Forum adverts like this one are shown to any user who is not logged in. Join us by filling out a tiny 3 field form and you will get your own, free, dakka user account which gives a good range of benefits to you: No adverts like this in the forums anymore. Times and dates in your local timezone. Full tracking of what you have read so you can skip to your first unread post, easily see what has changed since you last logged in, and easily see what is new at a glance. Email notifications for threads you want to watch closely. Being a part of the oldest wargaming community on the net. If you are already a member then feel free to login now.

I was going to write out my personal history and why 40k is, for me, most excellent, but then I realised how attention seeking it would seem, so decided against it.

Let me summarise with - "woo yeah, go plastic reality!"

The other week my merry men wanted me to go out with them, have a few drinks and pick up some girls. I told them I felt ill, but in truth I just wanted to take it easy at home and paint. Does this make me an ugly outcast escapist loser?

I hope not, as I've done that myself! Personally I have feth all me time though. Whenever I sit down to do something the neighbours knock on the door with an "are you coming out to moan about how gak our collective days have been?" so on the odd occasion that I say "jog on" I don't feel bad.

I guess it depends on the amount of time that you actually spend out of the house, compared to the amount of time you spend on just yourself before anyone can answer that question.

fishy bob wrote:
The other week my merry men wanted me to go out with them, have a few drinks and pick up some girls. I told them I felt ill, but in truth I just wanted to take it easy at home and paint. Does this make me an ugly outcast escapist loser?

No, I have refused friends coming aver because i didnt feel like hanging out, sometimes, somedays you want a day to yourself where you can do what you want

 mwnciboo wrote:


At People who say "I don't agree with Intervention".

Why not be interventionist? Consider the issue in the Round. People fundamentally don't know what is good for them? Hence spiralling Obesity and other social ills, everyone hides behind it's my right to do what I like, in the face of Medical advice (like don't smoke, eat your greens, clean your teeth, exercise like 30mins a day etc) . It does not cure social problems to be afraid of addressing them it perpetuates it. I have no problem with people doing what they like, but there must be consequences to their actions or their lack of discipline..

Because it's boorish, you don't know the cause and maybe you'd end up worse in similar conditions. Might come from misdiagnose, bad treatment (like my obese friend with hydrocortyzone), underlying physical/ mental illness, heavy trauma etc. It's non of your business as long as it doesn't involve cockroaches invading your house or having to kiss a smelly "nerd" for example. Not to mention that the mouth smell rarely comes from not washing your teeth, it's ussualy stomach/ throat/ nasal infection causing it - the condition of teeth that gives you a roten mouth takes you to the dentist fast unless your nerves are damaged.

Btw curious do you call homosexuals on their health risky anus penetrating? Alcoholism is partly genetical as well (assuming gay comes from genetics) so either you are tolerant for both or intervine on both.

You see I like the fact that physicaly weaker individuals have a chance to socialise through a hobby putting more emphasis on thinking, imagination and manual skills than physical fitness, why should I reject those people I'm not a f_cking eugenist or a picky girl. I recognise my good shape might have come from a lucky Gods roll as much as from my discpline, in fact I'm quite sure of it as I have non of the latter, just can cross a line much more vs mentioned guys and slip by unharmed thanks to good initial health.

 mwnciboo wrote:
Free Healthcare is a good example of this. Here in the UK it is costing the NHS Billions to sort out Obesity based issues (Gastric bands etc). If you cannot look after yourself to a reasonable level then I am against you getting treatment at vast expense from the NHS. Equally levels of Diabetes are skyrocketing, Heart disease, complications for other conditions and problems. I have the same opinion about Smokers and Alcoholics. Why should a decent Human being not be entitled to a life saving if expensive operation, for a Liver Transplant because an alcoholic is on the waiting list ahead of them? They had theirs and wasted it...

Out of curiosity, how much do the soccer injuries burden the budget?

Decent human being is kind of a hard term. The alcoholic might have beaten badly three people, insult three hundred, rape one and attempt to rape two. The decent human might have sacked 10 guys to earn more himself, creating 5 new alcoholics in the process. How do you differentiate, was/ wasn't drinking is too vague imo as much as I personaly felt the damage the alcoholic person can inflict.

 mwnciboo wrote:
My Local A&E where my Wife works, is being sued because a guy was so big he broke the bed he was in (30 stone +) and hurt himself into the bargain. Now the NHS is considering buying Outsize Equipment at great expense. Why should he be given Tax payers money for being grossly obese and the weight of a small Cow?

People casualy snowboarding have accidents that make them go through a really expensive treatment. How are you going to sort it out, what is acceptable and what is not? That supposed snowboarder might heavily burden the budget for 30 years. I was snowboarding but I'll rather have my ice cream, speed line and vodka glass today, thank you, the sound of head hitting the ice and puking my guts out is still ringing if I remind myself the times. The guy you describe was either too sick or too weak to loose weight just like thousands of people are too stupid to see that basketball on the concrete or running on a busy road is bad for their health.

 mwnciboo wrote:
Plus I am not talking about people being overweight (most of us ). The Body Mass Index was introduced based on data from the 1940's/50's, today people are much healthier and taller than back then (less rickets etc). I am talking about the Morbidly Obese, 30+ on the index (40%+ of their BODY MASS is pure fat!), People so Large they have trouble being mobile, this is ridiculous.

Really I've never seen that in person, has to be a hamburger or fish and chips thing. They might be hidden around somewhere but not really heavier on budget than rare diseases I guess. I doubt we are so much better disciplined or better overall though, the cause is somewhere else. Oh, sorry for posting obese nerd anime illuminati sf crap, happens with my tinfoil hat on.

 mwnciboo wrote:
Democracy is a form of government in which all eligible citizens have an equal say in the decisions that affect their lives. It does not mean a free cheque or freedom to do as you will without consequences.

Not sure why in a democratic system you are obliged to intervine on other people more, sounds more like hidden facism to me if we really need to take it to the political level. On which, btw, maybe international companies like McDonald advertising directly to kids (and selling to schools as I heard?) should be called on first, not the obese guy that was fat before even reached a self awerness level needed to defend himself.

Intervention doesn't have to be boorish in nature. I know a guy who's overweight. He eats out a lot (usually a key indicator of a food disorder) and doesn't eat well when he does. Chicken wings, pizza etc. I told him, dude, if you eat out less, you'd likely be able to shed some weight. He was cool with that, and knew, but of course went on how he didn't have time to cook and blah blah blah... And more excuses. So usually bad habits have multiple focal points, and it's difficult to intervene without that individual tackling those challenges instead of making excuses. However, there's nothing wrong with giving friendly advice.

