And Now, a word from Ken Cliffe, Editor of White Wolf Magazine
raga...@netcom.com
Hey, Net Punk,
It had to happen sometime. With upcoming changes in WHITE WOLF Magazine, the cutting voice of White Wolf will soon be on the net!
Sure you're into games, but we realize that you love movies, computer games and innovations, comics, collectibles, weird fiction, music and games. Starting with issue #51, the mag covers 'em all!
Don't worry, we'll still offer articles on our own games and those from throughout the industry. We'll also maintain our irreverent, biting style. It wouldn't be our magazine if we didn't! In tribute to the change, look for White Wolf INPHOBIA (tm), the thicker, glossier, more colorful phoenix that rises from WWM's ashes. It's a new name, a new look and a new approach, but all the attitude and style that you either loved or hated before lives on!
So what was that about the net? Starting in January, articles will be selected from each issue of INPHOBIA(tm) and posted online. You'll get a taste of what's coming to stores and mailboxes in the real world, and will have an opportunity to respond to each issue directly. Just post your comments and opinions on each issue's few articles at raga...@netcom.com, with 'INPHOBIA COMMENTS' in the subject line and you'll become part of this transforming animal.
Hope you like it (or can deal).
Ken Cliffe
Editor
White Wolf INPHOBIA and INPHOBIA are trademarks of White Wolf, Inc.
--
Sam Chupp (raga...@netcom.com, tore...@aol.com)
White Wolf Game Studio 404-292-1819
Internet Representative / Assistant Creative Director / Playtest Coordinator
Try The Storyteller's Circle, White Wolf's MUSH: draco.unm.edu 6666
Andrew Young
Hey, Ken, be sure to word-wrap your oh-so-kewl irreverent, biting, cutting
voice at column 70 or so. You'll look pretty amateurish if you don't.
Regards,
Andy, who doesn't feel like a "Net Punk" and doesn't think he wants to be one.
Hewlett Packard
Vancouver Division - Software Quality
P.O. Box 8906, Vancouver, WA 98668-8906
Bruce Baugh
:WHITE WOLF'S MAG ONLINE
:
:Hey, Net Punk,
Assuming this isn't a troll, you could hardly have picked a petter way to lose
my interest.
bru...@teleport.com * Bruce Baugh, posting from but not for Teleport
List Manager, Christlib, where Christianity and libertarianism intersect
"Lacquered frog bands are no longer popular with America's trendsetters,
Max. We'd be hosed." - Steve Purcell, SAM AND MAX: FREELANCE POLICE
James Nicoll
were hit every 78 characters or so -- many of us are reading on screens
which are 80 characters wide and which *don't* automatically word-wrap.
James Nicoll
--
"I'm glad I saw the galaxy, but I want to die in Brooklyn."
Bryan J. Maloney
Well, it looks like White Wolf Magazine has decided to become a copy of
Cryptych magazine.
Mitchell Gross
>WHITE WOLF'S MAG ONLINE
>
>Hey, Net Punk,
[gratuitous "hip" blather removed]
>Hope you like it (or can deal).
Ken,
Many of the people on the Net are educated, or at least in educational
institutions (stress on the institutions *grin*). I doubt many of them
refer to themselves as "net punks." Anyone out there beg to differ?
Considering that on two seperate occasions in the last issue of WW mag you
seemed to go out of your way to insult the net community, you may wish to
drop some of this attitude(tm) when venturing online. I am not sure
whether you insulted the community more than twice as after I noticed the
Apocalypse Cow ad, I "filed" the magazine.
If you wish to cater to the net community, then you should get a net
account of your own and BE a part of that community. The net is a growing
part of the gaming community and of the international community as well.
Don't talk AT us, be part of the community. Many businesses/magazines/etc
that are moving onto the net think they can just walk in and run things
their way. Don't make the same stupid mistake.
--'---,---'---,--`--'-,-'-`---'-,--`-'---,---'-----,---'---`---'-,-`-`-'---,--
Mitchell J. Gross * m...@io.com
http://www.io.com/user/mjg/visionary/
Check out alt.arts.storytelling!
"You can't mail order attitude!" - Jana Wright
"Fools allow others to rule them. Wise men rule themselves."
-`---,---'-,---`---`--'--,--`-'-,--`--'--,---`--'-,--`-'-,--,-'-`--'-,-`--,---
Greywolf
>
> Hey, Ken, be sure to word-wrap your oh-so-kewl irreverent, biting, cutting
> voice at column 70 or so. You'll look pretty amateurish if you don't.
> Regards,
>
> Andy, who doesn't feel like a "Net Punk" and doesn't think he wants to be one.
Whoops! This is getting cross-posted to alt.games.white.wolf now,
isn't it? (Sorry about that, a.g.w.w. folks!) Anyway, I have to
admit that the "irreverent, biting, cutting" attitude I've been
seeing so much in certain gaming publications is getting a tad ...
cliche. I know a lot of folks like to fantasize that we're all
"Internetrunners", and use all this Cyberpunkish lingo and Bad
Attitude (tm), but I'm not too inclined to apply for the position
of "Net Punk", either. =)
Nice to see that yet another big-name game company is 'net-
connected, but pardon me if I don't greet the news with a leather-
clad fist striking the air and an exchange of tough-guy macho-isms.
=, (At least I didn't see any more of those references to the
"Information Superhighway" in there. Whew! =) )
--
-Jordan .. PEACO...@cobra.uni.edu <New, improved, friendly,
.OO. Jordan Greywolf (Jordan Peacock) mushy, non-controversial
O/\O 1610 Parker .sig, due to popular
~~ Cedar Falls, IA 50613 demand! =) >
I love ... God, my family, my friends, unicorns, wolves, miscellaneous
critters, LARPs, RPGs, miniatures, doodling, sculpting, writing, gaming,
old cars, giant Japanese robots, anime, computer animation, and donuts. =)
Geoffrey C Grabowski
>
>Hey, Net Punk,
Well, i think if there was even the *slightest* chance I was
going to buy INPHOBIA(tm), that line just put the 13 nails in the coffin,
carried it to the hearse, took it to the cemetary, chunked it in the
ground and buried it. It did not erect a headstone, and there will be no
rising from the grave to stalk the living. Calling me and every other net
user a punk isn't a great way to earn our friendship and love, except
Jack Dracula, but it's hardly like you needed to win *him* over.
> It had to happen sometime. With upcoming changes in WHITE WOLF
> Magazine, the cutting voice of White Wolf will soon be on the net!
I sure hope the cutting voice learns to format its articles before
then. If you're posting it to this newsgroup, please be sure to use a
consistent subject line so my killfile can catch it more easily.
> Sure you're into games, but we realize that you love movies, computer
> games and innovations, comics, collectibles, weird fiction, music and
> games. Starting with issue #51, the mag covers 'em all!
Right, so unless it's as thick as a phonebook, it won't really do
justice to any of the topics. Not only am I not interested in comics,
goth music or collectibles, if I want incisive and biting reviews of
movies and weird fiction, I can go buy Interzone. It's not even
Tragically Hip, and doesn't call me a punk.
> Don't worry,
> we'll still offer articles on our own games and those from throughout
> the industry.
Right, sandwiched between the articles on pewter beermugs,
crystals and you, the movie reviews and '9 goth titles you should listen
to endlessly'?
> We'll also maintain our irreverent, biting style.
Oh goody.
> It
> wouldn't be our magazine if we didn't!
If this is the tack you're taking, I'd guess it won't be your
magazine for long. IMHOP, your creditors will own it soon.
> In tribute to the change, look
> for White Wolf INPHOBIA (tm), the thicker, glossier, more colorful phoenix
> that rises from WWM's ashes.
A thicker, cheesier, more expensive phoenix rising from the
ashes, eh?
> It's a new name, a new look and a new
> approach, but all the attitude and style that you either loved or hated
> before lives on!
But with more demons, huh Ken?
>So what was that about the net?
Yeah, you kinda forgot that in the middle of the 'ohh, lookie,
free ad space' frenzy.
> Just post your comments and opinions on
> each issue's few articles at raga...@netcom.com, with 'INPHOBIA
> COMMENTS' in the subject line and you'll become part of this
> transforming animal.
Okay, guys, just try to post gaming stuff in this space and keep
the music reviews in the mag. That's why there are these *different*
newsgroups, see, for *different* topics. If I wanted to read movie
reviews, I'd go over to rec.arts.movies.reviews, or watch Syskyel and
Egghead.
>Hope you like it (or can deal).
Okay, I'll just be my regular old "net punk" self and deal.
Considering the flood of oh-so-positive responses coming in, I hope you can
like it or deal too, Ken.
>
>Ken Cliffe
>Editor
>
>White Wolf INPHOBIA and INPHOBIA are trademarks of White Wolf, Inc.
What, no demons? This *can't* be the same Ken Cliffe *I* remember
from his days as line 'developer' for Ars Magica.
--
--Geoffrey Grabowski|gcg...@pitt.edu|Undergrad, U.Pittsburgh|PoliSci/Econ
--[.] "So put a candle in the window
--[.] and a kiss upon his lips
--[.] while the dish outside the window fills with rain"
Stephan Zielinski
*plonk*
--
Stephan Zielinski szielins%dvl...@us.oracle.com
Whip me. Beat me. Make me maintain AIX.
Donald G Bixler
Stephan Zielinski <szielins%dvl...@us.oracle.com> wrote:
>raga...@netcom.com wrote:
>>WHITE WOLF'S MAG ONLINE
>>
>>Hey, Net Punk,
>
>*plonk*
I second that motion.
Oops da "Where'd I put that Clue-Stick?" Ogre
PS- Sam, you really should try to convince Ken that the people on the net
are NOT the characters from _Neuromancer_; it'd help sales...
