[Binder of Demons]

I happened to agree with several of your assessments of the authors mentioned, rather than Wert's, I just don't see why it needed to be personally insulting (seemingly out of the blue)? You seem more than capable of explaining why you did or didn't like the authors and their work.

And why should you need personal insults for an adult conversation? Anyway, I look forward to reading your opinions on various sci-fi and fantasy authors. It's good to have differing views.

[caladanbrood]

frookenhauer;359144 said:

ah..you're so cute!

I am, I know:cool:

Quote

Interesting you should say this, because Sci-Fi is where it all began for me as a kid. Douglas Hill, All the old Doctor Who books, John Wyndham and Harry Harrison. Later on it was Bova, Niven and Pournelle, Arthur C Clarke, Orson Scott Card, Frank Herbert, Asimov, Dan Simmons, Phillip K Dick, Pier Anthony, Heinlein...And the list goes on. Maybe it makes me qualified, maybe not. If you had bothered to read the post you might have noticed that I haven't been too impressed with Sci-Fi offerings in the last decade or so.

Shockingly, I did read the post. If you've only read two of the authors on his list, then no, you are not qualified to comment on it. Sorry if that offends your sense of superiority, but it's a hard life eh.

[frookenhauer]

Binder of Demons;359148 said:

I happened to agree with several of your assessments of the authors mentioned, rather than Wert's, I just don't see why it needed to be personally insulting (seemingly out of the blue)? You seem more than capable of explaining why you did or didn't like the authors and their work.

And why should you need personal insults for an adult conversation? Anyway, I look forward to reading your opinions on various sci-fi and fantasy authors. It's good to have differing views.

I actually know the exact point at which I 'lost' it. Any person who spends as much time on these forums as Wert obviously has, should have a certain degree of respect for the writer of the series, yet he describes Erikson as borderline. Its all a red haze after that.
Space was made for Terry Pratchett, who as far as I am concerned needs to be on a list on his own. When I was a student I used to buy my books from 2nd hand bookshops, where rows upon rows are dedicated to discworld novels, it really is throwaway literature, its just not wide enough to be able to wrap up your chips in, thats all.

JV Jones deserves a place in the list, because the bakers boy was a good read, even though the ending wasn't quite as fulfilling as it could have been. The same goes for Tad Williams, but his crime is really just being far too verbose, a little editing would have helped. Using delayed release dates as a reason to remove authors is not the smart option.

BTW I love the argue with an idiot quote. I've used it a couple of times to good effect.

[frookenhauer]

caladanbrood;359165 said:

I am, I know:cool:

Shockingly, I did read the post. If you've only read two of the authors on his list, then no, you are not qualified to comment on it. Sorry if that offends your sense of superiority, but it's a hard life eh.

It seems sarcasm hasn't quite reached Manchester then. Poor show.

In your original argument you said:

caladanbrood;358925 said:

If you've only read Banks and Hamilton, how are you in anyway qualified to comment on a list of sci-fi authors, frooky?

I believe my argument was sufficient. Even with your latest addition I am still able to comment on Hamilton and Banks which is what I originally did. I made no comment on the other authors other than the insult reserved for Wert (Apologies again old boy), and If you will go back and have another look, stated that I will get round to reading them eventually.

As for my sense of superiority, its interesting you should say that considering some of the things you come out with, shall we have a look?

caladanbrood;354752 said:

...we'll I've met his wife, and NO

Must have been quite a proud moment in your life, to have finally met Eriksons wife. I'm sure the image will stay with you forever...

"O xein', angellein Lakedaimoniois hoti têde: keimetha tois keinon rhémasi peithomenoi."

Honestly, it really is a case of the pot calling the kettle black, isn't it? Consider yourself a Spartan?

[caladanbrood]

Aww damn, noobs flaming. Love it:D

If I didn't have to go to work now, I'd reply in kind... you'll just have to wait I guess.

[frookenhauer]

caladanbrood;359249 said:

Aww damn, noobs flaming. Love it:D

If I didn't have to go to work now, I'd reply in kind... you'll just have to wait I guess.

Quivering with anticipation, old bean:D

While you're at work I'll be watching The Dark Knight. Give it your best.

[Macros]

Well the fun is over and I missed it, that's what I get for sleeping (damn bodily needs)
I eagerly await broods return and round two to begin.

[Obdigore]

Macros;359285 said:

Well the fun is over and I missed it, that's what I get for sleeping (damn bodily needs)
I eagerly await broods return and round two to begin.

Can we get a ring-girl in a skimpy outfit to hold an oversized card that has the number 2 on it please?

[Terez]

Obdigore;359293 said:

Can we get a ring-girl in a skimpy outfit to hold an oversized card that has the number 2 on it please?

Sure, why not?

[Illuyankas]

Wow, Brood's buffed up. And the boxer's pretty beefy too.

[Obdigore]

Terez posting a picture objectifying (i suck at spelling!) a woman?

My world... it is shattered.

[Terez]

lol...she objectified herself, I'm sure.

What, no rep? Jeez...

[Raymond Luxury Yacht]

Ooooh, a scifi fight. This is the coolest of all internet fights. Gentlemen, set your phasers to BURN!

[Obdigore]

Terez;359343 said:

lol...she objectified herself, I'm sure.

What, no rep? Jeez...

Asking for rep? does that make you a rep-(insert word that is a cousin to a word that Terez took offense to in another thread, and so upon eggshells must we walk)?

PS - tried to rep you for quoted post. Im flaccid: You have given out too much Reputation in the last 24 hours, try again later.

[Terez]

"Whore" is okay, because it is a word that means a woman who sells sex. Those exist. "Sluts", on the other hand, are a figment of your patriarchally-brainwashed imagination.

[Obdigore]

Is it ok if I call men who sleep around for no reason other than because they can sluts as well? Because I do.

Is it the sexist sentiment attached to it you dislike, or the pointing out of a different type of lifestyle that you object too?

[Terez]

Obdigore;359355 said:

Is it ok if I call men who sleep around for no reason other than because they can sluts as well? Because I do.

It doesn't have the same connotations.

Obdi said:

Is it the sexist sentiment attached to it you dislike, or the pointing out of a different type of lifestyle that you object too?

Definitely more the former, though the latter is also offensive in its own way.

[Illuyankas]

Hmm, though I didn't intend it, I can see how it came across badly. One of those 'she's a slut because she sleeps around with everyone BUT ME' sentences. Alright, I'll go change it to wanton harlot of an elf. Because it sounds cooler, that's why.

[Obdigore]

lol do you think a man has ever been called a wanton harlot? I would think that is just as bad?

Perhaps 'dressed in a sexually revealing/enticing way'

I R KING O PC!

[Illuyankas]

See, society needs to change so slut isn't a derogatory word any more, partly because sluts can be sexy as all hell and don't deserve their poor reputation, but mostly so I don't have to change my vocabulary.

Oh, and I would love to be called a wanton harlot. Or a montebank.