Of course helping someone out of kindness, love, genuine concern, etc. is laudable and entirely appropriate. Deriding their appearance and expressing your disgust for them is i think highly unlikely to bring about any meaningful change, and is more likely to deepen/perpetuate the self-image and self-worth issues that can lead to obesity specifically, and the overindulgence in Escapism (capitalization intended) generally. That was the point I was originally lofting.

I know when people just came out and said i needed to loose weight i just kept feeling as if they didnt like me the way i was and retreated even more into myself.
It took some deep personal reasons to get me to exercise and eat right(well relatively right)

It will take me around 10 minutes to write this post, and probably around 30 to read this entire thread, so I'm posting first. I've read some posts, and would like to put in my own perspective.

I started this hobby around senior year of high school. I came into Warhammer 40k by DoW. Now I have always considered myself pretty nerdy. I liked history, science, technology, computers, cars....well, I think its easier to say I like a lot of things. Anything boyish you can think of, I like. I was always between the "cool boys group" and the group of people who actually do cool stuff (aka "nerds"). While the cool boys liked talking about some stuff I liked, i.e. cars, games, guns, swords, expensive house appliances and set-ups, football; I find myself relating to nerds more, over my time in high school. Me personally, I guess the only thing I was really escaping from was life. My social/school life was great. Tabletop games were always an interest to me, and I've never grown out of that small child who plays with toys.

As a guy in between these two groups of people though, I was able to notice a lot of difference. General ones are: the cool boys were able to interact with girls more easier, almost all of them play a sport, average intelligence is incredibly inferior, and are generally not that fun to be around.
The nerd group generally consists of people with problems with weight, health, and at least one issue that has to do with four senses of the human body. Most are shy, socially awkward, have difficulty interacting with girls/boys, are not athletic, and do not do the things that I generally avoid, like drugs, alcohol, and partying. But the thing was, the nerdy group would always have fun and amazing things to talk about and do, like roleplaying games, historic and political discussions, discussions about technology, medicine, space, prehistoric animals. And would always have something cool to do, like science experiments, and building things. These guys were fun and enjoyable to hang around. Best of all, that one stupid kid that thought he was tough and likes to get physical even though he is incredibly dumb, smokes, and wears his 10 pound jeans around his knees is not there.

And as the years progressed through high school, I noticed that as everyone got older and more mature, the kids who didn't exactly fit into the cool boys crowd would gravitate toward the nerds, I think just because they were more interesting and smart. This boosted our confidence, and I think points and hints us toward our future success in life. We would attract the smart, and interesting girls, and when we do stuff like go on picnics or biking, swimming, movies, it was a lot more fun and stimulating than when I did stuff with the high school Cool Boyz, who might as well have been Orks.

 LumenPraebeo wrote:
It will take me around 10 minutes to write this post, and probably around 30 to read this entire thread, so I'm posting first. I've read some posts, and would like to put in my own perspective.

I started this hobby around senior year of high school. I came into Warhammer 40k by DoW. Now I have always considered myself pretty nerdy. I liked history, science, technology, computers, cars....well, I think its easier to say I like a lot of things. Anything boyish you can think of, I like. I was always between the "cool boys group" and the group of people who actually do cool stuff (aka "nerds"). While the cool boys liked talking about some stuff I liked, i.e. cars, games, guns, swords, expensive house appliances and set-ups, football; I find myself relating to nerds more, over my time in high school. Me personally, I guess the only thing I was really escaping from was life. My social/school life was great. Tabletop games were always an interest to me, and I've never grown out of that small child who plays with toys.

As a guy in between these two groups of people though, I was able to notice a lot of difference. General ones are: the cool boys were able to interact with girls more easier, almost all of them play a sport, average intelligence is incredibly inferior, and are generally not that fun to be around.
The nerd group generally consists of people with problems with weight, health, and at least one issue that has to do with four senses of the human body. Most are shy, socially awkward, have difficulty interacting with girls/boys, are not athletic, and do not do the things that I generally avoid, like drugs, alcohol, and partying. But the thing was, the nerdy group would always have fun and amazing things to talk about and do, like roleplaying games, historic and political discussions, discussions about technology, medicine, space, prehistoric animals. And would always have something cool to do, like science experiments, and building things. These guys were fun and enjoyable to hang around. Best of all, that one stupid kid that thought he was tough and likes to get physical even though he is incredibly dumb, smokes, and wears his 10 pound jeans around his knees is not there.

And as the years progressed through high school, I noticed that as everyone got older and more mature, the kids who didn't exactly fit into the cool boys crowd would gravitate toward the nerds, I think just because they were more interesting and smart. This boosted our confidence, and I think points and hints us toward our future success in life. We would attract the smart, and interesting girls, and when we do stuff like go on picnics or biking, swimming, movies, it was a lot more fun and stimulating than when I did stuff with the high school Cool Boyz, who might as well have been Orks.

I noticed this too in High School, and heck even in general, the interesting girls generally hang out with the nerdier guys, but then again I have heard enough women complain about alpha males that this may be part of our success as nerds (Note this generally excludes the GUO)

 English Assassin wrote:
'Escapist' became a disparaging term in the 1960s, thanks to the likes of Theodor Adorno and Max Horkheimer, who popularised the view among the 'educated classes' (whatever they really are) that 'relevance' was the essential criterion of intellectual or artistic worth (this was the era of 'kitchen sink realism'), and that the growth of enjoyable and harmless but essentially irrelevant 'leisure pursuits' was a tool to divide and oppress the masses by taking up their free time and giving them something on which frivolously to spend their money.

Needless to say, Horkheimer and Adorno are full of crap, but this hasn't prevented the 'escapist' tag from enduring as a specific insult to anything nerdy, despite the obvious fact that all pass-times (including non-nerdy ones like sports and 'high culture') are likewise inherently 'escapist'.

It is worth adding, however, that writers (and readers) of sci-fi and fantasy do lay themselves open to this kind of criticism; I would indeed write-off the vast majority of 'genre fiction' as providing nothing other than escapism, without possessing any broader literary merit. It does make me a little sad when self-proclaimed fans of sci-fi eagerly lap up Star Wars spin-off novels, but wouldn't dream of reading literary sci-fi like Margaret Attwood or Kurt Vonnegut, or even classics like Arthur C. Clarke or Philip K. Dick, all of whom enjoy a significant readership and critical appreciation outside of genre fans, regarding them as 'boring' because they don't feature many explosions, laser gun battles or cute robots. Ironically, they are in fact fans of the trappings of science fiction (i.e. futuristic societies and technology) without actually enjoying the genre's fundamental purpose: to address the relationship between human beings and technology.