--
Oops da Ogre | "OK, so we didn't learn any big lesson. Sue me."
mud...@uxa.ecn.bgu.edu | "Live and don't learn, that's us."
----------------------- - Calvin & Hobbes Fnord
Beamish Boy
>raga...@netcom.com wrote:
>:WHITE WOLF'S MAG ONLINE
>:
>:Hey, Net Punk,
>
>Assuming this isn't a troll, you could hardly have picked a petter way to lose
>my interest.
It's not a troll, it's a reflection of Ken Cliffe's perspective on the
'net. In the last issue of White Wolf magazine, he explicitly stated
his dislike for 'net discussion groups at least twice.
Of course, it's his right, but somehow it doesn't seem the best
commercial strategy...
--
Robbie Westmoreland, Dilettante | star-bellied geek | rob...@inviso.com
I'm apathetic and I think about voting!
Why yes, I speak for the entire U.S. government. Why do you ask?
Alexander Siegelin
Hey WW Punks,
it seems you've read a bit too much CP 2020. I think "Style over
Substance" sums the content of your article fairly good up (and perhaps
that of the new magazine). I liked the WWM fairly well (although I hated
that unbelievable dumb and badly drawn Cow comic strips) but I really
wonder what that "INPHOBIA" ((tm)(c)(r) whatever you like WW) will be
other than hot air (and that dumb cow again).
I think it's a good thing that WW finally "discovered" the net (how much
postcards did you get anyway Sam?) but thats not the way to do it.
As another poster already said most people on the net are fairly well
educated (we'll see how long that stays that way) and don't like being
told they're punks especially by some guy who thinks he's ultra hip,
doesn't even know the difference between Usenet and Internet and who
still thinks that FTP is some new designer drug.
I'm really surprised that such a text came from the game company who
catered to the mature gamer (or at least said so).
C u l 8 r fellow "punks"
-Alex
P.S.: I'm normally not into flaming (or even posting much). But this was
simply too much.
--
!////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////!
! Alexander Siegelin & Usenet: Sha...@cube.net !
! Baierbrunn, Bavaria &&& or: asie...@dataware.com !
! Germany & Fido: 2:2480/66 !
!\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\!
Bryan J. Maloney
Dear Mr. Cliffe:
I would like to congratulate you upon the magnificent ironic humor that you
recently had Sam post to Usenet. I would say that it may be one of the most
piquant and subtle pieces of writing to have reached my eyes in quite some
time. First, your greeting "Hey, net punks"--art, pure art. After all, only
either a complete idiot or a master of the ironic would dare begin a mass-
mailed Usenet posting with such a greeting. "net punks"--It is almost Dali-
like in its tweaking of the audience. Such genius, to choose the one greeting
that would, were it a serious attempt, expose the author as an absolute boob.
You, on the other hand, are obviously a master of subtle humor. Consider how
you so slyly "forgot" to perform a simple 79 character-delimited word wrap
upon your message. Normally, this would be a sign of unprofessionality and
gross incompetence with the medium, but it is obviously a telling commentary
upon the very sort of gross incompetence that so many commercialists saddle
upon us. Kudos on your gesture.
Then there is your use of language--ah, my heart beats at the strains of your
prose. It is so far beyond what it appears to be. It is not merely a foolish
attempt to sound "cool" using languistic constructions and jargon that even
a moderately-educated adolescent would find quaint and just a little pathetic.
No, were your post to be serious, I would take it for that, but I saw through
your joke. I saw that it was a cutting commentary upon the ignorance and
simple stupid prejudice that the uneducated so often bring to electronic
communications.
Sir, I salute you.
I hope that you will be able to see my message, for a letter like yours
deserves the compliments I have given it.
jj31...@sable.adelphi.edu
Ken:YHBTYL. Have a day. :|
Giddeon Windemere
Your Name
>Hey, Net Punk,
hey D00D. Glad to catch ya SURFIN the INFORMATION HIGHWAY.
Let me shut off my Super-NES, lower the volume on my
KURT COBAIN tribute CD, and put down my copy of MONDO 2000.
Jeesh. And people wonder why I long for the 'ol days...
>Sure you're into games, but we realize that you love movies, computer games
K00L. But how about reviewing "clove" cigarttes, too?
============================================================================
DISCLAIMER: Wasn't me! A monkey sat at my keyboard and typed one key per
second for five years until he got this!
Matthew James Ruane
needed, hip, tragically cool people who could bring us things we always
wanted but didn't know we wanted. Before these men as goths arrived with
their style and culture, you could sit back in your closeted ignorance and
enjoy the days when a magazine gave the readers what they wanted, not what
the editors thought was en vogue and au courant. In the misty past of
yesteryear a struggling company sent we their first coloured issue (#8?)
to entice me with their insight and brillance. I became entranced and
eagerly sought out their irregular journalistic scribblings, seeking the
kernel of truth among the occassional chaff. I was rewarded more than
once, and continued to partake of their offerings. Until recently that
is.
They then entered the land of glossy colour and became entranced with
darkness and gloom. New editors were brought aboard to give us direction
and to move in new ways, examining areas they thought should be exposed to
us, their entranced and ignorant customers. But the spell was broken, not
so much by this new choir of voices seeking to illuminate us, but by the
insipid voice of the joker in the background, intruding constantly with
his editorial humour into the privacy of the writer, destroying both the
illusion of success and that of intelligence. With that the spell was
broken, and though I still fought against my will and continued to spend
my money on this "piece of art" for several months thereafter, the tide
finally came crashing in and the last cobwebs clouding my mind were
removed. I only ask that the editors find their roots, forget their
assumed poses, and return to servicing the reader's desires and not
fufilling their own ideas of grandeur and to cease posturing before the
mirror.
Matthew J Ruane
University of Delaware
Bruce Baugh
:bru...@teleport.com (Bruce Baugh) dicit:
:>Assuming this isn't a troll, you could hardly have picked a petter way to lose
:>my interest.
:Of course, it's his right, but somehow it doesn't seem the best
:commercial strategy...
Not from where I'm sitting, no, it doesn't. On the other hand, lots of things at
White Wolf seem to me more or less unconnected with what I'd think of as a
vision of enlightened self interest, y'know?
Scott Ricketts
the whole Steve Jackson fiasco, just brings up the whole concept of
assholes that make cool stuff. Wieland is a total putz, but he sings well,
and so I just ignore that he's a putz and listen to his songs.
I think I'll just ignore all the bullshit and ramblings that come out of
White Wolf and keep reading their RPG's and supplements.
Hey, if they don't get it, the drastic decrease in sales will force them
to see that this is just a total fiasco and they would be better off
sinking their money into cold fusion research.
--
-- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- --
Launchpad is an experimental internet BBS. The views of its users do not
necessarily represent those of UNC-Chapel Hill, OIT, or the SysOps.
-- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- --
Stephen E Mynhier
Granted that what Ken did was not very tactful, but this is obviously the
effort of someone who is completely unfamiliar with the medium that he was
attempting to work in (while trying to act as though he was). Ken
apparently is not aware of the environment of the Internet. He is ignorant,
but I think it would be far more constructive to him and others if he was
"corrected" and not flamed. What many people are doing by slow cooking
Ken's battered body over a blazing bonfire is only verifying what he felt
Internet was about. It is true that most of us come from either educational
institutions or companies and are not, in his words, "net punks," but we
should also respond based our our intelligence and not our fury. Those who
are ignorant should be guided to enlightenment so that they will realize
what is and is not respectful and appropriate on the Net.
However:
What Ken is planning to do to White Wolf Magazine, to me, appears to be
nothing short of an attempt at commercialization and embracing the very
"Establishment" that White Wolf attempts to reject. What I am looking
for in WWM is not another flowery magazine covering every conceivable
topic under the sun. I want a magazine about gaming and related topics.
I could see doing some music reviews, not just the "popular" or the
"new and cutting edge" music. If I wanted that, I would watch MTV. But
I, as a Storyteller/Gamemaster, utilize a great deal of music in my games
when I am running stories for my friends and at conventions. Consequently,
I would enjoy some opinions on a variety of music, be it classical, jazz,
alternative, whatever, that I could use to aid my gaming. Please, Ken,
think about what we, faithful patrons of White Wolf, want out of the
magazine that is supposed to be for us. Worry less about lining your
coffers with gold at the expense of your devoted customers. Don't
follow TSR's lead and nearly isolate your products' users in an attempt
at profit.
White Wolf fan and storyteller,
Stephen Mynhier
w
Bruce Baugh
:A short word in defense of White Wolf:
:Granted that what Ken did was not very tactful, but this is obviously the
:effort of someone who is completely unfamiliar with the medium that he was
:attempting to work in (while trying to act as though he was).
This is not an excuse. This is reason to write something to the effect of,
"We at White Wolf are (mostly) not very familiar with the net environment.
We'd like to reach out to you. What do you want to see in a new, improved
version of WWM? If we were to put some articles online, what would you
most (and least) want to see online? What turns you on, what turns you off?"
A few years back the editor of THE DRAGON went to the folks in ALARUMS &
EXCURSIONS (the Grand Old Thing of rolegaming magazines/fanzines, for those
who don't know) and asked them pretty much those questions: what they liked
in THE DRAGON, what they didn't, if they bought or not, why they bought or
not, what they'd want to see to get them to buy, and so forth. And he took
heed. THE DRAGON is a better magazine for it. (I don't buy it because I
don't play the games it covers. But its coverage is very good.)
Ken Cliffe's error is acting out of ignorance, rather than attempting to
remedy it. That's stupid. Do stupid things, earn a penalty, as the old
gaming maxim went.
CWM
Hey, "Net Punks,"
Christ, but you guys are pathetic, you know that?
