Recommend a good fantasy novel
PS Having re-read the opening post, it seems there is an indication of an interest in 'youth oriented' books, as there is in it referencing to the Harry Potter which is a series of children's books.
[QUOTE=Darth Gavinius;1096098]Distrbution of games, is becoming a little like Democracy (all about money and control) - in the end choice is an illusion and you have to choose your lesser evil.
And everything is hidden in the fine print.[/QUOTE]
And everything is hidden in the fine print.[/QUOTE]
-
LastDanceSaloon
- Posts: 270
- Joined: Sat Jan 24, 2009 3:59 pm
- Contact:
-
LastDanceSaloon
- Posts: 270
- Joined: Sat Jan 24, 2009 3:59 pm
- Contact:
Thank the Moderator who moved this into “Speak Your Mind”, because I’m going to do just that now.
LastDanceSaloon,
-You may believe that you “made it absolutely clear why [you] felt umbridge”, but it still isn’t clear to me, at least not in any *rational* sense. What you wrote was:
“Nowhere did I state I had a preference for books aimed at a youth market.
Please also note that the C.S. Lewis series was written for children as was the Lewis Carrol series but I would recommend both to adults and youths alike.
The fact that you posted a post worded as you did has made me very unlikely to ever engage you in conversation again, sorry about that, but thanks for contributing nonetheless.”
Just where have you made it clear (to anyone but yourself), why you took umbridge with my post? My “offending” post was what.. 3 sentences? Not a single sentence was referenced , or the reason why you thought it was offending. What specifically was in the 3 sentences that was “worded” to piss you off so much that you are “unlikely to ever engage [me] in conversation again”, or to give a flippant “sorry.., but..”.
There are in fact several statements in your prior posts that could possibly suggest a preference for youth oriented material:
“..dragons, knights and princesses on the front cover”.
- Yup, believe it or not, this type of stereotypical cover is often more youth oriented.
“..warm, cosy, detached imaginary sense of fantasy”
- “Warm” and “cosy” – again, something more commonly found in a youth oriented book. (..as opposed to cold and brutal.)
- “Detached”? Diddo. (..as opposed to something more visceral.)
“..Harry Potter..”
- Doesn’t take a genius to figure that it’s youth oriented.
“..Discworld..”
- Again, youth oriented with a split in the series specifically aimed at children, but even those that are written for adults because of their more serious themes, are less graphical in a “mature” sense and are generally consider suitable for young adults.
“I bought.. ..books are aimed at a youth (? 13+ ?) audience).. ..I just hope they aren't too full of bogies and chocolate smudges.”
- So you purchase a book that *you* think is likely to be youth oriented.
And so all of the above somehow is “..absolutely nothing in what [you’ve] written which would direct one to think that was [your] intention” as a preference for youth-oriented books and authors?
Hmm, just what is your definition of “absolutely nothing”? (..and yes that was rhetorical, in that any reasonable person would conclude that it certainly exceeds “absolutely nothing”.)
Now let’s delve into the insults:
1. I really don’t remember doing any “desperate pleading” as you’ve so derisively put it.
2. Nor do I believe that anything I’ve written is “complete and utter nonsense”, at least not from any reasonable reading.
3.
“If someone is capable of making leaps of assumptions on this scale then it is obvious that any conversation you have with them is going to go belly-up, pear-shaped, skew-whiff, topsy-turvy ect etc etc.”
“Someone” meaning me, correct? So now I’m not only making assumptions, the supposed assumptions are so inane as to result in a conversation that is “belly-up, pear-shaped, skew-whiff, topsy-turvy etc etc etc.”
4. Oh my,
Accusing me of supplanting false assumptions in an effort to “save face”? That’s more than simply abusive – it’s Libel.
5. And of course there is the back-handed insult along the lines of: “I was going to apologize for misinterpreting your *badly* written post, but..”
6. And hey, let’s insult Galrean as well – shall we? After all, his “stupid questions deserve stupid answers”.
..and well yes, that mostly covers the insults in just one of your posts.
Finally this is all because of my “misunderstanding”, correct?
I mean, if we’re going to lay blame it couldn’t possibly be the result of your own misunderstanding and your subsequent accusations and insults.. could it?
So, let’s try this one more time:
I’ve NEVER
1. Stated,
2. Assumed, or
3. Insinuated/Supplanted
That you prefer “youth oriented books”.
What I HAVE stated is that:
That at least one potential reading of your previous posts might suggest that you have a preference.
A. It’s one potential reading - out of many different perspectives,
B. It’s only the mere possibility of one of those perspectives.
Not that it actually is your preference.
Not that I assumed it was your preference.
And certainly not that I insinuated that it was your preference.
I was just a forum member who thought:
“hey, he may or may not like this series better (Xanth), and he might be appalled at my previous recommendation – so I should probably provide some sort of warning to help him be a more informed purchaser. It’s what I’d want.”
