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.
Sgt_Smudge wrote: Flippantly saying "XYZ unit will *sexually assault* this other unit" isn't some witty or even "coping" form of humour. It's just crude.
I'm very much aware of how to construct humour in a way that's actually designed for coping and handling those topics - and that ain't one of them.
Agreed. It was facile edgelord attempts at humour. Nothing more complex than that. No amount of whababoutism can imbue it with any nuance, it was just inappropriate and unfunny throughout.
Sub-jec-tive.
What is deemed funny or not you two have no monopoloy on, especially in light of what 8'500'000'000 people on this Planet give or take.
This message was edited 2 times. Last update was at 2020/08/25 22:50:50
https://www.dakkadakka.com/dakkaforum/posts/list/0/766717.page A Mostly Renegades and Heretics blog.
GW:"Space marines got too many options to balance, therefore we decided to legends HH units." Players: "why?!? Now we finally got decent plastic kits and you cut them?" Chaos marines players: "Since when are Daemonengines 30k models and why do i have NO droppods now?" GW" MONEY.... erm i meant TOO MANY OPTIONS (to resell your army to you again by disalowing former units)! Do you want specific tyranid fighiting Primaris? Even a new sabotage lieutnant!" Chaos players: Guess i stop playing or go to HH.
Sgt_Smudge wrote: Flippantly saying "XYZ unit will *sexually assault* this other unit" isn't some witty or even "coping" form of humour. It's just crude.
I'm very much aware of how to construct humour in a way that's actually designed for coping and handling those topics - and that ain't one of them.
Agreed. It was facile edgelord attempts at humour. Nothing more complex than that. No amount of whababoutism can imbue it with any nuance, it was just inappropriate and unfunny throughout.
Sub-jec-tive. What is deemed funny or not you two have no monopoloy on, especially in light of what 8'500'000'000 people on this Planet give or take.
Ig-nor-ant.
If someone thinks that just dropping sexual assault references into sentences with no other wit or context can be classed as funny, then that says far more about their maturity than it does anything else. If you (general) think "hurr, they said *sexual assault*, lol, so funny", sorry, you've got something wrong.
There's definitely limits on humour.
This message was edited 1 time. Last update was at 2020/08/25 22:56:05
Sgt_Smudge wrote: Flippantly saying "XYZ unit will *sexually assault* this other unit" isn't some witty or even "coping" form of humour. It's just crude.
I'm very much aware of how to construct humour in a way that's actually designed for coping and handling those topics - and that ain't one of them.
Agreed. It was facile edgelord attempts at humour. Nothing more complex than that. No amount of whababoutism can imbue it with any nuance, it was just inappropriate and unfunny throughout.
Wouldn't it be better to get the centralized comprehensive analysis without the facile edgelord humour rather than burning down the centralized comprehensive analysis to catch the facile edgelord humour?
Sgt_Smudge wrote: Flippantly saying "XYZ unit will *sexually assault* this other unit" isn't some witty or even "coping" form of humour. It's just crude.
I'm very much aware of how to construct humour in a way that's actually designed for coping and handling those topics - and that ain't one of them.
Agreed. It was facile edgelord attempts at humour. Nothing more complex than that. No amount of whababoutism can imbue it with any nuance, it was just inappropriate and unfunny throughout.
Sub-jec-tive.
What is deemed funny or not you two have no monopoloy on, especially in light of what 8'500'000'000 people on this Planet give or take.
If someone thinks that just dropping sexual assault references into sentences with no other wit or context can be classed as funny, then that says far more about their maturity than it does anything else. If you (general) think "hurr, they said *sexual assault*, lol, so funny", sorry, you've got something wrong.
There's definitely limits on humour.
By all means, except where? Stereotypes? Insults?
I think that isn't the case through the Content of the Humor but rather the sourounding Context which Make it break Humor in case of Limits.
https://www.dakkadakka.com/dakkaforum/posts/list/0/766717.page A Mostly Renegades and Heretics blog.