I mean, Ken types up a announcement about a MAJOR change in direction for
the mag, and what does he get? "`Net Punk'? Is that an insult? I think
I'm being INSULTED." "Yeah, and he didn't wrap his lines right either."
"Yeah, an, an, an he fucked up Ars Magica too!"
"Net Punks" is a COMPLIMENT, fergosh sakes. What do you want? "Hey, fine,
upstanding net citizens." "Hey, tight-assed reactionary net dorks" (come
to think of it, from the response so far the latter would have worked
pretty well). Good God, is it possible that in 1994 anybody this side of
alt.fan.rush.limbaugh would think that being a "punk" is anything other
than a state earnestly to be desired? How sad. I used to think you guys
were cool . . .
Now, to kick around a little BS . . .
To the guy who said that if the new mag tried to cover anything other than
games it would necessarily do an "inadequate" job, get a grip. Magazines are
designed to cover a wide spectrum of topics. Entertainment Weekly has a
much broader mandate on not too many more pages and does a pretty decent
job. Of if you're too cool for EW, take your pick. There's a whole bunch
of excellent wide-spectrum entertainment mags out there, and there's
plenty of room for one more.
As to the change being due to the old WW not making enough money, get a
clue. WW circulation has steadily grown ever since Ken took over, and
that didn't look likely to change. If you knew anything whatsoever about
the publishing industry you'd know that no company is even going to think
about a change this big unless the old version of the mag was doing
really, really well. Sure, you can say "leave well enough alone," but the
fact is, sales-wise, the game market is a ghetto. WW wouldn't be trying
to break out unless they already had hard evidence they could make it on
the outside.
Finally, to those couple of folks who expressed sincere and thoughtful
concern about the change in direction . . . yeah, we know. But give the
new magazine a try anyway, you might like it. As I've been trying to tell
people for the last year, there's a lot more out there besides gaming,
and a lot of it is pretty interesting.
--
Chris W. McCubbin / So I'm sitting there yelling, "Waiter,
C...@IO.COM/CWMF...@AOL.COM / there's a fnord in my soup," for, like, half
Freelance writer/editor / an hour . . . and the bum never even
games/comics/fiction/opinion / LOOKS at me!
Sea Wasp
>Hey, "Net Punks,"
>Christ, but you guys are pathetic, you know that?
I'm afraid that it's Ken and his coposter who are pathetic.
>I mean, Ken types up a announcement about a MAJOR change in direction for
>the mag, and what does he get? "`Net Punk'? Is that an insult? I think
>I'm being INSULTED." "Yeah, and he didn't wrap his lines right either."
>"Yeah, an, an, an he fucked up Ars Magica too!"
>
>"Net Punks" is a COMPLIMENT, fergosh sakes.
No, it's not.
Look, the point is that the article was written in an
artificial, overwritten style and demonstrated a complete lack
of knowledge of the audience to which it was directed.
THE NEAR-UNIVERSAL REACTION demonstrates this.
You can rant all you want about how YOU think these people should
react differently, but that won't change the facts.
To put it another way, if you go out to a formal dinner and
wear ripped bluejeans, the LEAST you can expect are odd looks.
In this case, the posting made it evident that the writer had
ABSOLUTELY no clue as to the audience he was addressing. This indicates
that either Ken himself or his net.rep, who should be BACKSTOPPING him,
doesn't care enough to think for one second about the audience. When
you first reach into a new medium, you are SUPPOSED to try to find
out how to interact in it FIRST. Had anyone over there LOOKED at the
net.dialogue, they would have seen that Ken's post would sound as
phony and pretentious as anything could POSSIBLY sound. The fact
that neither Ken nor anyone else bothered to do this utterly trivial
research overlays the already-annoying post with the implication
that this is a company which has decided on the direction people
OUGHT to take and by God they're going to go in that direction
whether you like it or not.
>pretty well). Good God, is it possible that in 1994 anybody this side of
>alt.fan.rush.limbaugh would think that being a "punk" is anything other
>than a state earnestly to be desired? How sad. I used to think you guys
>were cool . . .
This section made me wonder for a moment if this was a giant
troll; "punk" is cool? No, punk is "a**hole", usually; punk rock is
noise, street punks are trouble, and so on.
I planned to stay out of this example of idiocy, but this
was just too much. People who know the Net don't blow it that badly.
Those who don't have an obligation to learn the customs. If you don't,
you are sending the message "I don't care".
The approach was condescending and arrogant, rather like
someone getting onto a computer-oriented newsgroup and beginning
their post with
"Hey, Computer Geeks!
And then continuing with a post which implied all the
stereotypical images of the male isolated computer addict ever seen
on TV. I was uncertain about whether I should get any WW products
until now. That post decided me in the negative; the ridiculous
self-important puff-pieces in the games were bad enough, but this
was just the last straw.
Far from the other posters needing clues, you need to get one.
In fact, get a case of them.
Sea Wasp
/^\
;;;
Dave Rust
: Many of the people on the Net are educated, or at least in educational
: institutions (stress on the institutions *grin*). I doubt many of them
: refer to themselves as "net punks." Anyone out there beg to differ?
Yes! I'm not 'tragically hip', a 'punk' or anything else. I just like
the Dark. I enjoy cynical humour, but also love the contrast between
light and shadow. The storys that the White Wolf World of Darkness
brings out in gaming appeal to me. But does that mean I like a magazine
that plans its approach to gaming as a 'biting' commentary mag? Ugh.
Very few people do that well. Perhaps Harlan Ellison is one. No others
come to mind. I mean although the "Beyond the Parent's Basement" collum
is usually interesting, Mr. McCubbin really is far too abrasive than he
needs to be. The hallmark of a good commentator or critic is that they
can make concessions without weakening their own point, can sound like a
'friend' to those they are criticising, and can avoid needless
harshness. Afterall, a subtle commentary is far more far-reaching than a
blatant "boat oar to the head".
: If you wish to cater to the net community, then you should get a net
: account of your own and BE a part of that community. The net is a growing
: part of the gaming community and of the international community as well.
: Don't talk AT us, be part of the community. Many businesses/magazines/etc
: that are moving onto the net think they can just walk in and run things
: their way. Don't make the same stupid mistake.
Very well put. As devil's advocate though, I can see the difficulty that
execs at White Wolf would have in maintaining enough of a presence on
Internet to be considered a "Member" of the community. I mean, they *are
busy people (I talked to at least one at GenCon who hadn't had time to
even play an RPG since he started working for them...)! Still, they
maybe should do a bit more to engender feelings of "normalcy" in their
reading public. I mean, I like biting commentary as much as the next
person...
.....But only if it's done well......
Silver-Night.
Alexander Williams
Alexander Siegelin <sha...@cube.net> wrote:
>I'm really surprised that such a text came from the game company who
>catered to the mature gamer (or at least said so).
Ah, but you see, /this/ is really indicitive of their entire style...
After all, if they make it a point to hop up on the table in their Doc
Martens, thrust their fingerless leather gloves in the air and flip
their opera cape (made from /completely/ non-animal products, really)
and then claim to be aiming at the "tr00ly mat00re audience, k-rad
d00ds," then obviously we can see it as either intense self-parody or
as intense stupidity...
Past experience dictates how one should in fact interpret /that/.
[ For the record, its really interesting seeing the others who see it
as an interesting move to ``stake'' WW when they make of themselves
so easy a target... ]
--
tha...@runic.mind.org (Alexander Williams) | PGP 2.6 key avail
| DF 22 16 CE CA 7F
Do What Thou Wilt Shall Be the Whole of the | 98 47 13 EE 8E EC
Law. Love is the Law, Love Under Will. -oOo- | 9C 2D 9B 9B
Stephen E Mynhier
Let's take this a piece at a time:
1st) If, perchance, you were referencing my quote when referring to WW
not making enough money, I think that you should go back and re-read. I am
fully aware, knowing people at WW, how well they are doing. I am concerned
with the change in an attempt to make more money. I am very familiar with
publishing from many angles, and I am aware of what is required. Furthermore,
you are incorrect in that, if a magazine is doing "really, really well" they
would not make a "change this big." They might try slight alteration to test
consumer response, but certainly not a complete overhaul. Now...
2nd) If I wanted Entertainment Weekly, I would buy Entertainment Weekly.
If I wanted Time, I would buy Time. I don't look to EW or Time
for information on gaming. What I would like is a magazine to handle
gaming, in particular, White Wolf gaming. What I want is White Wolf Magazine.
I do not want an ultra-trendy, hip, chic, on-the-cutting-edge of everything
under the sun magazine. I will not buy a magazine as Ken described because
I have no interest in a magazine as Ken described. If WW is set on making
extra space or changing elements of the magazine, then please, dedicate
this space to what the magazine was designed for, gaming. Put in more
articles on WOD, more story ideas, more gaming information. And...
3rd) I am a highly avid gamer. An educated man with an open mind. And
however unpopular it may be to you, I like Rush. What is truly sad, is
that in 1994, a time when very few have any excuse to not be educated,
people still have to resort to the use of insults to try to guilt someone
into siding with them on an issue. And, in case you are interested, I
also have many other interests as well. For instance, I am a photographer
and I subscribe to Popular Photography (a magazine that I subscribe to in
order to get information on photography. A magazine that I do not want
to change to make room for music and movie reviews.) Yes, there are other
things out there... and most of us are involved in them.
Sincerly saddened,
Stephen
,
Mike Suzio
>Hey, "Net Punks,"
>Christ, but you guys are pathetic, you know that?
Oh shit, I was just waiting for you to jump in. You know, Chris, I
alternate between liking your witty comments in WW and hating you for:
1) Insulting posts on rec.arts.comics.misc, where anyone who doesn't
agree with you must be an idiot
2) Insulting comments about gamers in general. Your column in WW seems
predicated on the assumption that gamers are lame. Sometimes you make good
use of this (I loved the column ripping on types of Vampire players), but
too often you come across as rather mean-spirited. Which is your right,
but no one has to like it. In any case, let's see what you have to say...