I know it was already quoted, but this was an amazing post.

Of course we use wargaming as an escapist act. One of my friends, Portia rose, wrote an awesome book called Leaving Mundania, Its about larping (which is actually the precursor to wargaming interestingly enough).

One of her most major points though, is that it doesn't matter what type of person you are, you inevitably will want to leave mundane things behind you, for example your bills, rent etc. Wargaming is a means to do that. You essentially become a commander for an hour or so.

I think what we have here is the fact that people can't realise that so called *nerd* hobbies are actually in most facts quite mainstream in terms of what people actually enjoy them.

Borish? What because I do want my Country financially crippled by the NHS dealing with something that should be the responsibility of the Individual.

Plumbumbarum wrote:

Not sure why in a democratic system you are obliged to intervine on other people more, sounds more like hidden facism to me if we really need to take it to the political level. On which, btw, maybe international companies like McDonald advertising directly to kids (and selling to schools as I heard?) should be called on first, not the obese guy that was fat before even reached a self awerness level needed to defend himself.

Democracy is about doing as the masses demand (a Mandate for the elected Leaders to rule in our stead), when you look at the figures for the NHS then action needs to be taken today, not tomorrow, not next year, not next Decade. The Obesity time bomb is costing us more and more, it is projected to be almost exponential, the inherent costs on our creaky NHS are unsustainable. This is nothing to do with facism, it is economics, sort out the problem or we will all have to pay a hell of a lot more taxes.

Watch this and tell me that Football injuries cost the NHS anywhere near as much? This is Wales 3 Million of a total Population of 70 million.

http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-wales-19443314

You are missing the point entirely if you reduce this to a question of "morality" or "freedom of expression", people use the defence of freedom, Democracy and paying their taxes to justify abusing their bodies (Smoking, Alcoholism, Substance Abuse, Obesity) and many believe they are entitled to the best Healthcare available in a limited resource environment. Never once considering they are abusing the system, or put another way the person who doesn't work hard at school and yet when they get an F in an Exam then complain they should be entitled to an A. This is abusing the system, there is a tacit requirement for everyone to work in school for their grades, why not the same for Healthcare? If you abuse your body, you will be given a lower priority than those with a reasonably health lifestyle.

Burying your head in the sand about this problem and trying to cloud the issue is not helpful. Political issues aside, the Pragmatic issue is that we cannot afford to have an NHS full of people with massive health complications due to body abuse.

EDIT - @English Assassin, good post. I would recommend the Kim Stanley Robinson, MARS Trilogy (RED, BLUE, GREEN), but looking at your Reading habits it's probably a good bet you've read them already .

Unless you are proposing we ban wargaming in an effort to reduce the burden on the NHS then I would suggest your well off topic and sent this thread FUBAR.

Agreed.

But back to my original On Topic post which I have reinforced several times.

Escapism is good, taken to extremes = bad.

Also, I would beg to point out, not enough escapism is bad as well. Take the case point of Australia. I think its a case of too much work, too much business and not enough escapism.

Society works at different levels at that point

 MisterMoon wrote:
Intervention doesn't have to be boorish in nature. I know a guy who's overweight. He eats out a lot (usually a key indicator of a food disorder) and doesn't eat well when he does. Chicken wings, pizza etc. I told him, dude, if you eat out less, you'd likely be able to shed some weight. He was cool with that, and knew, but of course went on how he didn't have time to cook and blah blah blah... And more excuses. So usually bad habits have multiple focal points, and it's difficult to intervene without that individual tackling those challenges instead of making excuses. However, there's nothing wrong with giving friendly advice.

Yes if you are really close with someone, you can try politely doing it, I thing there was mockery mentioned somewhere by the poster I reffered to. Mockery some time earlier might actualy be the reason that the obese guy is not trying, lost confidence in himself and other people etc.

From my experience it's hardly working, I did both boorish and polite kind of intervention and never saw any effect, the for example obese guy is already completly aware of what he should do and why. The society constantly remins him of his bad shape, movies portray him as pathetic, girls give him no chances and he gets enough maeningful stares to not be able to forget - friends reminding him of this might be completly unnecessary and only add to the problem. Also it's easy from a healthy and fit person to throw "sort yourself up", if he could he would already most of the time, that's the line convenient when you are a shrink and decided there is no other problem behind the obesity than being a lazy crybaby masked as adult, even the shrink could be wrong though. I tasted severe depression coming from outside circumstances, hell on earth really if you're sensible enough and I was unstable on my feet from even thinking about matters. I was lucky that I was failing from a high horse so was physicaly fit, emotionaly rested and healthy. I can't imagine doing any planned attempt on loosing weight, quiting smoking etc then and I guess many of those obese guys are quite depressed.

One of my friends who was going downhill with drugs and alcohol, I wasted countless hours on talking him out of this, did not help. Hitting the bottom helps but is not really something you want to push a person into as the toll taken on body and mind might as well destroy the person. The friend was rejected at some point by my circles which works too and is often advised, I'm not exactly sure though - he just found new friends, more into his hobby at the time and his moral condition plummeted fast, managed a few heavy crimes at his way to the bottom and is a sober wreck today. I mocked him hard publicly each time I met him for his criminal actions after he was released from prison, didn't change anything. Positive motivation could have been so much better, that's what I think today.

Btw my football hooligans friends have obese guy among them, they don't give a crap, never try to make him loose weight or sth. It's quite funny for me that they could turn out more tolerant than wargamers from internet forum.

 mwnciboo wrote:
I would be interested to see if the pair who committed the Columbine School Massacre or the recent Batman Premier Murderer were engaged in escapism.

The problem for me, is when Escapism meets Mental illness it takes a healthy outlet for fantasies, day dreaming and unfulfilled aspirations and turns them into a massive negative.

