limits to what could be done with D&D. If you had a pencil, paper, and someone to play with, a table became your gateway to a world where anything was possible.
What did D&D mean to me? It meant a childhood filled with wonderment. It meant opening my mind to new possibilities, believing in the impossible, discovering mythologies I’d otherwise never have known existed. It meant learning to sharpen my mind when other kids were dulling theirs.
Gary Gygax may be gone, but he has pulled off the ultimate feat of magic: he has created a legacy that cannot be killed as long as there is such a thing as imagination.
Truth to tell, I played D&D exactly once. I was in my early 20s and a friend invited me to a D&D adventure that he was hosting. I went along and rolled up a thief. We were about fifteen minutes into the adventure and encountered a locked vault. I endeavored to pick the lock. It was bøøbÿ trapped and one flash of light later, I was transformed into a thistle.
The resident magic user decided that, since I was such a low level character, I wasn’t worth expending the magic points on to transform me back. So they stuck me in a backpack and sat there watching everyone else have a good time. At the end of four hours of my life that I’ll never get back, I was a thistle with experience points. Kind of soured me on any further involvement.
Ariel, however, now participates in a D&D group. To my knowledge, she has never been changed into any manner of plant life.
PAD
PAD – When you say “Kath doesn’t need defending” I think (miracle of miracles) you are correct. Nonetheless, you defended her (rabidly, but with very little coherence), so I suppose you don’t live up to your own standards. In this particular case, my criticism had nothing to do with you. Someone else – whom I believe is an adult, but you dither as if she is not – wrote her opinion in her own blog. I responded to her attempt at humor, thinking it was decidedly unfunny. Boo hoo. You then started having a fit that I would DARE to criticize her. This is not at all a situation like those on your own blog when you became enraged that a poster had drawn your wife or children into the discussion. This is someone else’s very own blog, in which she posts her opinions and endures responses – even those that disagree with her. You know, just like a grown-up (which she is, despire your hovering). It’s far more insulting that you think her inept to endure disagreement than that I think she made a tasteless post.
As for another, tactical, matter, if you are really so disturbed at my conduct and wish to protect your delicate flower of a wife from its outrages it is really incredibly stupid to crow here about shrouding me on your own site. A mean-spirited guy would take that as a challenge to cause trouble right here. I won’t, because, despite my disagreement with her post, I don’t think your wife is at all deserving of that kind of abuse. Apparently you think it’s clever to incite me to attack Messrs. Greenberger and Evanier. While I think they were both wrong about the Scheider matter, I respect both of them for maintaining very good relations with their readers. When I disputed a matter with Mr. Greenberger a little while ago he was quite polite and responsive in his public and private answers, and I remain convinced he’s a decent guy. I don’t read Mr. Evanier enough to form much of an opinion, but he hasn’t impressed me as a collossal jáçkášš, so any comparison of him to you would be unnecessary.
Well, it’s oh so wonderful to see that Mr. Shroud #2 felt he’s so important to the world that he’s hijacked this thread so he can read people telling him to go F-himself.
Which I’m going to do now: Mr. Shroud #2, go F-yourself.
Now, back to what really matters: Gary Gygax.
I played D&D when I was a kid with my uncle, and it really hasn’t been until now that I think about how much indrect influence Gygax has had on my life. D&D, comic books, and Star Trek were and still are the gateways of my imagination. And if not for Gygax’s helping create D&D, there would have been no Dragonlance. No Dragonlance, and I would be short a lot of enjoyable books and game material that I’ve read over the years, as well as several great friends that I’ve made over the last decade online as a member of various Dragonlance communities.
So, thanks, Gary.
Kathleen, I started playing D&D when I was 9 or 10. I started with the boxed Basic Set comprising a rulebook with a monochromatic cover (blue) and module B2, The Keep on the Borderlands. Chainmail was a little before my time. What was it like?
Also, I stopped playing before the Second Edition rules came out, and then got back into the game a few years ago, buying the books comprising the v3.5 rules. How do you feel about the evolution of the game from AD&D First Edition to what we have today?
As I recall, Gygax developed this game for personal use with friends and then decided to publish it. We’re all quite lucky he did. D&D is synonymous with role-playing and remains the “gold standard” for RPGs, and even though the new rules are (at least from my standpoint) markedly different from what he first created, Gygax provided the foundation without which we wouldn’t have the rest.
“Ariel, however, now participates in a D&D group. To my knowledge, she has never been changed into any manner of plant life.”
What, you never said when she was growing up that she was growing like a weed?
I never got as into D&D as a lot of my friends did, but I certainly have fond memories of a lot of those days — and while I can’t make the same claim Jerry does, I do still have all of my first-edition reference books around someplace. (And I still use d20’s and d12’s to pick random lab groups at school. The kids look at me funny. This is not news.)
Cheers, Mr. Gygax.
TWL
As PAD has seen fit to “shroud” me on his own site, I’ll say this here. My initial post here was a response to Kathleen David’s initial post. I believed then, and do today, that Mrs. David was an adult of normal intelligence who spoke for herself. Therefore, my response was to her. I did not believe her husband was egotistical enough to be unable to distinguish between himself and his wife – but in that I was mistaken. After blustering at length, he proclaimed that Ms. David required no defense – and then continued to “defend” her (this consisted of uninformed speculation as to my motives and abuse of my person). So much for a man in control of his prose.