>I mean, Ken types up a announcement about a MAJOR change in direction for
>the mag, and what does he get? "`Net Punk'? Is that an insult? I think
>I'm being INSULTED." "Yeah, and he didn't wrap his lines right either."
>"Yeah, an, an, an he fucked up Ars Magica too!"
Well, I think some of the posts on this do rather resemble whining.
However, "Net Punks" *is* a rather poor way to address the prospective
audience. It implies a tone of speaking down to the audience. I'm not
going to say Ken intended this - but it doesn't get things off to a good
start, now does it?
>"Net Punks" is a COMPLIMENT, fergosh sakes. What do you want? "Hey, fine,
>upstanding net citizens." "Hey, tight-assed reactionary net dorks" (come
>to think of it, from the response so far the latter would have worked
>pretty well). Good God, is it possible that in 1994 anybody this side of
>alt.fan.rush.limbaugh would think that being a "punk" is anything other
>than a state earnestly to be desired? How sad. I used to think you guys
>were cool . . .
We don't care if you think we're *cool*, that's the fucking point! To
assume (and you *know* what happens when you assume, right?) that just
because people like WW magazine and it's games, that they are punk
anarchist industrial-music listening fiends is pretty moronic. I mean, in
my case it's true, but what about everyone else? :-)
I think most of the posts tried to make this point - Ken's entire message
seemed to be making bad assumptions about what the readers of WW wanted.
>Now, to kick around a little BS . . .
>To the guy who said that if the new mag tried to cover anything other than
>games it would necessarily do an "inadequate" job, get a grip. Magazines are
>designed to cover a wide spectrum of topics. Entertainment Weekly has a
>much broader mandate on not too many more pages and does a pretty decent
>job. Of if you're too cool for EW, take your pick. There's a whole bunch
>of excellent wide-spectrum entertainment mags out there, and there's
>plenty of room for one more.
Well... yes, the market *could* support another entertainment rag. But
it's not going to be easy, it's a pretty well saturated market as it is.
What is this new magazine going to offer the "Net Punk" that Wired, Mondo
2000, 2600, or Details doesn't?
Magazines are designed for whatever suits their purpose - with as broad or
restricted a focus as they need. I'd argue that WW was better off focusing
on gaming, with a little bit of attention to side issues, than trying to
mutate into the latest, hottest, cutting-edge megazine. But the
circulation figures a year from now will tell the tale, I suppose. I just
know I most likely will not be there to care.
>really, really well. Sure, you can say "leave well enough alone," but the
>fact is, sales-wise, the game market is a ghetto. WW wouldn't be trying
>to break out unless they already had hard evidence they could make it on
>the outside.
Well, I'm sure you are correct. I guess we would have to assume that some
thought went into launching this effort. A pity more thought was not put
into the announcement - it was sloppy and ineffective.
As far as the game market being a ghetto, you are correct - someone pointed
out recently (maybe even in this thread, I'm getting forgetful in my old
age) that RPG's might not really have a bright future. Magic the Addiction
seems to have sucked huge amounts of $$$ from the industry, and that sort
of thing is hard to recover from. However, history is full of ambitious
people who failed due to overextending themselves. I'd rather see a
cautious effort to expand than this total overhaul. But like I said
before, we'll see.
>Finally, to those couple of folks who expressed sincere and thoughtful
>concern about the change in direction . . . yeah, we know. But give the
>new magazine a try anyway, you might like it. As I've been trying to tell
>people for the last year, there's a lot more out there besides gaming,
>and a lot of it is pretty interesting.
You are correct. However, it's possible to get this message across without
telling people they suck because they are gamers. Think about it.
- Mike
CWM
Sea Wasp <sea...@telerama.lm.com> wrote:
>In article <3cb2kf$6...@pentagon.io.com> c...@pentagon.io.com (CWM) writes:
>
>>Hey, "Net Punks,"
>>Christ, but you guys are pathetic, you know that?
>
> I'm afraid that it's Ken and his coposter who are pathetic.
Oooh, really burned one in there, didn't you?
>>I mean, Ken types up a announcement about a MAJOR change in direction for
>>the mag, and what does he get? "`Net Punk'? Is that an insult? I think
>>I'm being INSULTED." "Yeah, and he didn't wrap his lines right either."
>>"Yeah, an, an, an he fucked up Ars Magica too!"
>>
>>"Net Punks" is a COMPLIMENT, fergosh sakes.
>
> No, it's not.
Well, it was obviously intended that way. If you have a problem with the
terminology, that's your own problem.
> Look, the point is that the article was written in an
>artificial, overwritten style and demonstrated a complete lack
>of knowledge of the audience to which it was directed.
>
> THE NEAR-UNIVERSAL REACTION demonstrates this.
>
> You can rant all you want about how YOU think these people should
>react differently, but that won't change the facts.
No, and the facts are that y'all are being major jerks. I mean,
so-the-fuck what if the Press release was a tad . . . breathy. That's no
excuse for treating Ken and Sam like the Green Card Lawyers.
> To put it another way, if you go out to a formal dinner and
>wear ripped bluejeans, the LEAST you can expect are odd looks.
Odd looks are fine. "Get back to Russia, hippie," isn't. All I'm asking
for here is a little perspective.
> In this case, the posting made it evident that the writer had
>ABSOLUTELY no clue as to the audience he was addressing. This indicates
>that either Ken himself or his net.rep, who should be BACKSTOPPING him,
>doesn't care enough to think for one second about the audience. When
>you first reach into a new medium, you are SUPPOSED to try to find
>out how to interact in it FIRST. Had anyone over there LOOKED at the
>net.dialogue, they would have seen that Ken's post would sound as
>phony and pretentious as anything could POSSIBLY sound. The fact
>that neither Ken nor anyone else bothered to do this utterly trivial
>research overlays the already-annoying post with the implication
>that this is a company which has decided on the direction people
>OUGHT to take and by God they're going to go in that direction
>whether you like it or not.
Oh my god, don't you have any idea how . . . primitive this whole
attitude is? ("Him not know secret talk, him not part of tribe, we eat him
now!") How infantile? (Nyah, nyah, we're not going to read your dumb old
magazine 'cuz you act weird and you talk funny, nyah nyah.)
And the only thing that WW has decided is that their magazine can
potentially make a whole pile more money after a format change, and they
hope all you old timers will come along for the ride, but if not . . .
your loss, chum. That's not arrogance, that's just business.
>>pretty well). Good God, is it possible that in 1994 anybody this side of
>>alt.fan.rush.limbaugh would think that being a "punk" is anything other
>>than a state earnestly to be desired? How sad. I used to think you guys
>>were cool . . .
>
> This section made me wonder for a moment if this was a giant
>troll; "punk" is cool? No, punk is "a**hole", usually; punk rock is
>noise, street punks are trouble, and so on.
>
Oh, now this is sad. Late breaking news flash, Waspy . . . for about the
last 20 years now, "punk" has meant "open minded, willing to experiment,
unconcerned with the superficial constraints of culture and custom."
And anybody who still calls Punk Rock "noise" must still be listening to
thier Lawrence Welk 8-tracks, but let that go. More to the point, ever since
1st edition Vampire WW has been advertising itself as the "Gothic-punk"
publisher, making Ken's use of the word in this context about as
controversial or demeaning as a Champions press release starting out
with, "Hey, net-heroes."
> I planned to stay out of this example of idiocy, but this
>was just too much. People who know the Net don't blow it that badly.
>Those who don't have an obligation to learn the customs. If you don't,
>you are sending the message "I don't care".
And of course, we who are already initiated into our little secret
society have no obligation whatsoever to extend even the slightest
toleration or courtesy to a newbie. Yeah, and I bet you send hate-mail to
AOL users too.
> The approach was condescending and arrogant, rather like
>someone getting onto a computer-oriented newsgroup and beginning
>their post with
>
> "Hey, Computer Geeks!
>
> And then continuing with a post which implied all the
>stereotypical images of the male isolated computer addict ever seen
>on TV. I was uncertain about whether I should get any WW products
>until now. That post decided me in the negative; the ridiculous
>self-important puff-pieces in the games were bad enough, but this
>was just the last straw.
I never argue with paranoids. Anybody who can actually read knows that
the above has almost no resemblance whatsoever to anything that Ken
actually wrote.
> Far from the other posters needing clues, you need to get one.
>In fact, get a case of them.
>
Maybe on your planet I do.
CWM
Stephen E Mynhier <smy...@hubcap.clemson.edu> wrote:
>Chris,
> Let's take this a piece at a time:
>1st) If, perchance, you were referencing my quote when referring to WW
>not making enough money, I think that you should go back and re-read. I am
>fully aware, knowing people at WW, how well they are doing. I am concerned
>with the change in an attempt to make more money. I am very familiar with
>publishing from many angles, and I am aware of what is required. Furthermore,
>you are incorrect in that, if a magazine is doing "really, really well" they
>would not make a "change this big." They might try slight alteration to test
>consumer response, but certainly not a complete overhaul. Now...
I really don't remember if I made that remark in reply to you or not,
Stephen, but I do need to point out that the above paragraph completely
reverses my point. What I actually said was that a magazine would ONLY
make a change this big if it WAS doing really, really well. Tinkering is
indeed what happens when things start to slip, major overhauls only
happen when things are going good.
>2nd) If I wanted Entertainment Weekly, I would buy Entertainment Weekly.
> If I wanted Time, I would buy Time. I don't look to EW or Time
>for information on gaming. What I would like is a magazine to handle
>gaming, in particular, White Wolf gaming. What I want is White Wolf Magazine.