GW:"Space marines got too many options to balance, therefore we decided to legends HH units." Players: "why?!? Now we finally got decent plastic kits and you cut them?" Chaos marines players: "Since when are Daemonengines 30k models and why do i have NO droppods now?" GW" MONEY.... erm i meant TOO MANY OPTIONS (to resell your army to you again by disalowing former units)! Do you want specific tyranid fighiting Primaris? Even a new sabotage lieutnant!" Chaos players: Guess i stop playing or go to HH.
Sgt_Smudge wrote: Flippantly saying "XYZ unit will *sexually assault* this other unit" isn't some witty or even "coping" form of humour. It's just crude.
I'm very much aware of how to construct humour in a way that's actually designed for coping and handling those topics - and that ain't one of them.
Agreed. It was facile edgelord attempts at humour. Nothing more complex than that. No amount of whababoutism can imbue it with any nuance, it was just inappropriate and unfunny throughout.
Wouldn't it be better to get the centralized comprehensive analysis without the facile edgelord humour rather than burning down the centralized comprehensive analysis to catch the facile edgelord humour?
That would be ideal, yes - but I don't think the centralised comprehensive analysis was burned down because of that. Frankly, I'm more concerned about the people defending the facile edgelord "humour".
I think that isn't the case through the Content of the Humor but rather the sourounding Context which Make it break Humor in case of Limits.
Which the aforementioned completely failed at. By default, the "content" doesn't get a free pass, and isn't humourous. Rather, it is horrible things, which require insight and understanding to be able to relieve grievances - by default, it is best to assume that something *isn't* funny.
Something the creator of articles using excessive mentions of sexual assault failed to understand.
This message was edited 1 time. Last update was at 2020/08/25 23:08:03
CthuluIsSpy wrote: You'd be wrong. Rape, and other dark subject matter, has been used in humor.
That doesn't necessarily make it funny. And that Carlin segment was fething awful.
People don't need to 'stop being afraid of words' ... people need to remember that putting words on the internet is not the same as talking to a group of close friends. Your behaviour should be appropriate to your audience, and 'edgy' talk that might fly with friends has the potential to be deeply harmful to other people.
Yes, Jewish people can joke about the Holocaust. Rape victims can joke about rape. But they should do so to audiences who are aware of the context, or they risk hurting someone who isn't as capable of deflecting their pain with humour.
This is beside the point, though. There's a very big difference between humour used as a mechanism for dealing with awful things, and using inappropriate terms to describe mundane things.
This message was edited 1 time. Last update was at 2020/08/25 23:12:13
"That would be ideal, yes - but I don't think the centralised comprehensive analysis was burned down because of that. Frankly, I'm more concerned about the people defending the facile edgelord "humour"."
You should definitely perma-ban everyone who refuses to post things castigating 1D4chan. There's no room for disagreement on humor on this site.
If it's gone I'll miss the lore articles. They generally handled the Night Lords better than gw.
Karol wrote:I wonder how this realy works. Here if someone doesn't like to watch or be part of something they don't like, they just don't go to places where those things happen. If someone was really against the stuff that goes on there, why would they go and visit the place? But I guess this is one of those things I don't understand.
What a novel concept. If you don't like something just refuse to read/listen to/watch it. Obviously anything anyone doesn't like should be removed from existence. Personally I think brussel sprouts should be rendered extinct lest I accidentally eat one.
Sgt_Smudge wrote:There's definitely limits on humour.
Not a Bill Hicks or George Carlin fan I take it. Does this apply to other forms of entertainment and art? Should I promptly burn all my death metal and grindcore albums before you accidentally hear them and are offended?
dadx6 wrote: There's no room for disagreement on humor on this site.
If you're the one defending someone's freedom to joke about sexual assault instead of standing with people saying "hey, maybe cut out with joking about a deeply hurtful and life-altering situation", I'd maybe evaluate what argument I was standing in support of.