I’ll be clear about this: I objected to Ms. David’s joke about Mr. Gygax, and said so; At no time did I believe she was nothing but an unthinking extension of her husband’s ego. Her husband, unfortunately, felt otherwise. His rabid fans respond with F-bombs (self-censored, of course) and think themselves brilliant thinkers.
Bill-
The biggest change through the other editions was adding all the material that had been created in the now defunct Dragon Magazine which gave us all the classes and enough books to fill an entire bookshelf.
The second edition also took out a lot of the things that people used against D&D like the demons and devils and the like. The rules were stricter so there was less room for interpretation.
The 3rd version was the first not over seen by Gary. For one thing there is more math than the original and was the introduction to the 20d open source system which was suppose to open up the game. I think it ended up producing entirely too much product that overwhelmed the people playing the game.
3.5 fixes the numerous glitches that were in 3 and simplifies some of the more over the top pieces of the rules
4 (coming out this year) apparently has an online component which I am not totally sanguine with. But I’ll wait and see.
I’ve seen several early online reviews of the new D&D that have all praised it as being simpler, back to basics and, far more importantly, fun again. Here’s hoping.
~8?)
Gary Gygax…one of the few people who really must be referred to by both names…is one of those people that changed the world. Seriously. He, and his work, have touched enough people, and brought real change to those lives, that you can’t say anything other than that the world would be a very different place without him. Sure, maybe someone else would have taken the torch that Tolkein and others lit, but it’d be a different world than the one that GG made. Maybe somewhere between the Material and Inner planes has that place.
Which comes back to another point. I, regretfully, never met GG. But like many in the enterainment industry, my life intersected enough with his work that at times it feels like I know him. I’ve certainly heard enough second and first-hand tales about him to know that, upon hearing of his passing, after getting over my initial shock, my very next thoughts were game related. Because that’s what GG was…a gamer, down to his core. And I think the best thing that can be said about him after a pretty long, successful (depending on how you measure such things), influential, and certainly adventure-filled life, is a comment on how his life was lived according to the game. Failing his saving throw, ascending to the next Plane, rolling up a new character, hanging up his dice, etc…the only people that would consider such comments insensitive are those ignorant louts who don’t know a thing about GG, other than that he’s recently deceased.
Some of the first non-Monopolyed games I played were the original D&D, the little box with the red dragon on the cover sitting on a pile of treasure. It’s because of that game that today gaming is my favorite hobby and past time. Like many, my best frindships revolve around games, and playing games has taught me many lessons about myself, life, winning, losing, strategy, planning, etc. That’s no small feat considering that it all came from a single source, which has had parallel impacts on literally millions of other people all around the world.
Gary Gygax was 69. Not terribly old, but not tragically young, either. He’ll be missed, he’ll be mourned, but his death doesn’t strike us as a sensless loss or waste of a life. He accomplished more than most get a chance to, and the second biggest loss I feel, after his immediate family, is for his immediate adventure group, for whom the last session will always be “to be continued.” For the rest of us, there’s always the next adventure…maybe to find the Legendary Castle Gygax?
Hmmm. If you think about it, Gary helped create a type of fandom aka role playing games. While I never played D&D, I have to respect his accomplishments and mourn his passing.
I’m uncomfortable with the way bobb alfred judges the impact of Mr. Gygax’s death. Looking at his age and determining that it does or doesn’t make his death “a senseless loss or waste of life” is nebulous thinking. Like most here, I didn’t know the man, but I suppose those who loved him consider his loss a senseless waste of life. My father died at 73 – not all that much older than 69 – and his death seemed much too soon. Adolf Hitler died 10 days after his 56th birthday – probably about 56 years too late. In judging the value of a life, its length is among the least important factors. What that life meant to other people is much more important. What bobb alfred meant is clear enough: 69 years is not a shockingly young age at which to die, but it’s a bad idea to reduce a life to nothing but its extent. Let’s just say “A well known man whose work we respected has died. This is sad; We mourn his loss and regret the pain it causes his loved ones.”
(Note: This is a response to [bobb alfred], who is an entity distinct from from both [Kathleen David] and [Peter David], lest some diseased mind reads anything appearing on malibulist.com as pertaining first and only to the David family. I am fairly confident Mr. alfred is an independent being, rather than another name for PAD. I am nearly as confident PAD knows this – but who really knows?)
Jeffrey, just let me start with…I’m willing to respond to your ideas, even to you directly, but that willingness is going to quickly dry up if you continue to act like petulant child and try to get little jabs in on our kind hostess and host at the other site. Whatever beef you have with them, if you can’t keep a civil tounge in your posts, you’ll find me joining those for whom you’ve already crossed a line.
Now, I’ll say this. You go on and mourn however you like. My feeling is that American culture and society has avoided the topic of death like the plague. We don’t discuss it, we do very little planning for it, and more and more, we have no idea how to engage in a proper and measured response to it. It’s gotten to the point where death itself is considered an enemy against which we cannot give any ground to, no concession, no admission of any victory of death lest we all succumb to it.
Which of course is one great big fat fallacy. We all are going to pass on eventually. We can’t live forever. We may as well accept that not only is it a possibility, it’s a certainty that sooner, hopefully later, we’re all going.
My family’s had too much of that in the past year+. I’ve lost friends and loved ones…one to a terrible car accident, two to cancer. I cried for each loss…heck, I still cry when I’m in the right kind of mood. I cry because I miss them, I cry because of all the things I won’t get to say about them, and because of all the things they are not going to be present to share.