>I do not want an ultra-trendy, hip, chic, on-the-cutting-edge of everything
>under the sun magazine. I will not buy a magazine as Ken described because
>I have no interest in a magazine as Ken described. If WW is set on making
>extra space or changing elements of the magazine, then please, dedicate
>this space to what the magazine was designed for, gaming. Put in more
>articles on WOD, more story ideas, more gaming information. And...
Hey, fine for you, Stephen, but face it . . . that's your problem, not
Ken's. I mean, look at what you're saying . . . you've decided,
completely sight unseen, that you're not going to even give Inphobia a
try because it's trying to tackle a broader, more challenging context. I
mean, if your mindset is really that narrow, then obviously the new
magazine has nothing for you. I just don't understand why you're bragging
about it.
>3rd) I am a highly avid gamer. An educated man with an open mind. And
>however unpopular it may be to you, I like Rush. What is truly sad, is
>that in 1994, a time when very few have any excuse to not be educated,
>people still have to resort to the use of insults to try to guilt someone
>into siding with them on an issue. And, in case you are interested, I
>also have many other interests as well. For instance, I am a photographer
>and I subscribe to Popular Photography (a magazine that I subscribe to in
>order to get information on photography. A magazine that I do not want
>to change to make room for music and movie reviews.) Yes, there are other
>things out there... and most of us are involved in them.
Exactly what "insults" are you talking about? Ken didn't insult anybody in
his press release, except possibly through niavete (or through malice or
general cluelessness on the part of the insulted). If you're talking
about me calling the harpies "really pathetic," sorry, no apologies for
calling a spade a spade.
Anyway, there are lots of good general gaming magazines out there. Read
Pyramid. Ken and WW want to try something new and original, and good for
them. It's just not fair to demand that WW be a house organ for all time
and never aspire to be anything else. (And maybe if you took a positive
line, and suggested that now might be the perfect time for WW to launch a
new magazine entirely devoted to supporting their games, you might find a
sympathetic ear.)
I'll I'm saying if if you're really absolutely sure that the new magazine
has nothing to offer you whatsoever no matter how good or fresh it may
happen to be, don't buy it, but don't broadcast your handicap on the net
either. If, on the other hand, you are at least theoretically open to the
possibility of a new thing, buy a couple issues. If it sucks, you'll be
able to take satisfaction in saying "I knew it all along," and if it's
good your life will be that much richer.
>Sincerly saddened,
>Stephen
Cheer up and take a chance, why dontcha?
Stephen E Mynhier
Let's clarify here:
If a magazine is doing really well, they have no need to make major
changes in format. Slight alterations would be made in an attempt to
improve what is already a good thing. If a magazine is doing poorly, they
will then try to completely overhaul the magazine because it is not doing
well. The consumer is obviously not pleased with the magazine's product
and consequently is not buying it. Therefore, the magazine, realizing
that the public does not like what they offer, will implement major changes
in an attempt to get more readers by appealing to a different group
or the same group by using a different style of magazine.
Now, I certainly hope that you are not speaking as a representative
for Whitewolf because your attitude in no way reflects the attitude of the
people at Whitewolf that I know. I resent your "I don't care what Whitewolf
consumers want" attitude. Let me spell out the publishing industry for you.
If don't care about your customers, you don't do well. Let us take a look
at alt.games.whitewolf, a newsgroup DEDICATED to whitewolf gaming. Now,
it seems pretty apparent that this large group of whitewolf fans does not
want this "new and completely orignal" magazine that you readily compare
to Entertainment Weekly and sounds remarkable like Details, Link, Wired, and
any of a half-dozen other "new and completely orignal" magazines. Now if we
take this as a fairly representative sample of Whitewolf consumers, then
you can predict that Whitewolf will loose well over half of your consumers.
It sounds to me like this makes "my problem" Whitewolf's problem and that
makes it your problem, since it is my money that Whitewolf is not getting
to pay your salary.
Insults, dear Chris, would include attempts to compare anyone
who disagrees with you to Rush Limbaugh, since you obviously do not like
Rush. You are comparing someone to something that you do not like. You
are insulting them. Follow?
Now, as far as knew, Whitewolf has a magazine for supporting their
games. And as far as I knew, it was called, appropriately enough,
Whitewolf magazine. Now if I had a subscription to EW, Details, or any
other of those dozen "broader" and "new and completely orignal" magazines
or I purchased any of them on a regular basis, then if Whitewolf were to
come out with their own "new and completely original magazine" like EW,
Details, etc., in addition to their gaming magazine, then I would be willing
to try it. But I do not. And I will not. And neither will many other
people. And remember whose problem that is? You yourself said that
Whitewolf was doing this to make money, but just remember that we (the
consumers) support Whitewolf games and products with our purchases, and
it is by no means unfair or unreasonable to expect Whitewolf to support
their own products and the consumers of their products.
Thankfully not "new and original" like everyone else,
Stephen
Mike Suzio
[Stephen says he doesn't need Inphobia - he's got Time and EW. Or
at least that's how I read, *no flames intended*, just had to fucking
edit this monster down! - mjs]
>Hey, fine for you, Stephen, but face it . . . that's your problem, not
>Ken's. I mean, look at what you're saying . . . you've decided,
>completely sight unseen, that you're not going to even give Inphobia a
>try because it's trying to tackle a broader, more challenging context. I
^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^
No, he said he wasn't going to give it a try because it doesn't really
fill any niche he has a need or interest for. Like I pointed out before,
this is far from a "brave new world" WW is stepping into here. What is
going to make this different from all the other "cutting-edge" stuff out
there? At this point, you're dangerous close to exploiting the trends
instead of *being* them. I for one see no reason (yet) to praise this as
any kind of "more challenging" move. Well, maybe it's more challenging in
the sense that WW *is* taking a big chance here. But hey, maybe it will
work out, who knows? But there is nothing wrong with making a judgement
now that says "Hey, looks like crap. *I'm* not going to pursue it
further."
>mean, if your mindset is really that narrow, then obviously the new
>magazine has nothing for you. I just don't understand why you're bragging
>about it.
Pretty poor debate tactic here, Chris. So if we don't see things your way,
we have a narrow mindset? Gee, kinda like telling people that if they
don't like punk, they must be Lawrence Welk fans? Maybe *you* need to get
out a little more and broaden some horizons, eh? Remove the plank from
your own eye first.
>Anyway, there are lots of good general gaming magazines out there. Read
>Pyramid. Ken and WW want to try something new and original, and good for
>them. It's just not fair to demand that WW be a house organ for all time
>and never aspire to be anything else. (And maybe if you took a positive
>line, and suggested that now might be the perfect time for WW to launch a
>new magazine entirely devoted to supporting their games, you might find a
>sympathetic ear.)
Now this is a *lot* more reasonable. It might have soothed things somewhat
if this was the kind of tone we got from the start. I can see the desire
to try new things, expand the market, etc. But I have to wonder - why
didn't WW just start a totally new magazine called Inphobia, keep doing WW
magazine (maybe reducing it's page count), and make everyone happy? I
assume it's due to lack of resources to do both, but the choice they made
seems strange to me.
But I'll wait and see what happens. It's not like I lived to the moment I
could lay my hands on WW each month, if it's going bye-bye I think I'll
survive :-). If the new rag ends up with something fresh, more power to
them.
>I'll I'm saying if if you're really absolutely sure that the new magazine
>has nothing to offer you whatsoever no matter how good or fresh it may
>happen to be, don't buy it, but don't broadcast your handicap on the net
>either. If, on the other hand, you are at least theoretically open to the
>possibility of a new thing, buy a couple issues. If it sucks, you'll be
>able to take satisfaction in saying "I knew it all along," and if it's
>good your life will be that much richer.
*Sigh*. One more time. No one has a "handicap" here. See, if I choose to
*disagree* with you, and I decide I don't have time to waste on something
that seems totally outside the realm of my interests, that's my right. I'm
not being close-minded, I'm being reasonable. We all have finite time and
resources, and some people on this thread have decided that Inphobia will
consume too much of one of those things for them to bother with it. We
have no assurances that we'll like it, and the press release seemed to
convey an overtone that would make us rather discouraged for the prospects
here.
That said, I would tend to encourage people to at least look at this if you
see it at the local gaming shop or bookstore. Maybe it will suck, maybe
not... Chris is right to encourage people to wait and see.
- Mike
Bruce Baugh
:I mean, Ken types up a announcement about a MAJOR change in direction for
:the mag, and what does he get? "`Net Punk'? Is that an insult? I think
:I'm being INSULTED." "Yeah, and he didn't wrap his lines right either."
:"Yeah, an, an, an he fucked up Ars Magica too!"
Synecdoche is a form of metaphor in which mentioning a part signifies the
whole (or the whole signifies the part). Our, or at least my, quoting of
"Hey Net Punks" is an example of synecdoche in action.
However, for those unfamiliar with the concept of allusion, I'll spell it
out.
Ken Cliffe's letter demonstrates appalling ignorance of net.interests
combined with an overweening sense of hip self-importance. Neither of
those interests me. I'm tired of people telling me how cool they are,
rather than simply presenting interesting info and ideas for me to read
myself - it's why I no longer take WIRED, let alone MONDO 2000, regularly,
and prefer to stick with WHOLE EARTH REVIEW, GNOSIS, and SCIENCE NEWS,
where I can get the content without all the chrome.
The denizens of the net include a disproportionate number of preening
idiots. If someone has a scheme to make money off them, more power to
him; I'm willing to listen to the argument that it is the moral duty of
smart people to take money from those sufficiently stupid. However,
phrasing an argument that treats all prospective readers as belonging to
a very narrow lil' sub-culture is unwise at best. In fact, it is itself
downright stupid.