Sgt_Smudge wrote: Flippantly saying "XYZ unit will *sexually assault* this other unit" isn't some witty or even "coping" form of humour. It's just crude.
I'm very much aware of how to construct humour in a way that's actually designed for coping and handling those topics - and that ain't one of them.
Agreed. It was facile edgelord attempts at humour. Nothing more complex than that. No amount of whababoutism can imbue it with any nuance, it was just inappropriate and unfunny throughout.
Wouldn't it be better to get the centralized comprehensive analysis without the facile edgelord humour rather than burning down the centralized comprehensive analysis to catch the facile edgelord humour?
That would be ideal, yes - but I don't think the centralised comprehensive analysis was burned down because of that. Frankly, I'm more concerned about the people defending the facile edgelord "humour".
I think that isn't the case through the Content of the Humor but rather the sourounding Context which Make it break Humor in case of Limits.
Which the aforementioned completely failed at. By default, the "content" doesn't get a free pass, and isn't humourous. Rather, it is horrible things, which require insight and understanding to be able to relieve grievances - by default, it is best to assume that something *isn't* funny.
Something the creator of articles using excessive mentions of sexual assault failed to understand.
Now if you could avoid ad hominem. Congrats.
Maybee i'll give another exemple: think of Humor Like art, to some modern Art is not Art , others classify painting Miniatures as Art.
For others again neither is Art.
Yet all is under category Art. Excluding one just for the sake of it because Personal Taste got in the Way and therefore it would be justified to destroy a mondrian, or Giacometti scultpure is vastly more , what word's did you use again?
" Concerning" and " ignorant" for whilest some of the Humor ist addmitedly Bad no two Cents around it , does not Make it less humor.
At most it makes it less funny , but it is still Humor.
https://www.dakkadakka.com/dakkaforum/posts/list/0/766717.page A Mostly Renegades and Heretics blog.
GW:"Space marines got too many options to balance, therefore we decided to legends HH units." Players: "why?!? Now we finally got decent plastic kits and you cut them?" Chaos marines players: "Since when are Daemonengines 30k models and why do i have NO droppods now?" GW" MONEY.... erm i meant TOO MANY OPTIONS (to resell your army to you again by disalowing former units)! Do you want specific tyranid fighiting Primaris? Even a new sabotage lieutnant!" Chaos players: Guess i stop playing or go to HH.
blood reaper wrote: I will respect human rights and trans people but I will never under any circumstances use the phrase 'folks' or 'ya'll'. I would rather be killed by firing squad.
the_scotsman wrote: Yeah, when i read the small novel that is the Death Guard unit options and think about resolving the attacks from a melee-oriented min size death guard squad, the thing that springs to mind is "Accessible!"
Argive wrote: GW seems to have a crystal ball and just pulls hairbrained ideas out of their backside for the most part.
You're not. If you're worried about your opponent using 'fake' rules, you're having fun the wrong way. This hobby isn't about rules. It's about buying Citadel miniatures.
Please report to your nearest GW store for attitude readjustment. Take your wallet.
dadx6 wrote: There's no room for disagreement on humor on this site.
If you're the one defending someone's freedom to joke about sexual assault instead of standing with people saying "hey, maybe cut out with joking about a deeply hurtful and life-altering situation", I'd maybe evaluate what argument I was standing in support of.
Oh noes someone could get insulted quick shut it down .
Nevermind that you have to ya know actually go to this site?
Are we now paternalistically deciding for all our individual wills , removing any and all individual agency?
Automatically Appended Next Post:
Gadzilla666 wrote: If it's gone I'll miss the lore articles. They generally handled the Night
Not a Bill Hicks or George Carlin fan I take it. Does this apply to other forms of entertainment and art? Should I promptly burn all my death metal and grindcore albums before you accidentally hear them and are offended?
Considering the song contents it wouldn't surprised me in the least...