At the same time, where humor is appropriate, we use it. We use it because that’s how they lived their lives…and that’s how we remember them. We try to show tact and use it appropriately, but I’ll be dámņëd if I let some PC, sanitized, emotionless phrase govern how I engage and embrace the final act of life.
Because death isn’t just a time of loss. As demonstrated by this thread, it’s also a time of reflection…to think about all the ways that life…which hasn’t been lost so much as it’s been ended…has touched us. We think of all the things that we gained from touching that life. In Gary Gygax’s case, for the great majority of people touched by him, it was his the games he created that touched us. It’s only natural that, when it comes to reflect up his death, we turn in that direction. GG was a gamer…that’s not only what he did, it’s what he was. Reflecting on his death through the polyhedral lens of a d4 isn’t disrespect…it is, in fact, just the opposite. It’s the ulitamate form of affection expressed in terms that only a gamer could know.
To put things another way…what you, Jeffery, in effect have done is crashed a wake. Imagine visiting another culture, observing their funeral practices, and then in the middle of some event, you stand on a table and chastise them all by telling them they’re going about it in the wrong way. Is it any wonder, then, why you appear to be wearing the “disrepsectful” crown?
“At the same time, where humor is appropriate, we use it. We use it because that’s how they lived their lives…and that’s how we remember them.”
As a terrific example of this, I refer everyone to the 1989 memorial service for Graham Chapman. Everyone gave eulogies that, while clearly respectful, were also COMPLETELY in line with the anarchic and comedic spirit that Chapman embodied. As John Cleese put it after saying something shocking … “And the reason I feel I should say this is that Graham would never forgive me if I didn’t, if I passed up such a marvelous opportunity to shock you all on his behalf.”
There was also a rousing chorus of “Always Look on the Bright Side of Life” at the end. After showing it to my dad, I told him, “Just so you know, I think there’s a 50-50 chance that we’d do this at your memorial.” He immediately responded, “Frankly, I’d be disappointed if you didn’t.” (Did I do that for my mother? No, but both my brother and I used humor in other ways at her service.)
So, as one who uses humor to get through the day most of the time, AND as one who has recently memorialized a beloved parent … humor can absolutely be appropriate even in death-related settings, and anyone who thinks otherwise is frankly someone I’d rather not have at my own memorial when it comes.
And Bobb, my condolences on your losses. It’s never fun.
TWL
Whoops — forgot to include the link for the Chapman memorial. Here ’tis.
http://youtube.com/watch?v=fsHk9WC7fnQ
Isn’t that the service where on Pythoner came out with an urn and spilled some ashes? Or was that at a later event, a reunion?
But the point is well made. I don’t suggest that we shouldn’t fight to take every last breath we can…but when our time comes, we should at least somewhat feel free to celebrate the life lost, rather than wallow in what amounts to our own mortality.
That was a later event — some sort of TV special, I think.
TWL
Isn’t that the service where on Pythoner came out with an urn and spilled some ashes? Or was that at a later event, a reunion?
You’re remember the Python reunion a few years ago that was party of a Comedy Festival. They had an urn that purportedly contained his ashes, and about twenty minutes in, one of them “accidentally” kicked it over, spilling the ashes. Much “Oh My God!” “Oh, bloody hëll!” and then Michael Palin, I think (could be wrong), pulled out a dustbuster and started vacuuming him up. Audience was in hysterics.
Amazingly, no one stood up and shouted, “Shame! Shame on you!”
PAD
bobb alfred: Thank you for a well-expressed explanation of your feelings on this matter. I am terribly sorry for your loss, and hope you are holding up well. That being said, there is still a huge difference between your approach to loss and the situation here: You really are the friend, relative or close-connected one to these people. You have standing (I knew that term would come up again soon) to express yourself in the way that deals best with your grief – because these really are your loved ones. That’s entirely different from an uninvolved person following suit. Suppose it made you feel better to call a deceased loved one “that fat, ugly slug”: I don’t think that would make me feel better, but that’s your own business. Now suppose someone – say the wife of someone who had met your loved one once or twice – decided independently to call that good friend of yours “that fat, ugly slug.” What would be from you a very personal thing would be tremendous gauchery from that relative stranger. I know how I would have felt if anyone had said some of the things I had felt and occasionally said about my father after his death. What you’ve done in dealing with your own loss is an entirely different thing from someone uninvolved’s attempt at wit.
I have no grudge against Mrs. David. She said (in her own blog, not his) something I felt was in poor taste; I said so; Nothing much came of it; and then her husband insisted that criticism of her was a vile personal attack on him. It is not, unless he believes she has no identity except as his delegate. It is extremely likely that she thinks, speaks and writes for herself.
“That being said, there is still a huge difference between your approach to loss and the situation here: You really are the friend, relative or close-connected one to these people. You have standing (I knew that term would come up again soon) to express yourself in the way that deals best with your grief – because these really are your loved ones.”
Where is the line drawn? At what point removed from the deceased does one lose the entitlement to grieve as befits their relationship, however one sided?
People aren’t flocking out side GG’s funeral waiting to roll the d100 to see if they make their fortitude saves to prevent bawling. Or trying to BB/LG on the back door, or even attempting to pick locks to the mausoleum. A few remarks made in tribute to the man that invented those phrases is not the same as parading them in front of his grieving widow, children, or grandchildren. Some shared remarks in a community of gamers likely all from the same group…maybe having met him at a con, more likely never having met him but touched by him nontheless through the worlds he created and allowed others to create…well, I see no disrespect there.