Contrast the net.presence of Wizards of the Coast, or Steve Jackson Games,
or the folks who put out THEATRIX, or Atlas Games, or any of many others.
(No blame by omission intended here, folks.) In every case, these people
have made an effort to _ask_ or otherwise ascertain what the interests
of us'ns may be. Cliffe, on the other hand, undertakes to lecture. I
don't go for lectures.
CWM
Mike Suzio <msu...@tiamat.umd.umich.edu> wrote:
>c...@pentagon.io.com (CWM) writes:
>
>[Stephen says he doesn't need Inphobia - he's got Time and EW. Or
>at least that's how I read, *no flames intended*, just had to fucking
>edit this monster down! - mjs]
That's not exactly what he said, but I'll let him correct you if he wants to.
>
>>Hey, fine for you, Stephen, but face it . . . that's your problem, not
>>Ken's. I mean, look at what you're saying . . . you've decided,
>>completely sight unseen, that you're not going to even give Inphobia a
>>try because it's trying to tackle a broader, more challenging context. I
> ^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^
>No, he said he wasn't going to give it a try because it doesn't really
>fill any niche he has a need or interest for. Like I pointed out before,
>this is far from a "brave new world" WW is stepping into here. What is
>going to make this different from all the other "cutting-edge" stuff out
>there? At this point, you're dangerous close to exploiting the trends
>instead of *being* them. I for one see no reason (yet) to praise this as
>any kind of "more challenging" move. Well, maybe it's more challenging in
>the sense that WW *is* taking a big chance here. But hey, maybe it will
>work out, who knows? But there is nothing wrong with making a judgement
>now that says "Hey, looks like crap. *I'm* not going to pursue it
>further."
How the hell does he know it won't interest him before he's even seen it?
That's exactly the attitude that's pissing me off here.
And WW is coming at the popular culture from a completely new angle. It's
completely different from the music mags, completely different from the
techno-punk mags, sure as hell different from the EW/People mass media
axis. They last time anybody tried anything even remotely like this on
the adult, prozine scale was Jim Steranko's mag in the '70s (Preview?)
>>mean, if your mindset is really that narrow, then obviously the new
>>magazine has nothing for you. I just don't understand why you're bragging
>>about it.
>
>Pretty poor debate tactic here, Chris. So if we don't see things your way,
>we have a narrow mindset? Gee, kinda like telling people that if they
>don't like punk, they must be Lawrence Welk fans? Maybe *you* need to get
>out a little more and broaden some horizons, eh? Remove the plank from
>your own eye first.
Oh crap. His mind is narrow because he admitted it was closed in so many
words. Whether or not he agrees with me has nothing to do with it. I'm
not accusing Stephen of being narrow-minded because I don't like what he
says, I don't like what he says because it's narrow minded.
(Boring part where we actually agree on some stuff deleted)
>>I'll I'm saying if if you're really absolutely sure that the new magazine
>>has nothing to offer you whatsoever no matter how good or fresh it may
>>happen to be, don't buy it, but don't broadcast your handicap on the net
>>either. If, on the other hand, you are at least theoretically open to the
>>possibility of a new thing, buy a couple issues. If it sucks, you'll be
>>able to take satisfaction in saying "I knew it all along," and if it's
>>good your life will be that much richer.
>
>*Sigh*. One more time. No one has a "handicap" here. See, if I choose to
>*disagree* with you, and I decide I don't have time to waste on something
>that seems totally outside the realm of my interests, that's my right. I'm
>not being close-minded, I'm being reasonable. We all have finite time and
>resources, and some people on this thread have decided that Inphobia will
>consume too much of one of those things for them to bother with it. We
>have no assurances that we'll like it, and the press release seemed to
>convey an overtone that would make us rather discouraged for the prospects
>here.
Again, crap. There are lots of potentially cool things out there in the
big wide world that I just haven't made time for yet. I've never seen any
Quintin Tarantino film, for example (there, I said it, now I feel
better). That doesn't mean I have to post to the whole wide net to try to
justify the finite nature of my free time by trash talking things I
haven't experienced yet. I consider that urge both perverse and annoying.
If people don't think they're going to have time to read WW after the
format change, that's their call, and nobody else in the whole wide world
gives a shit. But that's not what the harpies on this thread are saying.
They're saying they won't make time for the new mag, because they have
already psychically determined that it will suck. That's moronic.
(Stephen, by the way, is far from the worst example of the above
attitude, but it nonetheless applies.)
>That said, I would tend to encourage people to at least look at this if you
>see it at the local gaming shop or bookstore. Maybe it will suck, maybe
>not... Chris is right to encourage people to wait and see.
Thanx.
David R. Henry
> In future, it might make the articles more readable if 'return'
>were hit every 78 characters or so -- many of us are reading on screens
>which are 80 characters wide and which *don't* automatically word-wrap.
Hey, we're dealing with the company that brought out Wraith. Can we
be certain that posting wrap-around posts _isn't_ deliberate?
--
David R. Henry - Rogue Fan Club / Damn the death threats, full pizza ahead
"All you of Earth are IDIOTS!"-P9fOS / What was the question? -- Kate Bush
dhe...@plains.nodak.edu * Evolution: Give it some time, it'll grow on ya.
Jacob A Hester
That is now how I read any of those messages. I understand Stephen
(and others') point. Perhaps you dont; I shall attempt to rephrase.
The problem everyone has with the new proposed format is that what
it seems to be doing is adding extra pages (which, either now or in the long
run) will cost the consumers of WW (or Inphobia) extra money to get the same
gaming info. The problem lies in the fact that we will end up paying more
for something (ie, music and movie reviews) which most of us probably get
from other sources (ie, local newspaper). To get, say, your humorous and
catchy article "Fandom by Night: Your Handbook to Vampire Gamers" (WWM #42), I must pay for, and sift through, "The Black Crowes' "Ameroica": A Stones ripoff?" and "Does "Mary Shelley's Frankenstein" measure up?" I learned all I need to
know about these subjects from: my local newspsper (Greenville, SC's "The
News", a freebie local newspaper (Greenville's "Edge"), my college newspaper
(Clemson Univ's "The Tiger"), and from a plethora of freebie mags that seem
to end up in my mailbox (ie, Wired).
When I pay for a magazine in order to recieve gaming info, and am
satisfied with that publication, I don't wish to have to pay for more info
on non-gaming topics. This is not being "closed minded". This is being
practical. And one cannot say that it will not cost more: the only way one
could avoid it costing more is to cut space dedicated to gaming. This is,
perhaps, one of my biggest concerns.
So, please look at this with more of a placid, open mind, yourself:
We're not lamblasting the idea of another broad-scope magazine, although
this takes courage (when our publications staff did research on launching
a broad-base mag, if I'm not mistaken, econ failure rate for such mags were
better than 50%.). We just don't want to lose WWM, as it exists. We enjoy
it. We get what we need from it- fresh gaming info and ideas. And so we
speak up about it. This is the proper way to do things: if everyone were
to stay quiet and allow drastic changes to occur to something we enjoy so
much, then the enevitable change is going to happen, and we'll either pay
more for gaming info & ideas from WW in the long run, or we'll get less of
it.
Again, I ask you to reconsider pushing your staff and editor for this
change.
Thank you.
Jake
Stephen E Mynhier
need to correct him, Chris.
And I know it won't interest me because it has been described to me by the
editor. And in his reading his list of changes, I know that it won't
appeal to me. That's not attitute. That's a fact. I do not care if they
are covering those same things as the other mags even if it is a
"completely new angle." The fact is that if something does not appeal to
me, it will not appeal to me regardles of the angle it is approached at.
Now, for you to come out and post that I said that my mind is closed is
absurd. Read a bit. Learn what I am saying and keep in mind that
I do not have a closed mind simply because I disagree with you.
And I will grant that there are many things out there that I have not
tried and would probably enjoy if I had the opportunity to try them.
But we are not talking about sky-diving or zen meditation here. We
are talking about a magazine that is, by their own admission, going to
cover topics which I know that I have no interest in. That is not to
say that I haven't tried and therefore do not know if I have an interest.
That IS, however, to say something that I know I do not have an interest in.
Now it is about time that you begin to give a shit because it is time that
you realize that this is your pay we are talking about here. To simplify:
If people do not buy this new magazine, YOU do not get paid. Period.
Therefore, it seems to me that you would be one of the first persons
to care what I, a consumer, think of your product.
And I am afraid that I must admit that I am not clairvoyant, so I have
no method of "psychically" <your word> determining it will suck. Nothing
so grand and elaborate. Just plain, simple common sense tells me that
if Whitewolf announces that additions of things that I already know that I
do not like, then if the changes are implemented, I will not like them.
No psychics needed.
And you are correct, Chris, you have not insulted anyone on the net. I, for
one, would never be offended at being called "moronic."
Moronically yours,
Stephen
CWM
Jacob A Hester <jac...@hubcap.clemson.edu> wrote:
>Chris,
> That is now how I read any of those messages. I understand Stephen
>(and others') point. Perhaps you dont; I shall attempt to rephrase.
>
1. You're precisely the kind of netter I excluded from my first flame -
somebody with a genuine concern for the long-term welfare of the mag. I
was responding to those people who used the press release as an excuse to
flame Ken personally for not being a good little net.drone, not you.
2. When a magazine increases its circulation and ups its outside ad
count, many things might happen, but a price increase is probably not
going to be one of them. More pages aren't going to make Inphobia's price
increase in any serious way. Better production values might, but WW's are
already top-of-the-line.
3. I don't think Inphobia's coverage of mass media is liable to be very
close to anything published in a daily newspaper, or even a student paper
or alternative weekly.
CWM
>need to correct him, Chris.