That's a good question and as far as Holmes is concerned, already answered. He was a heavy World of Warcraft player, also fits some nerdy stereotypes with his high IQ, comic book fixation and Star Wars shirt:

http://www.nytimes.com/2012/08/27/us/before-gunfire-in-colorado-theater-hints-of-bad-news-about-james-holmes.html?pagewanted=all

Now another questions, in the article it seems people around him were very friendly, a girl he texted about his supposed condition asked him to come and talk about it, he faced no real critique etc apart from proffesors who examined him and told him he should find another career. What if he was mocked, critiqued, intervined on his awkwardness - would he get his crap together or rather would his outburst turn out much bloodier? Or maybe no impact, this is interesting matter imo of course impossible to give a certain answer but I'm curious what you and others think.

One more thing I'm wondering about on the supposed "nerds" topic is that maybe aspergers/ ocd/ bipolar/ neurotic etc is just a price to pay for really high IQ. From that link, Holmes was seriously smart for example.

 RiTides wrote:
I know it was already quoted, but this was an amazing post.

Thanks RiTideas (and others); it's nice to feel appreciated.

Plumbumbarum wrote:
Because it's boorish, you don't know the cause and maybe you'd end up worse in similar conditions. Might come from misdiagnose, bad treatment (like my obese friend with hydrocortyzone), underlying physical/ mental illness, heavy trauma etc... why should I reject those people I'm not a f_cking eugenist or a picky girl.

Out of curiosity, how much do the soccer injuries burden the budget?

Not sure why in a democratic system you are obliged to intervine on other people more, sounds more like hidden facism to me if we really need to take it to the political level.

Hold on Plum, you make a fair point when you say that we shouldn't be wilfully unkind to fat people (or indeed to anybody on the basis of their lifestyle, so long as they are breaking no laws or social boundaries). But being of the opinion that the likes of Francis (the morbidly obese WoW player from the videos above) should be told, ideally politely, and ideally by a doctor, that that their lifestyle is going to lead to a life cruelly curtailed in both breadth and length, doesn't make one a eugenicist. (And in all honesty, it would be safe to say he's written himself out of the gene pool anyway.) Indeed given that medical (and psychological) intervention would offer him the chance to live a normal and happy life, rather than that of a grotesque, pitiable lard-bucket man-child, there exists something of a moral onus to encourage him promptly to seek both by the least-unkind means possible.

As for the rest, you're putting up straw men: the burden to healthcare and cost to employers of sporting-induced induced injuries is negligible (sufficiently so that they are considered statistically-insignificant in the demography of causes of injury and death), whereas obesity in the UK alone, at a conservative estimate, incurs costs estimated to be around £27 billion per annum - half of the NHS's £51 billion budget, and as much again in lost productivity. Yes there are other contributing factors to obesity, but statistically they pale into insignificance compared with eating too much cake and not exercising. And of course there are other lifestyle-induced areas of cost to health services (drinking, smoking, unsafe sex, vehicle accidents, etc.); in all of these instances governments (with varying degrees of success) have intervened with the objective of change public behaviour to reduce risk, so why not obesity?

Representative democratic government (a government chosen by the people to act in their interests) does not preclude state intervention in the lives of its citizens - indeed practically every action of government does so to some extent - particularly when the benefits of doing so are readily apparent. Our governments have for centuries heavily taxed goods which produce negative externalities (the costs of which are inevitably borne by the state, not the producer) such as tobacco and alcohol while offering tax breaks on, among other things, books, newspapers and medicines (considered to have positive externalities) with the intention of directing social trends to beneficial (or less-harmful) ends; to call that "fascism" is simple juvenile. I will not be in the least surprised to see similarly Pigouvian taxation of junk food become a topic of political debate in the coming decade, and I shan't object to it when it does.

Now to bring this all back to the original topic, I have a question: are we nerds, on individual experience, actually fatter than other demographics? I must know!

 mwnciboo wrote:
Borish? What because I do want my Country financially crippled by the NHS dealing with something that should be the responsibility of the Individual.

Plumbumbarum wrote:

Not sure why in a democratic system you are obliged to intervine on other people more, sounds more like hidden facism to me if we really need to take it to the political level. On which, btw, maybe international companies like McDonald advertising directly to kids (and selling to schools as I heard?) should be called on first, not the obese guy that was fat before even reached a self awerness level needed to defend himself.

Democracy is about doing as the masses demand (a Mandate for the elected Leaders to rule in our stead), when you look at the figures for the NHS then action needs to be taken today, not tomorrow, not next year, not next Decade. The Obesity time bomb is costing us more and more, it is projected to be almost exponential, the inherent costs on our creaky NHS are unsustainable. This is nothing to do with facism, it is economics, sort out the problem or we will all have to pay a hell of a lot more taxes.

Watch this and tell me that Football injuries cost the NHS anywhere near as much? This is Wales 3 Million of a total Population of 70 million.

http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-wales-19443314

You are missing the point entirely if you reduce this to a question of "morality" or "freedom of expression", people use the defence of freedom, Democracy and paying their taxes to justify abusing their bodies (Smoking, Alcoholism, Substance Abuse, Obesity) and many believe they are entitled to the best Healthcare available in a limited resource environment. Never once considering they are abusing the system, or put another way the person who doesn't work hard at school and yet when they get an F in an Exam then complain they should be entitled to an A. This is abusing the system, there is a tacit requirement for everyone to work in school for their grades, why not the same for Healthcare? If you abuse your body, you will be given a lower priority than those with a reasonably health lifestyle.

Burying your head in the sand about this problem and trying to cloud the issue is not helpful. Political issues aside, the Pragmatic issue is that we cannot afford to have an NHS full of people with massive health complications due to body abuse.

EDIT - @English Assassin, good post. I would recommend the Kim Stanley Robinson, MARS Trilogy (RED, BLUE, GREEN), but looking at your Reading habits it's probably a good bet you've read them already .

Yep I forgot that you in Britain are chasing USA in this regard, it really is rarer here. I only know/ knew two person with diabetes, a skinny girl with type I and my grandfather who got type II in his 70s and morbid obese as you describe is a rare sight. I suspect as a part of free world we will see the issue growing though in incoming years.