What I see in those that find such comments in poor taste is ignorance. Anyone even anecdotally familiar with Gygax would feel little to no discomfort with such comments.
And for the record, your account of your actions is a bit revisionist. You didn’t just disagree, you attacked in what was clearly an attempt to provoke an argument in what was clearly intended to be an affectionate remembrance of the recently passed. As I’ve said, if anyone here is being crass, it’s you.
bobb alfred asks where to draw the line between those entitled and those not to disparage the deceased. I’d put it between those to whom that person was a close friend and those to whom he was not. If he acknowledges that there is such a line (it is possible he does not), where would he draw it? He also says essentially that derisive references are appropriate when the relationship was entirely one-sided – that it’s fine when the celebrity was important to the mourner, but the mourner was an unknown to the deceased. I completely disagree with that – It would mean it was perfectly normal for, say, a person who had thought highly of JFK (and who didn’t happen to be one of his intimates) to scream out “Oh, he was a son of a bìŧçh, and I mean that in only the most positive way! Oh, he was a philandering dog! Oh, me, that makes me feel MUCH better!!That is not therapeutic, but cruel and deranged. Mr. alfred feels my criticism of Ms. David was an attempt to provoke an argument. I would disagree, except insofar as any claim of “You’re wrong” tends to provoke “No, I’m not, really.” PAD should have no trouble telling when I think he’s wrong: I say that he is wrong. When I say that someone else is wrong, he ought to know that he isn’t that person. It’s not hyperbole when I say that he has a lot of difficulty seeing his wife as an independent mind, rather than a pet. So, I think she’s wrong about something, and her husband thinks she’s too feebleminded to have opinions apart from his own ego, and I’m the one who’s insulted her?
Jeffrey, this is the only time I intend to engage you on this thread, but let me point something out.
No one is taking the “lost his saving throw vs. death” line to be a derisive or derogatory remark. Nobody, that is, except you. You can say that it’s an inappropriate reference if you like, but there is absolutely no reason for you to believe it was meant as disparaging, assuming that you believe Kath’s sentiments in the rest of her post were sincere.
You now have a choice: admit you were wrong in attributing those motives to Kath, or explicitly accuse her of being derogatory towards Gary Gygax and thus lying about her fond memories elsewhere in the post.
Kindly choose.
I’ll be up front: if you choose the first option I’ll believe you’re capable of growth and will consider future conversations.
If you choose b, you demonstrate very little ability to understand people.
If you refuse to choose (which is the option I expect), then you’re arguing simply to argue and picking a fight, in which case you’re about as useful to this thread as Fred Phelps, and you can kindly pìšš øff.
The choice, however, is yours. Bye now.
TWL
“Much “Oh My God!” “Oh, bloody hëll!” and then Michael Palin, I think (could be wrong), pulled out a dustbuster and started vacuuming him up. Audience was in hysterics.”
Ha! I have that one (Monty Python Live!)on DVD. Eddie Izzard has a funny bit at the start of the thing as well. Good show.
Tim Lynch would like me to admit I accused Ms. David of being derogatory toward Gary Gygax. Being derogatory is expressing a low opinion of a person, and that’s not really what she did. The latter part of her post made it clear she thought highly of Mr. Gygax. What her first remarks did was show an inappropriate lack of respect for the dignity of a deceased man, his friends and family – bad taste, not a personal attack. That’s exactly what I said and meant.
Am I that different from the rest of you that I think joking, dismissive comments from strangers are out of place in a tribute to someone who is respected? I can’t get into the brains of either PAD or Kath, but if I were either of them I would be deeply offended if some person who only thought he knew one of them saw fit to joke about “You wouldn’t like me when I’m angry,” purple pants, mindless rage or Gamma Bombs when I was trying to deal with the very real death of someone I loved. They are free to deal with their own feelings as they like, and even to sanction it by their friends, but I can’t imagine finding any comfort in strangers who only knew a little about the two of them throwing that kind of disrespect around. It is exactly that way in the case of Mr. Gygax – He may well have welcomed that sort of thing from people he loved, but when it comes from strangers it is nothing but ignorance and callousness.
Tim Lynch may or may not agree with my perspective, but he ought to understand what it is.
As I expected … option (c), cloaked in the “let’s talk about other people in the third person to show how above it all I am” style that seems to be your usual one. (Oh, and coupled YET again with a passive-aggressive attack, this time by terming the original phrase “dismissive.” That makes “derisive,” “disparaging,” and “dismissive.” You might want to go a bit further in that dictionary.)
I’m saddened, but not surprised.
Shrouded. Permanently. You want a chance of me responding, Jeffrey, you take it to e-mail.
And my apologies to Kath and everyone else on this thread for the part I played in prolonging this.
TWL
I’m curious as to why Tim Lynch believes I want to talk to him. He asked me a question, and it seemed reasonable to answerr it. Now he seems to be at a loss at the presence of several words which I guess sent him to the dictionary: “dismissive, derisive, disparaging and dismissive.” The fact is that each of them has a particular meaning and is not a synonym for any of the others, not that I am barraging him with scary words. He believes that relating one situation to a similar one is “passive-aggressive.” I would consider it nothing but analogy. It comes down to something simple: I am suggesting that neither Kath nor anyone else would respond well to a stranger ridiculing someone she loved at the time of that person’s death. Mr. Lynch dislikes the use of the third person, so I’ll use the second:
Tim Lynch: Can we agree that I am not a personal friend of you or your family? If we can, would you find it amusing or endearing if I ridiculed a just-deceased member of your family at the time of his memorial, or would you think I was being an ášš? You may think me heartless, but I would be ashamed to behave that way, even if I knew I meant it all humorously. This is pretty important: Mr. Gygax is dead, and that is quite a serious thing. I don’t think anyone here has claimed to be his dear friend, but several have expressed their respect and affection for him. I don’t think there is any reason to minimize his family’s loss with dismissive humor. If you don’t think that is an honest answer, you’re a fool. (Yes, that is quite a dismissive thing to say, but, as far as I know, you are not dead. That’s something, probably.)