>
>And I know it won't interest me because it has been described to me by the
>editor. And in his reading his list of changes, I know that it won't
>appeal to me. That's not attitute. That's a fact. I do not care if they
>are covering those same things as the other mags even if it is a
>"completely new angle." The fact is that if something does not appeal to
>me, it will not appeal to me regardles of the angle it is approached at.
So you don't listen to music, never watch movies and don't read? Hmmm,
guess the magazine won't appeal to you.
>Now, for you to come out and post that I said that my mind is closed is
>absurd. Read a bit. Learn what I am saying and keep in mind that
>I do not have a closed mind simply because I disagree with you.
As I already said, I do not assume that you have a closed mind simply
because you don't agree with me, I don't agree with you because you've
demonstrated a closed mind.
>And I will grant that there are many things out there that I have not
>tried and would probably enjoy if I had the opportunity to try them.
>But we are not talking about sky-diving or zen meditation here. We
>are talking about a magazine that is, by their own admission, going to
>cover topics which I know that I have no interest in. That is not to
>say that I haven't tried and therefore do not know if I have an interest.
>That IS, however, to say something that I know I do not have an interest in.
God, this is so sad. Stephen, I can understand you not having the time or
energy to expand your horizons. What I can't understand is your
persistant and adament pride in the fact.
>Now it is about time that you begin to give a shit because it is time that
>you realize that this is your pay we are talking about here. To simplify:
>If people do not buy this new magazine, YOU do not get paid. Period.
>Therefore, it seems to me that you would be one of the first persons
>to care what I, a consumer, think of your product.
Oh wow, like, I might lose my $100 a month from WW and have to sell my
cat to the violin factory. My paycheck is completely irrelevant both to
the case and to my lifestyle. The only think I'd really lose if WW went
under is my voice, and a good author can always find a place for his
stuff to be read. Heck, if WW dropped dead tomorrow I'd probably be able
to take Mom's Basement straight to some other gaming mag, people seem to
like it.
On the other hand, if the Inphobia thing does take off, I'm getting out
to a much wider, larger and potentially better connected audience. I'm
willing to take the chance.
>And I am afraid that I must admit that I am not clairvoyant, so I have
>no method of "psychically" <your word> determining it will suck. Nothing
>so grand and elaborate. Just plain, simple common sense tells me that
>if Whitewolf announces that additions of things that I already know that I
>do not like, then if the changes are implemented, I will not like them.
>No psychics needed.
Things you don't like? Don't you do ANYTHING except game for fun? If
that's really the problem, then I take it back. Your mind's not narrow,
your life is.
>And you are correct, Chris, you have not insulted anyone on the net. I, for
>one, would never be offended at being called "moronic."
>
Nonetheless, I would never call you or anybody else "moronic." If,
however, you espouse an attitude that I consider moronic I won't hesitate
to so characterize it, as I did.
CWM
Bruce Baugh <bru...@teleport.com> wrote:
>c...@pentagon.io.com (CWM) wrote:
>
>:I mean, Ken types up a announcement about a MAJOR change in direction for
>:the mag, and what does he get? "`Net Punk'? Is that an insult? I think
>:I'm being INSULTED." "Yeah, and he didn't wrap his lines right either."
>:"Yeah, an, an, an he fucked up Ars Magica too!"
>
>Synecdoche is a form of metaphor in which mentioning a part signifies the
>whole (or the whole signifies the part). Our, or at least my, quoting of
>"Hey Net Punks" is an example of synecdoche in action.
Ooooh, big words. You must know what you're talking about.
>However, for those unfamiliar with the concept of allusion, I'll spell it
>out.
>
>Ken Cliffe's letter demonstrates appalling ignorance of net.interests
>combined with an overweening sense of hip self-importance. Neither of
>those interests me. I'm tired of people telling me how cool they are,
>rather than simply presenting interesting info and ideas for me to read
>myself - it's why I no longer take WIRED, let alone MONDO 2000, regularly,
>and prefer to stick with WHOLE EARTH REVIEW, GNOSIS, and SCIENCE NEWS,
>where I can get the content without all the chrome.
Well, OK, fine. You don't like the Punk attitude, so you don't read
things that display it. But that's no excuse to go slamming punks or
punkishness or those who tend to the needs of punks. In short, if you
have something substantive to say about the matter, say on. But just
sneering at punk is a pretty pointless exercise. I mean, that's just as
much mindless posturing as anything in the punk aesthetic, isn't it?
>The denizens of the net include a disproportionate number of preening
>idiots. If someone has a scheme to make money off them, more power to
>him; I'm willing to listen to the argument that it is the moral duty of
>smart people to take money from those sufficiently stupid. However,
>phrasing an argument that treats all prospective readers as belonging to
>a very narrow lil' sub-culture is unwise at best. In fact, it is itself
>downright stupid.
Oh crap, Ken implied nothing of the time. What the release did imply was
that there's a certain kind of attitude that WW plays to, and that after
the Inphobia change people who respond to that attitude can still find it
in the magazine. If you're not the kind of person the magazine is
targeted at, that's your get out. All I'm objecting to is this sadistic
urge to sneer at those who don't happen to share your attitudes.
Everybody has a frame of reference that's somewhat limited. That's why
they call it a "frame." If your not interested in the magazine then your
not interested. So SHUT UP about it and go do something that interests
you. I don't have much time, myself, for Jazz, but that doesn't mean I
feel a need to flame anybody who posts anything about jazz music on a
music-related sub.
>Contrast the net.presence of Wizards of the Coast, or Steve Jackson Games,
>or the folks who put out THEATRIX, or Atlas Games, or any of many others.
>(No blame by omission intended here, folks.) In every case, these people
>have made an effort to _ask_ or otherwise ascertain what the interests
>of us'ns may be. Cliffe, on the other hand, undertakes to lecture. I
>don't go for lectures.
Oh yeah, Ken assumed that netters like to read, watch movies, listen to
tunes and collect things, and he didn't even ask us first. How dare he.
Actually, he didn't even assume that. All he said was, "this is what
we're going to do, I hope you give it a chance." Every other attitude and
implication that anybody else has read into the press release is, as far
as I can tell, pure paranoia.
Bruce Baugh
:And WW is coming at the popular culture from a completely new angle. It's
:completely different from the music mags, completely different from the
:techno-punk mags, sure as hell different from the EW/People mass media
:axis. They last time anybody tried anything even remotely like this on
:the adult, prozine scale was Jim Steranko's mag in the '70s (Preview?)
In what sense is this different from either Factsheet Five (either in the
glorious days of Mike Gunderloy, or the merely very good days recently) or
bOING bOING? Or, for that matter, Whole Earth Review? In a 1994 picked at
random, WER surveyed subjects ranging from OVER THE EDGE to Scott McCloud's
UNDERSTANDING COMICS to the religious symbolism of the tree to the futility
of efforts at net censorship to business simulation computer programs for
kids to Brian Eno's efforts at developing a new theoretical framework for
music appreciation. b0ING b0ING hasn't nearly that range, but can still
give me Robert Anton Wilson and his ilk. The Comics Journal again has a
narrower focus, but can provided regular exposure to the whole gamut of
non-superhero stuff with interviews that sometimes run more than a hundred
pages, essays by people directly involved, and reviews that range from the
horribly bad to the wonderfully good.
What, exactly, is Inphobia's edge on any of this?
Now, you've commented about people prejudging in advance, so let me
explain _why_ I, for one, am doing so. Y'see, I suffer from a rare but
catastrophic enzyme deficiency, a form of porphyria, which has driven my
immune system berserk - I react in ways ranging up to full-blown seizure-
type episodes, fugue states, and coma to a few hundred things, both
products of my own body and less-than-exotic environmental stuff like
smoke, NCR paper, and chlorine. (I've also got unrelated neurological
hang-ups, but let's not complicate things too much.) My energy is limited.
If I foray out one day, that's likely it for the week. All of this puts a
certain cramp in my budgets, so that my money supply is limited. Simply
getting to a game or magazine shop is a big deal physically, and I have
very little extra to blow on speculative ventures. If you can offer a good
case to look at Inphobia, I will. Otherwise, it's not so much that I
won't go out of my way but that I can't.
Net.talk about Wraith, for example, did generate a sale - I liked what I
read about the contents, enough to get me past the ghastly cover. And I'm
glad I did. So far, the new magazine is utterly failing to do anything
similar.
Stephen E Mynhier
read, although at $5.50 a shot, frequent movie going is not well within a
college student's budget. Music? Oh yes, let me demonstrate how much
I don't listen to music, or how narrow my mind is, shall we? Lycia, Concrete
Blonde, DM, Violent Femmes, Black Aria, Orff, Koto music of Japan,
Tchaikovsky, PoTO, BB King, Charlie Bird, Tom Petty, etc., get the idea?
And books? Oh my many books...I have my Winnie the Pooh and Tigger colouring
books, my Lovecraft, my cokkbooks, my American Lit books, my Heinlein books,
etc., Oh, Chris, you are so right. I don't read either.
I never said that I didn't do those things. I said that I have no interest
in reading about those things.
A closed mind? Chris, please do enlighten me as to how I have in any way
demonstrated that I have a closed mind. If you will recall my original
post, I posted out how silly and superficial everyone was being by
insulting Ken. I am sincerly concerned with Whitewolf removing from
distribution as product which I enjoy and purchase. Now if that makes my
mind closed, then so be it!
Chris, it seems that you have drifted well off the subjects and have
attempted to turn my concern for a product I enjoy into your
own personal insult war waged against me. Certainly you have a far better
way of spending your time, or perhaps we must look into other options.