I don't consider obesity as a "freedom of expression", I consider it a heavy problem often beyond the power of free will. Now, the idea of national healtcare, how I understand it (not saying GB just generaly) is that you as a fit person pay for the others and others pay for you when you are unlucky, there always is and will be this matter of uneven distribution. In Poland for example obesity is not a problem but hardcore alcoholics are, just 2 days ago I was talking to a nurse who complained about bums that are usualy only drunk taking emergency time and burdening the budget, what can you do? They go help every time because 10 % of this might be a sick person being dirty because of garden work or a normal man who just drank to much on occasion, not to mention that the bum might be in critical condition and need help. Now, calling up on a bum is banging a steel wall with your head, the matter is only do I as a taxpayer want to help sick bums. I do for example, I reduce this to a question of morality, go send a spaceship to mars or whatever you want to do with the money, sincere congratulations but we will spend the many on sick alcoholics. This is not simply a question of individual responsibility, the country elites was executed first by Hitler then by Stalin, the nation was being pumped with cheap vodka on purpose, the culture destroyed on every corner and 50 years of soviet occupation is not something that leaves anything close to a proper middle class or elites. Now the transformation to democracy was not a walk in the park either, with no Marshall plan of any kind to benefit from and world bank mobsters and friends predating on any profitable national business having full cooperation of our politicians. Knowing all this, I cant really point a drunk individual and blame him, it's his fault at some level but the real issue is somwhere else, imo.

Not sure why GB wouldn't handle it btw, we can and you can't? You're a fething 1st world country. Stop bombarding nonexistant enemies maybe, don't know, surely there have to be few more things draining your budget besides obese guys. Also was it always that bad with obesity, is it really the introduction of NHS that created the problem with people intentionaly doing harm to themselves to abuse the system. I know that I'm over-exaggerating your opinion but is causability that simple?

I understand your stance btw, just don't share it. It's also not an easy topic, maybe what you propose is better just farer from me on ideological level. I never did a serious analysis of the matter with numbers etc, speak from a different perspective and ofc can be wrong.

English Assasin wrote:

Plumbumbarum wrote:
Because it's boorish, you don't know the cause and maybe you'd end up worse in similar conditions. Might come from misdiagnose, bad treatment (like my obese friend with hydrocortyzone), underlying physical/ mental illness, heavy trauma etc... why should I reject those people I'm not a f_cking eugenist or a picky girl.

Out of curiosity, how much do the soccer injuries burden the budget?

Not sure why in a democratic system you are obliged to intervine on other people more, sounds more like hidden facism to me if we really need to take it to the political level.

Hold on Plum, you make a fair point when you say that we shouldn't be wilfully unkind to fat people (or indeed to anybody on the basis of their lifestyle, so long as they are breaking no laws or social boundaries). But being of the opinion that the likes of Francis (the morbidly obese WoW player from the videos above) should be told, ideally politely, and ideally by a doctor, that that their lifestyle is going to lead to a life cruelly curtailed in both breadth and length, doesn't make one a eugenicist. (And in all honesty, it would be safe to say he's written himself out of the gene pool anyway.) Indeed given that medical (and psychological) intervention would offer him the chance to live a normal and happy life, rather than that of a grotesque, pitiable lard-bucket man-child, there exists something of a moral onus to encourage him promptly to seek both by the least-unkind means possible.

Eugenicist (in my post "eugenist", good to know the proper form now) was an over- exaggeration, a reaction maybe to claims like "The other is a waste of space and an Oxygen thief. ", mentions of mockery and stools breaking at the tournaments or posting the actual guy photo as an example of proto nerd and a source of bad stereotypes. If the intervention is about an obligatory tratment for too obese people, that is some idea and clearly not eugenism, I don't agree with it though just as I don't agree with obligatory treatment for alcoholics, not to mention that I don't really see a viable way to do it, post me examples though, maybe I just don't know.

English Assasin wrote:As for the rest, you're putting up straw men: the burden to healthcare and cost to employers of sporting-induced induced injuries is negligible (sufficiently so that they are considered statistically-insignificant in the demography of causes of injury and death), whereas obesity in the UK alone, at a conservative estimate, incurs costs estimated to be around £27 billion per annum - half of the NHS's £51 billion budget, and as much again in lost productivity.

Was just a thought and as above, we don't have that much of an obesity problem afaik but I imagine legions are injuring themselves on stupid concrete playgrounds build near schools (out of curiosity, do you have them? I wonder if it's a communist invention only) and I though not only of direct injuries but late consequenes. I have no numbers really, should have stressed that out.

English Assasin wrote:Yes there are other contributing factors to obesity, but statistically they pale into insignificance compared with eating too much cake and not exercising. And of course there are other lifestyle-induced areas of cost to health services (drinking, smoking, unsafe sex, vehicle accidents, etc.); in all of these instances governments (with varying degrees of success) have intervened with the objective of change public behaviour to reduce risk, so why not obesity?

I'm not talking only about direct causes like genetics, hormonal imbalances or sth. If your parent were eating cake and not exercising, you didn't have much chance did you. The effect of commercials or how the culture is pushed into the direction where healthy eating is harder than before, officials not really doing anything to help or stop it etc. It's not that simple to call responsibility on the people themselves.

Eating too much cake and not exercising, even if that's how it started, dealing with an obese individual especialy one who got there at younger age, you have much more than just excessive fat to deal with.

English Assasin wrote:Representative democratic government (a government chosen by the people to act in their interests) does not preclude state intervention in the lives of its citizens - indeed practically every action of government does so to some extent - particularly when the benefits of doing so are readily apparent. Our governments have for centuries heavily taxed goods which produce negative externalities (the costs of which are inevitably borne by the state, not the producer) such as tobacco and alcohol while offering tax breaks on, among other things, books, newspapers and medicines (considered to have positive externalities) with the intention of directing social trends to beneficial (or less-harmful) ends; to call that "fascism" is simple juvenile. I will not be in the least surprised to see similarly Pigouvian taxation of junk food become a topic of political debate in the coming decade, and I shan't object to it when it does.

I consider taxing or even baning junk food a great idea, I do not want interventions on the affected but products and makers, be my guest. I also do not value democracy a lot, the remark was about using democracy as a point for intervention and facism was thrown in the context of, as I understood it, queuing fat people (so imo just sick) behind more responsible and disciplined people. Also some say it's socialism what you describe as the foundation of democracy is free market etc. Btw todays so called democracy is partly facism, some strange mix of facism, socialism, technocrat and democracy in fact, we had voting being under deep Stalinism. It's some half-assed system that has little to do with freedom or choice imo. Semantics really, what is important is I'm not against taxing junk food producers to help reduce the burden on healthcare, just don't share the idea that the individual is suddenly all that responsible because this is democracy. "With freedom comes responsibility", what freedom? Make me a nationwide vote on "do you want democracy to end", oh no it's undemocratic, you can vote but don't vote too far, we've already gave you 2 parties to choose from every 4 years and 2 - 5 corporations in every segment of the market to buy from.