Jeffrey, last chance.
You’re not anybody. Really, honestly, you’re No One. And you have proven that you have no idea what you’re talking about.
Anyone even remotely familiar with Gary Gygax would know that the comments made about his death were not joking or dismissive. They were affectionate, caring, and most importantly PERSONAL comments made about a man that many of us knew, or knew enough about to feel like we knew him. What about you?
I started playing RPGs, the blue and red box Dungeons and Dragons…do you even know what thos are?… in the 70s. Think about that. I’ve had some kind of relationship with Gary Gygax for 30 years…almost 80% of my life. In that time, I’ve followed the hobby, met others who have, and heard stories about this man…my entire life. I never had the joy of meeting him to give personal thanks. But I feel that I know enough about him, about the man he actually was, to know that comments like these would have been welcomed by him.
You refuse to even acknowledge this, or the fact that Kath met him. You come here, imposing your view as to what is and is not appropriate, and wonder why people start shrouding you?
I find your actions to be a step…a very small step…above those who think that a soldier’s funeral is an appropriate place to vent their views on homosexuality. Your comments and actions are just as out of place…and near on as unwelcome…here as those other disruptive actions are.
bobb alfred: Without being derisive (You know, like telling a stranger he’s “not anybody”) I think you are completely wrong in thinking you had a relationship with Gary Gygax for 30 years, and your error has a lot to do with your incomprehension of a difference between his friends and relative strangers making jokes about his passing. The thing about his friends is that he actually knew and valued them. What you’re talking about is much more one-sided: You liked his games. While I imagine he would have appreciated that, it didn’t make you his friend or establish a relationship with him. Ms. David said in her initial post that she met him a few times, was tongue-tied the first time, and did a bit better on subsequent occasions. That’s a little bit closer to a relationship than the admiration you expressed for his games, but she had the very good sense not to characterize that as the closeness of a loved one. She met him, liked what he had done, and regrets his passing: That’s very nice. I’ve exchanged a few messages with you here, occasionally been impressed with your logic or knowledge in some areas, and formed a few impressions of you. You may even consider that a “relationship” if it seems that way to you (I really don’t…), but we are not intimates (for which you may well feel glad, of course). A real, caring, mutual relationship is a lot more than one party knowing who the other party is – It’s a matter of both parties having a strong connection with each other. Ms. David took care to make it clear her relationship with Mr. Gygax was not that – In this respect, she recognized boundaries much better than you. What she did was (I think) rude, but hardly delusional. What you are doing in claiming a relationship with Mr. Gygax is not particularly rude, but it is delusional, given the passing nature of the connection you described.
All I can say, Jeffrey, is that you lack even the most basic understanding of the gaming community.
Jeffrey “Idiot Child” Frawley doesn’t give a dámņ about being sensitive about the deaths of othersw\. Here’s a link to one of his posts in an older thread in PAD’s blog where he makes an insensitive remark about JFK Jr.’s death. It wasn’t even the topic of the thread.
Idiot Child has been coming here on and off for a period of a few years, and his main M.O. has been to manufacture reasons to feel outraged at PAD. He’s not trying to argue a point, but merely arguing for its own sake. I don’t know what drives him to this behavior, nor do I care.
What I do know, Kathleen, is that you seem like a nice person. I’d surmise that you’re a pleasant person to meet and a good person to know. You don’t deserve this crap.
Going forward I am not going to read or respond to anything Frawley says, permanently. I wasn’t going to make this vow publicly but I didn’t want my silence to be seen as a tacit approval of Idiot Child’s behavior towards you, Kathleen.
I’d encourage everyone else to join myself, PAD, and Tim Lynch in ignoring Idiot Child completely, utterly, and for all time. Because arguing with Frawley is like hitting Sebastian Shaw of the Hellfire Club, the X-Men villain who absorbs all kinetic energy and becomes stronger every time he is hit. Frawley gets off on negativity in the same way, so admonishing him only gives him what he wants. Why give such a crappy person his heart’s desire?
For all intents and purposes, Idiot Child is a non-person to me. He no longer exists.
It seems I mis-coded the aforementioned link and it didn’t show up. Just realized: who cares? More good effort after bad. From now on, I focus on the decent people and ignore the rest.
Bill raises a point that’s troubled me in the past–when someone posts something egregiously offensive here is it better to ignore it (which is what it deserves) or does that risk making PAD and others assume that those of us who are long time contributers here did not find the post offensive?
I once felt the need to email PAD apologizing for not taking an especially idiotic posting to task. I just had this feeling that he could have been wondering where all the support was. Look at Byrne’s board–someone makes a perfectly mild criticism and the acolytes jump him. Here the more persistent assclowns eventually get ignored, more often than not.
It’s a better system all the way around, as long as PAD and Kath know that silence does not equal assent, which I think they do. So I don’t feel the need to belabor these obvious points as often as I did. I very much doubt anyone reading this thread will be likely to see Jeffrey as having the winning argument.