Of course what I didn’t know was your reaction – so I purposefully wrote it as a conditional statement.
i.e.
1st “problem” post:
IF this, then MAYBE this:
“IF you are more interested in books aimed at youths..
A "feel-good" youth (though teen) fantasy series can be found in the Xanth series by Piers Anthony.
Of course IF that's more your focus then I'd NOT recommend many of the books I mentioned previously. (..The Way of Kings is pretty hardcore, and Steven Erickson's novels are often downright brutal. )”
2nd “problem” post:
Clarification of IF:
“The emphasis was on "if".
Really, I don't know what your preference is - that's why I used all-caps on "if".
(..you purchased a youth oriented book, that and the prior statement of "warm, cosy, detached imaginary sense of fantasy", *might* suggest that you were more interested in something youth oriented.)..”
Furthermore I used emoticons to convey my emotions so that there couldn’t possibly be any misinterpretation that would lead to hard feelings.
Guess I was wrong..
Note: If a moderator decides that this post is inappropriate and removes it, I’ll be *extremely* displeased. (..again, that’s a conditional statement – I don’t think they will because none of it breaks any forum rules that I know of.) The reason for my displeasure would not simply be from having this post removed, but also that your [LastDanceSaloon] abusive posts were allowed for several days, and more specifically did not provide me with a reasonable time for my own rebuttal to exist.
EDITED: On second thought I'd be displeased if any of the posts were removed - the reason is that I'd like to have proof (via link of this thread) to warn others of LastDanceSaloon's behavior (..i.e. respond at your own risk or this could happen.)
LastDanceSaloon,
-You may believe that you “made it absolutely clear why [you] felt umbridge”, but it still isn’t clear to me, at least not in any *rational* sense. What you wrote was:
“Nowhere did I state I had a preference for books aimed at a youth market.
Please also note that the C.S. Lewis series was written for children as was the Lewis Carrol series but I would recommend both to adults and youths alike.
The fact that you posted a post worded as you did has made me very unlikely to ever engage you in conversation again, sorry about that, but thanks for contributing nonetheless.”
Just where have you made it clear (to anyone but yourself), why you took umbridge with my post? My “offending” post was what.. 3 sentences? Not a single sentence was referenced , or the reason why you thought it was offending. What specifically was in the 3 sentences that was “worded” to piss you off so much that you are “unlikely to ever engage [me] in conversation again”, or to give a flippant “sorry.., but..”.
There are in fact several statements in your prior posts that could possibly suggest a preference for youth oriented material:
“..dragons, knights and princesses on the front cover”.
- Yup, believe it or not, this type of stereotypical cover is often more youth oriented.
“..warm, cosy, detached imaginary sense of fantasy”
- “Warm” and “cosy” – again, something more commonly found in a youth oriented book. (..as opposed to cold and brutal.)
- “Detached”? Diddo. (..as opposed to something more visceral.)
“..Harry Potter..”
- Doesn’t take a genius to figure that it’s youth oriented.
“..Discworld..”
- Again, youth oriented with a split in the series specifically aimed at children, but even those that are written for adults because of their more serious themes, are less graphical in a “mature” sense and are generally consider suitable for young adults.
“I bought.. ..books are aimed at a youth (? 13+ ?) audience).. ..I just hope they aren't too full of bogies and chocolate smudges.”
- So you purchase a book that *you* think is likely to be youth oriented.
And so all of the above somehow is “..absolutely nothing in what [you’ve] written which would direct one to think that was [your] intention” as a preference for youth-oriented books and authors?
Hmm, just what is your definition of “absolutely nothing”? (..and yes that was rhetorical, in that any reasonable person would conclude that it certainly exceeds “absolutely nothing”.)
Now let’s delve into the insults:
1. I really don’t remember doing any “desperate pleading” as you’ve so derisively put it.
2. Nor do I believe that anything I’ve written is “complete and utter nonsense”, at least not from any reasonable reading.
3.
“If someone is capable of making leaps of assumptions on this scale then it is obvious that any conversation you have with them is going to go belly-up, pear-shaped, skew-whiff, topsy-turvy ect etc etc.”
“Someone” meaning me, correct? So now I’m not only making assumptions, the supposed assumptions are so inane as to result in a conversation that is “belly-up, pear-shaped, skew-whiff, topsy-turvy etc etc etc.”
4. Oh my,
Accusing me of supplanting false assumptions in an effort to “save face”? That’s more than simply abusive – it’s Libel.
5. And of course there is the back-handed insult along the lines of: “I was going to apologize for misinterpreting your *badly* written post, but..”
6. And hey, let’s insult Galrean as well – shall we? After all, his “stupid questions deserve stupid answers”.
..and well yes, that mostly covers the insults in just one of your posts.