English Assasin wrote:Now to bring this all back to the original topic, I have a question: are we nerds, on individual experience, actually fatter than other demographics? I must know!

I'd say no, I don't see it.

mwnciboo wrote:Why not be interventionist? Consider the issue in the Round. People fundamentally don't know what is good for them? Hence spiralling Obesity and other social ills, everyone hides behind it's my right to do what I like, in the face of Medical advice (like don't smoke, eat your greens, clean your teeth, exercise like 30mins a day etc) . It does not cure social problems to be afraid of addressing them it perpetuates it. I have no problem with people doing what they like, but there must be consequences to their actions or their lack of discipline. Free Healthcare is a good example of this.

Democracy is a form of government in which all eligible citizens have an equal say in the decisions that affect their lives. It does not mean a free cheque or freedom to do as you will without consequences.

Now this would ordinarily be my attitude too - just put the cake down, fatty! - but thinking about this has made soften my line slightly. It's relatively easy for me to be self-disciplined about food and exercise: I enjoy cooking, I enjoy sports, and I have the time and money necessary for both. But then, that's how I was brought up; had I been brought up eating takeaways on the floor with my fingers while the telly blared constantly in the background, I might find it significantly more difficult. People scoffing junk food know on some level the consequences of their actions, yet they continue to cram chips into their mouths. If the present epidemic of obesity is going to be cured, it's going to require something more complex and far-reaching than simply telling people what's healthy and expecting them to follow advice; that's been tried, and hasn't worked. Since until that solution arises, you and I are going to be picking up the bill for the fat bastards, I think we would be wise to look more deeply into the problem.

Plumbumbarum wrote:Yep I forgot that you in Britain are chasing USA in this regard, it really is rarer here. I only know/ knew two person with diabetes, a skinny girl with type I and my grandfather who got type II in his 70s and morbid obese as you describe is a rare sight. I suspect as a part of free world we will see the issue growing though in incoming years.

We are indeed. This little gem from Scotland might provide some insight as to why the UK is quite so fat. I dug around for a few Europe-wide statistics, and sadly it indeed looks as though the Poles are catching us up.

Plumbumbarum wrote:Not sure why GB wouldn't handle it btw, we can and you can't? You're a fething 1st world country. Stop bombarding nonexistant enemies maybe, don't know, surely there have to be few more things draining your budget besides obese guys. Also was it always that bad with obesity, is it really the introduction of NHS that created the problem with people intentionaly doing harm to themselves to abuse the system. I know that I'm over-exaggerating your opinion but is causability that simple?

The UK's a minor power with pretensions; randomly invading places for no readily apparent reason allows us to imagine that we're still important. Bizarrely, it appears that the total cost of invading Iraq and Afghanistan is "only" about £20 billion per annum; imagine how many places we'd invade if we weren't all so fat! I very much doubt there's any correlation between free healthcare and obesity however, given that only only first world nation fatter than us is the US, which conspicuously lacks such provision.

Plumbumbarum wrote:Eugenicist (in my post "eugenist", good to know the proper form now) was an over- exaggeration, a reaction maybe to claims like "The other is a waste of space and an Oxygen thief. ", mentions of mockery and stools breaking at the tournaments or posting the actual guy photo as an example of proto nerd and a source of bad stereotypes. If the intervention is about an obligatory tratment for too obese people, that is some idea and clearly not eugenism, I don't agree with it though just as I don't agree with obligatory treatment for alcoholics, not to mention that I don't really see a viable way to do it, post me examples though, maybe I just don't know.

If either of us could come up with a effective solution to this, we should be sharing it with the world in general, not just a few wargamers. Simply promoting the obvious benefits of not looking like a hippo and dying of a heart attack or liver failure at fifty doesn't seem to have prevented the unwashed masses from guzzling down pie, cake and lager by the bucketload, however, so I foresee the implementation of increasingly coercive solutions to both problems by policy-makers.

Plumbumbarum wrote:I imagine legions are injuring themselves on stupid concrete playgrounds build near schools (out of curiosity, do you have them? I wonder if it's a communist invention only) and I though not only of direct injuries but late consequences.

I can't find any specific statistics, but it doesn't appear that exercise-induced injuries are considered by the medical profession to impose a significant cost burden in the way that obesity, smoking and drinking do. And indeed, it wasn't just communists, local governments over here in the 70s and 80s were inexplicably fond of concreting over parks, then acting surprised when children fractured their skulls after falling off the swings. (In the same way, public buildings that era in the UK, particularly on university campuses, are uniformly ugly neo-brutalist cuboids which look like Red Army barracks; it was just the fashion at the time. By way of example, here's the Royal National Theatre, London. They filmed some Doctor Who there once; an episode set in a dystopian futuristic prison.)

Plumbumbarum wrote:I'm not talking only about direct causes like genetics, hormonal imbalances or sth. If your parent were eating cake and not exercising, you didn't have much chance did you. The effect of commercials or how the culture is pushed into the direction where healthy eating is harder than before, officials not really doing anything to help or stop it etc. It's not that simple to call responsibility on the people themselves.

Eating too much cake and not exercising, even if that's how it started, dealing with an obese individual especialy one who got there at younger age, you have much more than just excessive fat to deal with.

This is indeed true, but when the consequences fall so directly on the individual, you have to expect them to accept a measure of responsibility for dealing with the problem, particularly when help and advice are available to them at no personal cost. It is particularly noteworthy that obesity seems to be entrenched by social class: contrast approximately 50% prevalence among those with no qualifications with about 20% among those with university degrees in the UK (a trend mirrored across Europe).

Plumbumbarum wrote:I consider taxing or even baning junk food a great idea, I do not want interventions on the affected but products and makers, be my guest.

As it turns out, the Danes have got there already, and imposed a supertax on fatty foods. The shape of things to come, I predict.

Absolutely, a FAT Tax will be instituted in our Lifetime, especially as smoking is declining and the Treasury makes alot of money from Tabacco Duties. Maybe we will tax other things more heavily, like Scandinavian Countries unfortunately unlike Norway we never used North Sea Oil to make a Sovereign Wealth fund (because our politician's are shortsighted).