This message was edited 4 times. Last update was at 2020/08/25 23:26:31
https://www.dakkadakka.com/dakkaforum/posts/list/0/766717.page A Mostly Renegades and Heretics blog.
GW:"Space marines got too many options to balance, therefore we decided to legends HH units." Players: "why?!? Now we finally got decent plastic kits and you cut them?" Chaos marines players: "Since when are Daemonengines 30k models and why do i have NO droppods now?" GW" MONEY.... erm i meant TOO MANY OPTIONS (to resell your army to you again by disalowing former units)! Do you want specific tyranid fighiting Primaris? Even a new sabotage lieutnant!" Chaos players: Guess i stop playing or go to HH.
Maybee i'll give another exemple: think of Humor Like art, to some modern Art is not Art , others classify painting Miniatures as Art.
For others again neither is Art.
Yet all is under category Art. Excluding one just for the sake of it because Personal Taste got in the Way and therefore it would be justified to destroy a mondrian, or Giacometti scultpure is vastly more , what word's did you use again?
" Concerning" and " ignorant" for whilest some of the Humor ist addmitedly Bad no two Cents around it , does not Make it less humor.
At most it makes it less funny , but it is still Humor.
Yeah, no, that's not changed my thoughts on it at all.
What's so hard to understand here? We're not talking "oh, I don't like how that looks, I want that gone", we're talking about a REAL thing that REAL people suffer from, that causes immense deals of pain and suffering. What is there to find funny about that in regards to an article about toy soldiers?
If someone thinks that *is* funny, they're far more of a problem than the person calling them out on that.
Maybee i'll give another exemple: think of Humor Like art, to some modern Art is not Art , others classify painting Miniatures as Art.
For others again neither is Art.
Yet all is under category Art. Excluding one just for the sake of it because Personal Taste got in the Way and therefore it would be justified to destroy a mondrian, or Giacometti scultpure is vastly more , what word's did you use again?
" Concerning" and " ignorant" for whilest some of the Humor ist addmitedly Bad no two Cents around it , does not Make it less humor.
At most it makes it less funny , but it is still Humor.
Yeah, no, that's not changed my thoughts on it at all.
What's so hard to understand here? We're not talking "oh, I don't like how that looks, I want that gone", we're talking about a REAL thing that REAL people suffer from, that causes immense deals of pain and suffering. What is there to find funny about that in regards to an article about toy soldiers?
If someone thinks that *is* funny, they're far more of a problem than the person calling them out on that.
Ig-no-rant. Wasn't an adhominem intended to discredit an opposite Position ?
And now you appeal to Emotion. People have no right to not be insulted , simply because that would Run contrary to free speech , for everything can be coined as "insulting" including criticism, Rude language , etc.
This message was edited 1 time. Last update was at 2020/08/25 23:27:08
https://www.dakkadakka.com/dakkaforum/posts/list/0/766717.page A Mostly Renegades and Heretics blog.
GW:"Space marines got too many options to balance, therefore we decided to legends HH units." Players: "why?!? Now we finally got decent plastic kits and you cut them?" Chaos marines players: "Since when are Daemonengines 30k models and why do i have NO droppods now?" GW" MONEY.... erm i meant TOO MANY OPTIONS (to resell your army to you again by disalowing former units)! Do you want specific tyranid fighiting Primaris? Even a new sabotage lieutnant!" Chaos players: Guess i stop playing or go to HH.
dadx6 wrote: There's no room for disagreement on humor on this site.
If you're the one defending someone's freedom to joke about sexual assault instead of standing with people saying "hey, maybe cut out with joking about a deeply hurtful and life-altering situation", I'd maybe evaluate what argument I was standing in support of.
Oh noes someone could get insulted quick shut it down .
Sexual assault, my guy. Are you pretending to be unaware of it's effects?
Nevermind that you have to ya know actually go to this site?
