Friday, July 23, 2010

Friday Controversy

Is there any media group (bloggers included) that reports or publishes stories with the sole purpose to cause controversy? I, for one, have never said something just because I thought that it would stir the emotions of any of my readers, hoping that they respond and get caught up in a storm of irrelevant arguments that I have no real position on. I have always stated what I truly believed, every time, but where those statements controversial? I don't care. I don't seek to create an issue out of nothing. I don't profess beliefs that are not my own. I've seen it done, I believe. Obviously I don't have proof, but we're all pretty smart, intuitive people here; would you honestly say that it doesn't happen out there in the blogosphere?

I could trick you, I could say that there's a possibility that I think X when I really think Y, but then again I just might believe Y and not care about X. Let's try it. Try and guess whether I truly believe what I'm saying here:

Namecalling is an acceptable practice where proof of my opinion can't be refuted. Idiots, morons, slackers, you name it, if there's a good reason for it I'll do it. More so if I can prove it.

Or how about this:

The game design is clear, end-game activities must be centered around raiding or high-end arena in order for a person to be considered skilled. Without participating in those activities, it's proof that that person has no skill and is most likely lazy and unimaginative. End-game raiding should be the goal of all serious players of WoW.

Oooh, here's another:

Beta is for babies. You heard me. Impatient, lazy, "know-it-all" types - these all describe those who participate in beta testing or even just want to participate. They can't wait for the final product, no, they need to lick the spoons and dream about the perfect cookie, all the while the cookies are burning and the game will never be as perfect as they want it. Beta testers actually hurt the game more than help it.

One more example:

Raid leaders who apply undue amounts of social pressure on a player to fill a role (such as healing or tanking) in a raiding guild are short-sighted and lazy. More time and effort should be put in by a raid or guild leader to build the right kind of team, a team made up of people playing the class/spec of their choice. For all the collectivist talk about doing "what's best for the guild", at what point in time will a guild do what's best for their members? If we claim to encourage people to play the game how they want to, we, the guild and raid leaders should accept this without hipocracy and recruit in a targeted manner, as opposed to being lazy and making your Ret Pali put together a tanking set.

Do I believe what I just said in any of the above comments? Maybe yes, maybe no. As a blogger I have power, power over what I put on my site. I can, if I choose, put lies and false beliefs, or I can say what I really mean. You, the reader, never know the difference unless 1) I state it absolutely what is real and what is fake and 2) You believe I am honest in said statements.

I am sick of watching news on TV and seeing pundits proclaim opinions that are not their own. I'm sick of watching my own countrymen and women spew forth political beliefs that they are just repeating off the TV, which are not honest opinions to begin with. I hope, sincerely hope, that there are no WoW bloggers out there that do this, I hope that I can be assured that what I read is what you think. It makes it far more difficult for me to trust you if I have no idea where you stand. I don't care if I agree or not, just give it to me how you see it.

Aside from the examples in this post, which I'll leave to your guess as to whether I believe them or not (just for fun...just this once), you can always know that what you get from me is the truth. At least, as I see it. I've got my opinions, and I'll never share anything that isn't mine.

That's all, for now. Have a great weekend!


Tesh said...

Does idea ownership matter? Is it not wise to consider ideas on their own merit, rather than dismiss or validate them based on their source?

Just a thought...

Gronthe said...

@ Tesh: After thinking about it, my answer is yes and no to your idea ownership question.

Ideas, having neither thought or emotion, deserve at their base to be considered on their own merit, yes.

It probably is not the best practice to dismiss or validate an idead based in its source either, so I guess what is left is the credibility of the source. Where the credibility of the source is in question, I would put myself in a position of not knowing the legitimacy of the idea, or if the idea contained lies and falsehoods woven in to garner my support.

Where at it's base, an idea must be considered on its own merits, if the source is being untruthful in conveying the idea, then I would need to take a deeper look into the idea to see if it's been tampered with or muddied by the source.

As a parent of young kids I am made aware of the power I hold in influencing them and sharing ideas with them. While they are young they take these ideas and beliefs and live by them, for the most part, but they don't really consider their source because they trust that their parents love them and won't hurt them (abusive homes not included in this example).

They grow up and continue to consider the ideas, and eventually evaluate and judge the source of those ideas. So I think when it comes down to it, all ideas are judged on a combination of both the idea itself and it's source, whether we are aware of it or not. Is that perfect? Probably not. Teenagers disregard their parents ideas because they view the source as "outdated" and "unsympathetic", when adults around them tell them to "trust in the wisdom that 40 years of your parents life has taught them...they know what's best for you".

I don't think the perfect world or person exists that can completely separate an idea from it's source, however ideal that may be, because all ideas come from some source or another and are not created out of nothing nor exist apart from anything or anyone...ideas are tied to people, the sources of all ideas. Therefore to evaluate and question the source is essential in completely understanding the idea. Or something like that...

It's a difficult question to answer, I'll think about it some more, definately. I have no idea if what I just said made sense, so perhaps more thought will help me form a clearer picture. Thanks for the thought.