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/The_Government_Pension_Fund_of_Norway

Oh and on another point, Just because you espouse sensible, pragmatic solutions doesn't make you a communist, I'm slightly right of centre but I don't believe in Gun Ownership (except for licensed Hunters and Farmers which should be single shot, and even sport shooting can be done with Laser Guns like in the Olympics!), I believe in Abortion and the Womans right to decide, I believe in Gay marriage, and freedom of Religion within the Bounds of the law. I believe in many things and don't think that one particular party represents me completely, and I resent being called communist. Social Responsible Capitalism, like our Grandfathers did the Victorian Era, building Hospitals and Universities with their wealth and bettering society is probably my favoured solution, Philanthropic deeds is the way to go. I hope I become seriously Wealth, oh the things I would do help society and change things for the better.

Indeed, it's a fortuitous alignment of good social policy and the chance to improve government finances. I had some thoughts arising from your last post; to confuse you I've edited them in a the top of one you've already read. I also agree with you on paternalistic capitalism; regrettably the dominant culture of the present day political right in the UK is one which prides itself on a lack of empathy for one's fellow man.

 English Assassin wrote:
We are indeed. This little gem from Scotland might provide some insight as to why the UK is quite so fat. I dug around for a few Europe-wide statistics, and sadly it indeed looks as though the Poles are catching us up.

Yes I found similar data as well, sad as it was mentioned in the article that not that far ago it was something to be proud of - the low obesity level in Polandl. It's really hard to see on the streets for me though and I'm driving around a lot because of my work, maybe it's just that my region is more dependable on physical labor.

 English Assassin wrote:

The UK's a minor power with pretensions; randomly invading places for no readily apparent reason allows us to imagine that we're still important. Bizarrely, it appears that the total cost of invading Iraq and Afghanistan is "only" about £20 billion per annum; imagine how many places we'd invade if we weren't all so fat! I very much doubt there's any correlation between free healthcare and obesity however, given that only only first world nation fatter than us is the US, which conspicuously lacks such provision.

Lies. You sell mass produced toy soldiers at a price closing on the one of gold equvalent in weight, country able to pull off something like that in broad daylight can never be poor.

Your comedies are sheer power like Garth Merengis Darkplace, Absolutely Fabulous, Some Mother Do Awe Them or Blackadder, this is more influence than USA will ever have despite the supposed dominant position.

Being serious, I get your point but I guess your power still llies in infrastructure, education, mentality, civilisation advancement in general, also recognition, influence etc. I don't underestimate Europe powers yet just as I don't underestimate Poland despite it looking like a mess from some viewpoints.

 English Assassin wrote:

If either of us could come up with a effective solution to this, we should be sharing it with the world in general, not just a few wargamers. Simply promoting the obvious benefits of not looking like a hippo and dying of a heart attack or liver failure at fifty doesn't seem to have prevented the unwashed masses from guzzling down pie, cake and lager by the bucketload, however, so I foresee the implementation of increasingly coercive solutions to both problems by policy-makers.

The solutions I see are

- go full Tea Party and drop national healthcare, the insurance company will put an adequate price on you, you can't afford it and noone pays for you - you die. Just but cruel, imo a bad idea from lot of angles, could work though in a wealthy, educated, properly ruled society (but what wouldn't really)

- go full on interventions and if you are proven to be an alcoholic, you have to go to obligatory treatment and then spend let's say 1 year in closed facility working for free or a low wage to pay for the treatment . That would work for sure but obviously criminals would have to get harsher treatment and obligatory work is illegal in EU, also that's something communist regime did around here so bad conotation

- and the best one imo, applicable and logical, stop demoralising the population, promote something beyond the instant gratification, quick pleasure, succes in hierarchy based on financial achievements/ looks/ cocksureness, give the mother a possibility to cook the dinner somehow and yes, intervine on her telling her how to feed her kid. My kids for example have a ban for sweets bar the dark chocolate (not sure the name, the one without sugar), the grandparents protest and smugle some cake from time to time but the message comes across .it is really the first 3 years that decide the most. If my kid is obese, come and mock me that's most probably my fault.

Can't say much about your policy makers btw but I'm quite positive about ours being traitors that faced with such problem could be bought by corporations which earn on this for the fraction of the profit, not to mention how much easier it is to rule the bloated, demoralised or drunk nation. At some point 40% of people in USSR were alcoholics, the 30%+ of people in USA are obese, might be a meaningless conotation but makes me wonder sometimes.

 English Assassin wrote:

Plumbumbarum wrote:I imagine legions are injuring themselves on stupid concrete playgrounds build near schools (out of curiosity, do you have them? I wonder if it's a communist invention only) and I though not only of direct injuries but late consequences.

I can't find any specific statistics, but it doesn't appear that exercise-induced injuries are considered by the medical profession to impose a significant cost burden in the way that obesity, smoking and drinking do. And indeed, it wasn't just communists, local governments over here in the 70s and 80s were inexplicably fond of concreting over parks, then acting surprised when children fractured their skulls after falling off the swings. (In the same way, public buildings that era in the UK, particularly on university campuses, are uniformly ugly neo-brutalist cuboids which look like Red Army barracks; it was just the fashion at the time. By way of example, here's the Royal National Theatre, London. They filmed some Doctor Who there once; an episode set in a dystopian futuristic prison.)

No need I wasn't even discussing it anymore rather recreating my thought process when posting it - it was only a wildguess then. Maybe was putting a straw man, can't say for sure as I'm not very familiar with the term, does straw man have to be used intentionaly as a technique to be qualified as such? I guess there are things lost in translation, misunderstood and wrongly described coming from me, talking such issues even with my countrymen is hard as we have to discuss the meaning of words first, best to do it before the first glass btw. Anyway you were both right about obesity being so much more expensive, I wasn't exposed to a problem for a long time and forgot how massive it is. On the other hand the issue of headers being brain damaging is lively for me, I want to teach my kids to play soccer but it appears to be quite an dangerous endavour despite the common view on it, sporty and all. Thanks for the answer btw.

 English Assassin wrote:
This is indeed true, but when the consequences fall so directly on the individual, you have to expect them to accept a measure of responsibility for dealing with the problem, particularly when help and advice are available to them at no personal cost. It is particularly noteworthy that obesity seems to be entrenched by social class: contrast approximately 50% prevalence among those with no qualifications with about 20% among those with university degrees in the UK (a trend mirrored across Europe).

That's an interesting data, I'm still thinking about it, have to say though I saw quite an opposite analysis blaming obesity on office working, cars etc so more an upper classes thing .About the responsibility, soon they will be putting photos of rotten corpses along with the smell on the cigarette packs but that doesn't seem to change the attitude of smokers The prices do though, that's why I support the tax intervention on products.