When Bill Myers announces he will no longer respond to my posts he is responding to my post, but that’s in keeping with the kind of mind that thinks calling people “Idiot Boy” is a good substitute for a coherent argument.
bobb alfred’s post is very strange. I am not now a gamer, haven’t played any RPGs for a few decades, and have never played any of Mr. Gygax’s games, so it may be that I “lack even the most basic understanding of the gaming community,” but I think gamers are human beings like anyone else – subject to the same standards as everyone. Ms. David’s comment was either in good taste or not, whether she is a gamer or not. If bobb thinks gamers are some other species, not to be held to human standards, that’s quite an appraisal. “Oh, never mind bobb, he’s a GAMER: They aren’t like PEOPLE, for God’s sake! They can’t be expected to behave like civilized people – Their minds are not at all like PEOPLE’s.” If he insists on ghettoizing himself, I can’t stop him – but he’s making a bad mistake doing so to others who happen to share his enjoyment of RPGs. That kind of limitation is pathetic and self-despising. Gaming is one thing among many that some people like to do – not their species. I have no reason to presume Ms. David feels as constricted as bobb alfred does; It wouldn’t surprise me if she finds her life a bit better rounded than “She’s a gamer – They’re just like that, you know.” Let me offer an analogy to bobb: He thinks my behavior is terrible. Would he be remotely satisfied with the explanation “Oh, bobb – you lack even the most basic understanding of the way Frawleys are, so who are you to judge,” or would he think I should be held to certain standards? One can argue that Ms. David’s humor was appropriate and in fine taste (Some have, but I didn’t think much of their arguments), but it is wrong to claim that she is subject to different standards than non-gamers. Show that I’ve misjudged – not that Ms. David has some sort of Gamer-dispensation.
Jeff, I’m going to give this one and only one try to see if maybe you can understand the difference in what happened here and why you get the reactions that you get.
The people here talking about rolling dice and getting a “save” or not are not be insulting. They’ve all, we’ve all, been affected in a positive way by Gary Gygax’s creation. Everyone here was doing nothing more than the editorial cartoonists were doing when they showed John Denver being met by “God” at the Pearly Gates and God was George Burns or when they showed Johnny Carson being greeted at the Pearly Gates by a Heavenly voice shouting, “Heeeeere’s Johnny!” It’s like when Michael Conrad passed away and almost everybody had a variation of, “Let’s be careful out there,” in their obits and remembrances.
It’s affectionate. Gygax would more than likely know that and I’m sure his family would, at a later date, read it and say the exact same thing. People aren’t making disparaging remarks about Gygax and their not making jokes at his or his loved ones’ expense. Everything has been voiced in the manner of heartfelt tributes by appreciative and respectful fans of the man and his creation. No one here has said anything that was meant to or did “trivialize Gary Gygax’s death.”
You started out your argument here by stating this:
“If I had made a nerd-joke about a recently deceased celebrity on your husband’s board, I assume I would rightly be slammed for crudity and insensitivity to other people’s loss. How your jest is in any way different is a mystery.”
And later this:
“If I had made a crack about doubling cubes and guidebooks as a joke about a recently deceased person on YOUR blog, you know very well you’d call me on being an áššhølë.”
You seem to be in some small way comparing your past treatment on Peter’s blog for your past comments about the deceased to the comments made here and making a baseless charge about your “victimization” (My word, not yours.) at the hands of others. You have been roundly and rightly slammed before for your comments about other people’s deaths on Peter’s blog. However, that was because you did so with the intent of being as insulting as possible to the deceased and to the other posters.
http://www.malibulist.com/mt/mt-commentsantispam.cgi?entry_id=5544
==============================================
“Posted by Jeffrey Frawley at July 24, 2007 03:10 PM”
“Bill Myers: It is also worth noting that he crashed into the ocean and died. Very unfortunate, isn’t it? Perhaps his training was not quite up to the challenge. Saying that he was cleared to fly by the FAA is about as persuasive as noting that a high percentage of fatal car crashes involve people with driver’s licenses”.
“His eyes looking at the displays
His hands and feet on the controls
His, His wife’s and his sister-in-law’s bodies hitting the ocean.
Boom!”
——————————————————————
“Posted by Jeffrey Frawley at July 27, 2007 08:51 PM”
“Did Lauren Bessette deserve anything less than the average person because her sister’s husband’s father is immensely beloved for losing a big piece of his head?”
===============================================
You got slammed because of the fact that you were making jokes about a death and making it clear how much it seemed you were taking some measure of joy from it. You also seemed to enjoy getting more and more crass about it as that thread went on.
From that same thread, you also said something that makes you seem even more the hypocrite here.
===============================================
Posted by Jeffrey Frawley at July 23, 2007 12:32 PM
The Chappaquiddick reference was obvious enough, and pretty funny.
===============================================
You think that Chappaquiddick jokes are funny. Hmm… Jokes made in a crass manner about the accidental death of some young woman are, in your own words, pretty funny. Yet heartfelt comments interspaced with joking references to a man’s amazing creation and the affect it had on people’s lives are, in your words, rather crass. Doesn’t really help your case or give you much moral high ground here.