Finally this is all because of my “misunderstanding”, correct?
I mean, if we’re going to lay blame it couldn’t possibly be the result of your own misunderstanding and your subsequent accusations and insults.. could it?
So, let’s try this one more time:
I’ve NEVER
1. Stated,
2. Assumed, or
3. Insinuated/Supplanted
That you prefer “youth oriented books”.
What I HAVE stated is that:
That at least one potential reading of your previous posts might suggest that you have a preference.
A. It’s one potential reading - out of many different perspectives,
B. It’s only the mere possibility of one of those perspectives.
Not that it actually is your preference.
Not that I assumed it was your preference.
And certainly not that I insinuated that it was your preference.
I was just a forum member who thought:
“hey, he may or may not like this series better (Xanth), and he might be appalled at my previous recommendation – so I should probably provide some sort of warning to help him be a more informed purchaser. It’s what I’d want.”
Of course what I didn’t know was your reaction – so I purposefully wrote it as a conditional statement.
i.e.
1st “problem” post:
IF this, then MAYBE this:
“IF you are more interested in books aimed at youths..
A "feel-good" youth (though teen) fantasy series can be found in the Xanth series by Piers Anthony.
Of course IF that's more your focus then I'd NOT recommend many of the books I mentioned previously. (..The Way of Kings is pretty hardcore, and Steven Erickson's novels are often downright brutal. )”
2nd “problem” post:
Clarification of IF:
“The emphasis was on "if".
Really, I don't know what your preference is - that's why I used all-caps on "if".
(..you purchased a youth oriented book, that and the prior statement of "warm, cosy, detached imaginary sense of fantasy", *might* suggest that you were more interested in something youth oriented.)..”
Furthermore I used emoticons to convey my emotions so that there couldn’t possibly be any misinterpretation that would lead to hard feelings.
Guess I was wrong..
Note: If a moderator decides that this post is inappropriate and removes it, I’ll be *extremely* displeased. (..again, that’s a conditional statement – I don’t think they will because none of it breaks any forum rules that I know of.) The reason for my displeasure would not simply be from having this post removed, but also that your [LastDanceSaloon] abusive posts were allowed for several days, and more specifically did not provide me with a reasonable time for my own rebuttal to exist.
EDITED: On second thought I'd be displeased if any of the posts were removed - the reason is that I'd like to have proof (via link of this thread) to warn others of LastDanceSaloon's behavior (..i.e. respond at your own risk or this could happen.)
Strange no one picked up on my misspelling of Umbrage! So at east we haven't offended the grammar police, although I still can't see anything in Scott's post to take offence at.
One thing I can be sure of is that if Fable was still a mod on here he would have stepped on this as soon as the flaming started.
One thing I can be sure of is that if Fable was still a mod on here he would have stepped on this as soon as the flaming started.
[QUOTE=Darth Gavinius;1096098]Distrbution of games, is becoming a little like Democracy (all about money and control) - in the end choice is an illusion and you have to choose your lesser evil.
And everything is hidden in the fine print.[/QUOTE]
And everything is hidden in the fine print.[/QUOTE]
It's an Um..Bridge over troubled waters..galraen wrote:Strange no one picked up on my misspelling of Umbrage! So at east we haven't offended the grammar police, although I still can't see anything in Scott's post to take offence at.
One thing I can be sure of is that if Fable was still a mod on here he would have stepped on this as soon as the flaming started.
(spellchecker found it, I just kept with it for the sake of consistency, and because it was pulled from a quote.) The general why for the "outrage" - not to difficult to understand. (..though the reaction seems way out of bounds even if it actually was as LastDanceSaloon is claiming.)
The problem is getting from "A.. to Z" How can you take a brief, well intended, and reasonably clear set of posts and read them as if they were trashing you? (..and not just trashing you in a friendly way, but something malicious.) I just don't think it's rational behavior. Unfortunately I don't think it's isolated behavior either.
I was reading though the SYM "What happened to GB" thread for the first time a couple of days ago and where members are sharing their feelings, and up pops this rancorous reply to Claudius's *opinions* (post 67):
http://www.gamebanshee.com/forums/speak ... 58-p5.html
I'm mean - what happened to the "hi, my name is and this is why I don't participate as much anymore at gamebanshee"? Instead it straight into: "lets see if we can tear apart this individual because I don't like his opinions". I mean, that's just not nice.
Yeah, ..miss Fable.
You just had to dig out a post where he said something nice about me didn't you!
[QUOTE=Darth Gavinius;1096098]Distrbution of games, is becoming a little like Democracy (all about money and control) - in the end choice is an illusion and you have to choose your lesser evil.
And everything is hidden in the fine print.[/QUOTE]
And everything is hidden in the fine print.[/QUOTE]