 English Assassin wrote:

Plumbumbarum wrote:I consider taxing or even baning junk food a great idea, I do not want interventions on the affected but products and makers, be my guest.

As it turns, the Danes have got there already, and imposed a supertax on fatty foods. The shape of things to come, I predict.

Plumbumbarum wrote:

Nice and smart people create the things that other nice and smart people enjoy.

Indeed, it just all seems to fall apart when you go on Youtube and read of the Vitriolic/ Hate filled & Irrational comments on there. That said, the Internet has been a massive force for good and has done an awful lot for everyone and has literally put the world at everyone's fingertips.

I remember when doing researching for school projects or whatever about a subject, I had to traipse to the local library and actually find books on the subject.

Tim Berners-Lee & DARPA did us all a huge favour.

 English Assassin wrote:
Now to bring this all back to the original topic, I have a question: are we nerds, on individual experience, actually fatter than other demographics? I must know!

In my experience nerds are skinnier than other demographics.

Yeah, Nerds tend to be skinnier or at least on the healthy side of husky.
Its football and sports fan who i see as being fatter then most.
but thats just my observation.

 Wardragoon wrote:

 LumenPraebeo wrote:
It will take me around 10 minutes to write this post, and probably around 30 to read this entire thread, so I'm posting first. I've read some posts, and would like to put in my own perspective.

I started this hobby around senior year of high school. I came into Warhammer 40k by DoW. Now I have always considered myself pretty nerdy. I liked history, science, technology, computers, cars....well, I think its easier to say I like a lot of things. Anything boyish you can think of, I like. I was always between the "cool boys group" and the group of people who actually do cool stuff (aka "nerds"). While the cool boys liked talking about some stuff I liked, i.e. cars, games, guns, swords, expensive house appliances and set-ups, football; I find myself relating to nerds more, over my time in high school. Me personally, I guess the only thing I was really escaping from was life. My social/school life was great. Tabletop games were always an interest to me, and I've never grown out of that small child who plays with toys.

As a guy in between these two groups of people though, I was able to notice a lot of difference. General ones are: the cool boys were able to interact with girls more easier, almost all of them play a sport, average intelligence is incredibly inferior, and are generally not that fun to be around.
The nerd group generally consists of people with problems with weight, health, and at least one issue that has to do with four senses of the human body. Most are shy, socially awkward, have difficulty interacting with girls/boys, are not athletic, and do not do the things that I generally avoid, like drugs, alcohol, and partying. But the thing was, the nerdy group would always have fun and amazing things to talk about and do, like roleplaying games, historic and political discussions, discussions about technology, medicine, space, prehistoric animals. And would always have something cool to do, like science experiments, and building things. These guys were fun and enjoyable to hang around. Best of all, that one stupid kid that thought he was tough and likes to get physical even though he is incredibly dumb, smokes, and wears his 10 pound jeans around his knees is not there.

And as the years progressed through high school, I noticed that as everyone got older and more mature, the kids who didn't exactly fit into the cool boys crowd would gravitate toward the nerds, I think just because they were more interesting and smart. This boosted our confidence, and I think points and hints us toward our future success in life. We would attract the smart, and interesting girls, and when we do stuff like go on picnics or biking, swimming, movies, it was a lot more fun and stimulating than when I did stuff with the high school Cool Boyz, who might as well have been Orks.

I noticed this too in High School, and heck even in general, the interesting girls generally hang out with the nerdier guys, but then again I have heard enough women complain about alpha males that this may be part of our success as nerds (Note this generally excludes the GUO)

That's an interesting theory. I was subconsciously testing it all my life and my conclusion is, there are (rare) girls immune to the cocksure alpha male effect. I saw it even in the primary school when my stunning classmate rejected the handsome and fashionable guy just because he was shallow and cocksure (i.e. not thinking too much). I also repeatedly saw that the girls attracted to such guys often have dad issues so are insecure, need protector etc. Also it's obviously a matter of culture, if you promote in the face manliness then you get legions craving for it no matter the actual value of it vs given times.

 mwnciboo wrote:
Absolutely, a FAT Tax will be instituted in our Lifetime, especially as smoking is declining and the Treasury makes alot of money from Tabacco Duties. Maybe we will tax other things more heavily, like Scandinavian Countries unfortunately unlike Norway we never used North Sea Oil to make a Sovereign Wealth fund (because our politician's are shortsighted).

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/The_Government_Pension_Fund_of_Norway

Oh and on another point, Just because you espouse sensible, pragmatic solutions doesn't make you a communist, I'm slightly right of centre but I don't believe in Gun Ownership (except for licensed Hunters and Farmers which should be single shot, and even sport shooting can be done with Laser Guns like in the Olympics!), I believe in Abortion and the Womans right to decide, I believe in Gay marriage, and freedom of Religion within the Bounds of the law. I believe in many things and don't think that one particular party represents me completely, and I resent being called communist. Social Responsible Capitalism, like our Grandfathers did the Victorian Era, building Hospitals and Universities with their wealth and bettering society is probably my favoured solution, Philanthropic deeds is the way to go. I hope I become seriously Wealth, oh the things I would do help society and change things for the better.

Funny I guess you've mistaken me for some kind of liberal at some point but I really like the sound of social responsible capitalism. I'm a borderline socialist at heart but obviously not a fool to go after Marx or Trotsky as those were dehumanised thugs just like Hitler was.

btw I am against gay marriage but not really a place to discuss it I guess.

 mwnciboo wrote:

Plumbumbarum wrote:

Nice and smart people create the things that other nice and smart people enjoy.

Indeed, it just all seems to fall apart when you go on Youtube and read of the Vitriolic/ Hate filled & Irrational comments on there. That said, the Internet has been a massive force for good and has done an awful lot for everyone and has literally put the world at everyone's fingertips.

I remember when doing researching for school projects or whatever about a subject, I had to traipse to the local library and actually find books on the subject.

Tim Berners-Lee & DARPA did us all a huge favour.

I was more about imagined places to visit with your imagination, fantasy, sf, rpgs, games etc so peaceful sublimation of instincts into imagination and respectful play(don't mistake me for a freudist though). Internet is a sheer force, occupied by "nerds" maybe but something so much bigger, a powerful tool of freedom I hope... hope is fool's mother they say here though, is darpa nerdy by definition - I'm not sure, kind of shows the vagueness and simplesness of the term.