The key difference, Jeff, if you’re really interested at all in learning something about why you get treated like, well, you, is that the tone and intent of the writers here are different than yours in just about anything that you’ve posted about someone’s death on Peter’s blog. The comments here are tributes and expressions of fond memories for a shared joy. You comments are usually crassly made digs meant to insult or “score points” in whatever argument that you happen to be in. The comments here are meant to express a love of a man’s creation. Your comments are more often than not meant in malice.
There’s a huge difference between the two things. If you don’t get that, you’re likely trying, and trying very hard, not to get it. Either that or you really are just incapable of understanding such basic concepts of context and intent. Either way, that doesn’t make you much of a prospect for intelligent dabates in the future.
Beyond that, anybody who says that jokes about the death of an innocent girl are funny and makes the jokes you did about the death a man, his wife and her sister has absolutely zero right to open his mouth and say anything about anything that was said here. Well, you have the right to do so, but everyone else has the right to call you on your hypocrisy and foolish nonsense.
Lastly, there’s this statement of yours that sticks out like a flare in the night:
“I don’t like or respect you (Peter) at all;”
Well, then why come around here? Peter’s blog is hardly a website that exclusively promotes Peter’s works and none of his opinions, observations on life or biases. If you just like the man’s work but dislike the man, there are more than a few websites devoted to discussions of the works themselves. Or, barring your going elsewhere, why did you ever post on any thread other than those devoted to the man’s works?
You’re like the idiots who go onto IMDB board of a movie that they hate and start telling fans of that movie how horrible and stupid it is. What’s the point other than being a troll? You’ve said that you don’t like or respect Peter, almost all you ever do is pick fights with him and you find reasons to pick fights with others on the threads. Like it or not, whether you meant to or not, whether you meant to be one or not, you’ve just told everyone here, through past actions and now those words, that you are a troll by design.
You could change that view that others have of you, but it would require you being able to understand and learn from the mistakes you make. If you can do that, fine. If not, you’re shrouded by everyone in the end. It’s your choice, Jeff.
Jeff, I’m going to give this one and only one try to see if maybe you can understand the difference in what happened here and why you get the reactions that you get.
The people here talking about rolling dice and getting a “save” or not are not be insulting. They’ve all, we’ve all, been affected in a positive way by Gary Gygax’s creation. Everyone here was doing nothing more than the editorial cartoonists were doing when they showed John Denver being met by “God” at the Pearly Gates and God was George Burns or when they showed Johnny Carson being greeted at the Pearly Gates by a Heavenly voice shouting, “Heeeeere’s Johnny!” It’s like when Michael Conrad passed away and almost everybody had a variation of, “Let’s be careful out there,” in their obits and remembrances.
It’s affectionate. Gygax would more than likely know that and I’m sure his family would, at a later date, read it and say the exact same thing. People aren’t making disparaging remarks about Gygax and their not making jokes at his or his loved ones’ expense. Everything has been voiced in the manner of heartfelt tributes by appreciative and respectful fans of the man and his creation. No one here has said anything that was meant to or did “trivialize Gary Gygax’s death.”
You started out your argument here by stating this:
“If I had made a nerd-joke about a recently deceased celebrity on your husband’s board, I assume I would rightly be slammed for crudity and insensitivity to other people’s loss. How your jest is in any way different is a mystery.”
And later this:
“If I had made a crack about doubling cubes and guidebooks as a joke about a recently deceased person on YOUR blog, you know very well you’d call me on being an áššhølë.”
You seem to be in some small way comparing your past treatment on Peter’s blog for your past comments about the deceased to the comments made here and making a baseless charge about your “victimization” (My word, not yours.) at the hands of others. You have been roundly and rightly slammed before for your comments about other people’s deaths on Peter’s blog. However, that was because you did so with the intent of being as insulting as possible to the deceased and to the other posters.
http://www.malibulist.com/mt/mt-commentsantispam.cgi?entry_id=5544” rel=”nofollow”>http://www.malibulist.com/mt/mt-commentsantispam.cgi?entry_id=5544
==============================================
“Posted by Jeffrey Frawley at July 24, 2007 03:10 PM”
“Bill Myers: It is also worth noting that he crashed into the ocean and died. Very unfortunate, isn’t it? Perhaps his training was not quite up to the challenge. Saying that he was cleared to fly by the FAA is about as persuasive as noting that a high percentage of fatal car crashes involve people with driver’s licenses”.
“His eyes looking at the displays
His hands and feet on the controls
His, His wife’s and his sister-in-law’s bodies hitting the ocean.
Boom!”
——————————————————————
“Posted by Jeffrey Frawley at July 27, 2007 08:51 PM”
“Did Lauren Bessette deserve anything less than the average person because her sister’s husband’s father is immensely beloved for losing a big piece of his head?”
===============================================
You got slammed because of the fact that you were making jokes about a death and making it clear how much it seemed you were taking some measure of joy from it. You also seemed to enjoy getting more and more crass about it as that thread went on.
From that same thread, you also said something that makes you seem even more the hypocrite here.
===============================================
Posted by Jeffrey Frawley at July 23, 2007 12:32 PM
The Chappaquiddick reference was obvious enough, and pretty funny.
===============================================
You think that Chappaquiddick jokes are funny. Hmm… Jokes made in a crass manner about the accidental death of some young woman are, in your own words, pretty funny. Yet heartfelt comments interspaced with joking references to a man’s amazing creation and the affect it had on people’s lives are, in your words, rather crass. Doesn’t really help your case or give you much moral high ground here.