The site doesn't ever provide a "hey, we have terrible """"humour"""" here, join us if you want to laugh about sexual assault!!!" disclaimer.
Are we now paternalistically deciding for all our individual wills , removing any and all individual agency?
Are we saying that EVERYTHING is on the table to joke about now? If so, why did you call me out for ad hom? Surely I should be allowed my individual agency?
Also, the word of a comedian doesn't mean anything on if sexual assault is or isn't something to laugh at. It's horrific, and anyone defending it as "funny" needs to have a long hard look at themselves.
The site had warning lables nay sorry banners in every article dude. What are you talking about.
This message was edited 1 time. Last update was at 2020/08/25 23:28:33
https://www.dakkadakka.com/dakkaforum/posts/list/0/766717.page A Mostly Renegades and Heretics blog.
GW:"Space marines got too many options to balance, therefore we decided to legends HH units." Players: "why?!? Now we finally got decent plastic kits and you cut them?" Chaos marines players: "Since when are Daemonengines 30k models and why do i have NO droppods now?" GW" MONEY.... erm i meant TOO MANY OPTIONS (to resell your army to you again by disalowing former units)! Do you want specific tyranid fighiting Primaris? Even a new sabotage lieutnant!" Chaos players: Guess i stop playing or go to HH.
1d4chan is a site that filters 40k through plainspeak hyperbole. Sometimes it's serious, presenting tactica and rules information, and sometimes it's having a bit of fun.
Not Online!!! wrote: Ig-no-rant. Wasn't an adhominem intended to discredit an opposite Position ?
No, the OPINION displays ignorance - ignorance of the deeper effects and psychological impact of sexual assault and trauma.
And now you appeal to Emotion.
And why is that a problem?
People have no right to not be insulted , simply because that would Run contrary to free speech , for everything can be coined as "insulting" including criticism, Rude language , etc.
So, I should be allowed to just insult whoever I like, say whatever I like, and not suffer any consequences, make horrific comments about the tragic incidents in people's lives?
No, that would make me an utter scumbag of a person with a total ignorance of the humans around me. Out of common human decency, we don't *need* to make light of such tragedies, and if someone feels they *need* to, they're the one with the problem.
1d4chan is a site that filters 40k through plainspeak hyperbole. Sometimes it's serious, presenting tactica and rules information, and sometimes it's having a bit of fun.
If this isn't your bag, why do you care?
What's fun about sexual assault? I've got no issue with putting things into plainspeak. It's immensely helpful. But I don't see why it was ever necessary to allude to units *sexually assaulting* others.
Automatically Appended Next Post:
Not Online!!! wrote: The site had warning lables nay sorry banners in every article dude. What are you talking about.
It really didn't.
This message was edited 3 times. Last update was at 2020/08/25 23:32:30
Sgt_Smudge wrote: Flippantly saying "XYZ unit will *sexually assault* this other unit" isn't some witty or even "coping" form of humour. It's just crude.
I'm very much aware of how to construct humour in a way that's actually designed for coping and handling those topics - and that ain't one of them.
Agreed. It was facile edgelord attempts at humour. Nothing more complex than that. No amount of whababoutism can imbue it with any nuance, it was just inappropriate and unfunny throughout.
Wouldn't it be better to get the centralized comprehensive analysis without the facile edgelord humour rather than burning down the centralized comprehensive analysis to catch the facile edgelord humour?
“What about if the site was a different site?”
Maybe ask the people who wrote the site why they were incapable of showing any semblance of self-restraint and decided to lace their material liberally with puerile rape references? Not sure why this was a post/rebuttal directed at me. Their analysis was useful as I posted. The site’s ancillary content pretty troubling.
Stormonu wrote: For me, the joy is in putting some good-looking models on the board and playing out a fantasy battle - not arguing over the poorly-made rules of some 3rd party who neither has any power over my play nor will be visiting me (and my opponent) to ensure we are "playing by the rules"