The key difference, Jeff, if you’re really interested at all in learning something about why you get treated like, well, you, is that the tone and intent of the writers here are different than yours in just about anything that you’ve posted about someone’s death on Peter’s blog. The comments here are tributes and expressions of fond memories for a shared joy. You comments are usually crassly made digs meant to insult or “score points” in whatever argument that you happen to be in. The comments here are meant to express a love of a man’s creation. Your comments are more often than not meant in malice.
There’s a huge difference between the two things. If you don’t get that, you’re likely trying, and trying very hard, not to get it. Either that or you really are just incapable of understanding such basic concepts of context and intent. Either way, that doesn’t make you much of a prospect for intelligent dabates in the future.
Beyond that, anybody who says that jokes about the death of an innocent girl are funny and makes the jokes you did about the death a man, his wife and her sister has absolutely zero right to open his mouth and say anything about anything that was said here. Well, you have the right to do so, but everyone else has the right to call you on your hypocrisy and foolish nonsense.
Lastly, there’s this statement of yours that sticks out like a flare in the night:
“I don’t like or respect you (Peter) at all;”
Well, then why come around here? Peter’s blog is hardly a website that exclusively promotes Peter’s works and none of his opinions, observations on life or biases. If you just like the man’s work but dislike the man, there are more than a few websites devoted to discussions of the works themselves. Or, barring your going elsewhere, why did you ever post on any thread other than those devoted to the man’s works?
You’re like the idiots who go onto IMDB board of a movie that they hate and start telling fans of that movie how horrible and stupid it is. What’s the point other than being a troll? You’ve said that you don’t like or respect Peter, almost all you ever do is pick fights with him and you find reasons to pick fights with others on the threads. Like it or not, whether you meant to or not, whether you meant to be one or not, you’ve just told everyone here, through past actions and now those words, that you are a troll by design.
You could change that view that others have of you, but it would require you being able to understand and learn from the mistakes you make. If you can do that, fine. If not, you’re shrouded by everyone in the end. It’s your choice, Jeff.
All that I can say to Jerry Chandler is that President Kennedy died in 1963: I wouldn’t consider that particularly recent. Nonetheless, if you think my reference to his death was tasteless I will admit that it was. Do you think that makes anything said about more recently deceased persons in any way better?
As for my statement about PAD, you have quoted me very accurately. As Mr. David feels so strongly about freedom of speech, I will ask you, so what? If truthfulness is a defense, it is true: I don’t like or respect him, and that is why I said so. You ask why I stick around here (by which I suppose you mean his own blog, since this is something else). I do that because I wish to, which is all of the explanation you deserve. You might better ask why I think what I do. The answer to that is that I formed my opinion from what he said on his blog. Before reading that, I thought he was a rather good writer about whom I had no personal opinion. Afterward, I thought he was just about as skillful a writer as I had previously thought (At least 85% of his work on the Hulk is really first-rate), but one I found arrogant, wrong-headed and constitutionally-incapable of ever admitting error. You offer me the possibility of improving my reputation here by admitting my errors. That’s a rather generous suggestion: I would do so if I thought I had been wrong – but there’s the problem. This is a bit uncomfortable, as one of my biggest complaints about PAD is that he never admits error, and here I am denying any error of substance in what I’ve said. Without any doubt, I have been wrong to personalize some things that didn’t need to be so confrontational. I have expressed my opinions mean-spiritedly far more than I want to admit, but I still hold to virtually all of those opinions – despite the ill-will toward me which will remain. Here I’ll be confrontational again: It is not nearly as important to me as you seem to think that I should change your opinion of me. This (very circuitously) comes back to one of the things I’ve been trying to say on this string: All of you, despite the conversations we have had, remain essentially strangers to me, and many of you to each other. email connections are seldom friendships or any other kind of close connection. They remain only strangers interacting superficially, sometimes thinking the interaction is something more. Without meaning any insult – I have friends, but you aren’t they; You have people whose opinions should mean much to you, but I am not one of them. I am a stranger whose opinion irritates you, and that’s about it, Jerry.
1) Your remarks were about Teddy & Teddy’s passenger and JFK JR. Had you forgotten that and not bothered to look up the thread through the link, I would tend to think that the references to Chappaquiddick (Ted) and flying/crashing into the ocean (JR) would rule out anyone’s belief that the remarks wee about JFK’s death by gunshot/assignation. The fact that you decided to play games about your own past remarks makes you look rather stupid at best or like someone who is just trying to jerk other people’s chains at worst.
2) You nicely and intentionally sidestepped what I told you was the key issue and substituted the straw dog of the passage of time. The passage of time has nothing to do with it. It’s all about the intent of the jester and the joke. Your intent has almost always been malicious and mean spirited. Your jokes about the deceased have been likewise so. THAT’s the difference between what you do and what was done here. You could not have NOT gotten that this was a key issue in why you get the reactions you get VS what reactions others get. You’ve also flat refused to have the class and decency to not bring your stupidity to this particular thread and then, quite deliberately it seems, refused to understand why people reacted badly to you yet again.
1+2= Getting it but deliberately acting as though you don’t in order to continue being a nuisance.
3) You’re here to attack the site’s host, the host’s family and others and you’ve no intention of changing, learning from mistakes or going away. You don’t like our host or a number of others here and you want to stay and keep saying that you dislike them.
1+2+3= You are a Troll by deliberate design rather than accident.
In this matter I’ll acquiesce to Peter’s request. You are shrouded. Hopefully enough others will do the same and you’ll finally get bored enough to permanently go away.
Have a nice life, Frawley.