Psychologically, people tend to insult others about things that they feel
they are lacking in their own life. Please, Chris, do not continue your
petty stream on name calling. If you wish to carry on an intelligent
conversation/debate concerning the replacement of Whitewolf magazine
with Inphobia, then by all means continue to do so. If, however, you
wish to satisfy petty and childish feelings in inadequacy by insulting
other people, then please do so elsewhere, because I don't think anyone
here wants to hear you do so.
Now, my horizons, my time, and my energy is not the topic of this
conversation. And I really don't remember you ever being privvy to this
information or it being any of your business. Please, refrain from
drifting off of the topic of Whitewolf magazines and direct connections.
Furthermore, and hopefully for the last time, I do significantly more
than game (please read previous posts if you happen to have forgotten
any of this, Chris). But that is not the point. The point is, as was
pointed out earlier, that Whitewolf magazine fills a specific niche. I
have not seen any other magazine to do so. Therefore, I personally have
something to lose if the format changes, even if you do not, Chris.
And if your column and writing is as noteworthy as you appear to believe
that it is, then you should have no trouble being hired/contracted by other
magazines which can connect you to "a much wider, larger and potentially
better connected audience."
Ever so sincerly,
Stephen "Well, if they take away my Whitewolf magazine, then I still have
my Tigger colouring books" Mynhier
CWM
> Let's clarify here:
> If a magazine is doing really well, they have no need to make major
>changes in format. Slight alterations would be made in an attempt to
>improve what is already a good thing. If a magazine is doing poorly, they
>will then try to completely overhaul the magazine because it is not doing
>well. The consumer is obviously not pleased with the magazine's product
>and consequently is not buying it. Therefore, the magazine, realizing
>that the public does not like what they offer, will implement major changes
>in an attempt to get more readers by appealing to a different group
>or the same group by using a different style of magazine.
No, you're wrong.
This is a generalization, of course, and all generalizations are false,
but if a magazine's doing poorly the editors will tinker with it for
awhile, then cancel it if things don't change. Major comprehensive
rethinkings usually only happen when the mag is doing well, because then
it has extra money in its budget to finance the changeover, and because
then the suits are more inclined to trust a successful editor than a
flagging one if he says he wants to take a chance.
> Now, I certainly hope that you are not speaking as a representative
>for Whitewolf because your attitude in no way reflects the attitude of the
>people at Whitewolf that I know. I resent your "I don't care what Whitewolf
>consumers want" attitude. Let me spell out the publishing industry for you.
>If don't care about your customers, you don't do well. Let us take a look
>at alt.games.whitewolf, a newsgroup DEDICATED to whitewolf gaming. Now,
>it seems pretty apparent that this large group of whitewolf fans does not
>want this "new and completely orignal" magazine that you readily compare
>to Entertainment Weekly and sounds remarkable like Details, Link, Wired, and
>any of a half-dozen other "new and completely orignal" magazines. Now if we
>take this as a fairly representative sample of Whitewolf consumers, then
>you can predict that Whitewolf will loose well over half of your consumers.
>It sounds to me like this makes "my problem" Whitewolf's problem and that
>makes it your problem, since it is my money that Whitewolf is not getting
>to pay your salary.
First of all, I don't speak for anything except common sense.
Second, I'm NOT saying WW shouldn't listen to its customers, but any time
you make a chance this big there will always be a radical reactionary
fringe crying "betrayal." A publisher can't afford to listen to such
nancy-boy minorities, or nothing new or interesting will ever get done.
Third, let's suppose your projection of "WW losing half its readers"
after the format change is accurate (it's actually ludicrous, but we'll
let that go). If, at the same time, the format change opens up enough new
markets and generates enough publicity that the magazine is exposed to
say, 3 to 5 times the old readership, WW still emerges clearly the
winner. Of course, there's no guarantee that the new mag will hold on to
that new readership, but that's Ken's lookout, and it's also the nature
of the Biz. So even if it does drive off a whole brigade of old-timers
(something that there's absolutely no evidence for, other than your
crystal ball) the change is still a reasonable risk with a potentially
formidable payoff.
> Insults, dear Chris, would include attempts to compare anyone
>who disagrees with you to Rush Limbaugh, since you obviously do not like
>Rush. You are comparing someone to something that you do not like. You
>are insulting them. Follow?
Just for the record, what I said about Rush was to imply that the people
who hang out on the alt.fan.rush-limbaugh newsgroup might possibly, in
general, not be particularly atuned to the subtleties of the punk
aesthetic. Do you honestly consider that an innacurate statement? Where's
the insult? If I said, "There's about as much Christmas spirit on this
sub as there is in soc.religion.islam," would I be insulting Moslems? Do
me a favor and roll back your paranoia meter a few points if you want to
talk to me.
> Now, as far as knew, Whitewolf has a magazine for supporting their
>games. And as far as I knew, it was called, appropriately enough,
>Whitewolf magazine. Now if I had a subscription to EW, Details, or any
>other of those dozen "broader" and "new and completely orignal" magazines
>or I purchased any of them on a regular basis, then if Whitewolf were to
>come out with their own "new and completely original magazine" like EW,
>Details, etc., in addition to their gaming magazine, then I would be willing
>to try it. But I do not. And I will not. And neither will many other
>people. And remember whose problem that is? You yourself said that
>Whitewolf was doing this to make money, but just remember that we (the
>consumers) support Whitewolf games and products with our purchases, and
>it is by no means unfair or unreasonable to expect Whitewolf to support
>their own products and the consumers of their products.
Well, just as a matter of historical record, WW had a magazine long
before they had any games to support, and they have always strongly
resisted the implication that WW magazine is a house organ. In fact, (and
this is pure speculation on my part) it would not surprise me to learn
that the growing public perception that the magazine was a WOD house
organ, rather than a general gaming magazine representing a certain
spectrum of mood and tone, but no one company, might have had something
to do with the decision to change missions. Like I've said before, if you
want a WoD magazine, write to WW and suggest one, but don't whine because
WW is no longer a WoD magazine, because that's never what it was supposed
to be anyway.
Finally, your paragraph above makes an interesting point. There are lots
of general gaming magazines out there too, buy among all those choices
you found something unique which lead you to White Wolf. How can you be
so sure that that unique element (whatever it might be for you) won't
carry over to the new magazine and the broader mission? That's the
fundamental hypocracy behind your whole line of reasoning. "It was good
when it did games, but it will suck when it does other stuff." It just
doesn't add up.
CWM
Bruce Baugh <bru...@teleport.com> wrote:
>c...@pentagon.io.com (CWM) wrote:
>
>:And WW is coming at the popular culture from a completely new angle. It's
>:completely different from the music mags, completely different from the
>:techno-punk mags, sure as hell different from the EW/People mass media
>:axis. They last time anybody tried anything even remotely like this on
>:the adult, prozine scale was Jim Steranko's mag in the '70s (Preview?)
>
>In what sense is this different from either Factsheet Five (either in the
>glorious days of Mike Gunderloy, or the merely very good days recently) or
>bOING bOING? Or, for that matter, Whole Earth Review? In a 1994 picked at
>random, WER surveyed subjects ranging from OVER THE EDGE to Scott McCloud's
>UNDERSTANDING COMICS to the religious symbolism of the tree to the futility
>of efforts at net censorship to business simulation computer programs for
>kids to Brian Eno's efforts at developing a new theoretical framework for
>music appreciation. b0ING b0ING hasn't nearly that range, but can still
>give me Robert Anton Wilson and his ilk. The Comics Journal again has a
>narrower focus, but can provided regular exposure to the whole gamut of
>non-superhero stuff with interviews that sometimes run more than a hundred
>pages, essays by people directly involved, and reviews that range from the
>horribly bad to the wonderfully good.
>
>What, exactly, is Inphobia's edge on any of this?
It will be different because it comes from people with a different set of
aesthetic priorities. The White Wolf guys are gamers, with gamers
interests. These interests might overlap with those of techno-punks, club
rats, comics fans or whoever, but they're going to be prioritized
differently and they're going to have a fresh slant. Just like WW had a
fresh slant on games that set it apart from other gaming mags, but even
moreso, because instead of playing to a niche market in a niche hobby,
the magazine will be addressing the whole spectrum of popular culture
from the new angle.
>Now, you've commented about people prejudging in advance, so let me
>explain _why_ I, for one, am doing so. Y'see, I suffer from a rare but
>catastrophic enzyme deficiency, a form of porphyria, which has driven my
>immune system berserk - I react in ways ranging up to full-blown seizure-
>type episodes, fugue states, and coma to a few hundred things, both
>products of my own body and less-than-exotic environmental stuff like
>smoke, NCR paper, and chlorine. (I've also got unrelated neurological
>hang-ups, but let's not complicate things too much.) My energy is limited.
>If I foray out one day, that's likely it for the week. All of this puts a
>certain cramp in my budgets, so that my money supply is limited. Simply
>getting to a game or magazine shop is a big deal physically, and I have
>very little extra to blow on speculative ventures. If you can offer a good
>case to look at Inphobia, I will. Otherwise, it's not so much that I
>won't go out of my way but that I can't.
Well, Bruce, we all make calls like that, and we all sometimes miss out
because of it. I've lost count of the number of times I've dropped a
comic book when a creator I liked left, only to find that the new guy has
taken the book to places no comic has ever been before. That's my choice,
my loss. I don't whine about it, and I don't try to justify it by bashing
the thing I'm missing out on.
When a magazine makes a change like this, it knows that change will shake
off a few oldline readers. However, the potential exists for it to pick
up many, many times that number of completely new readers. Some times you
have to shake off the deadwood.
>Net.talk about Wraith, for example, did generate a sale - I liked what I
>read about the contents, enough to get me past the ghastly cover. And I'm
>glad I did. So far, the new magazine is utterly failing to do anything
>similar.
>
"So far" consists of one extremely preliminary press release. Is your
mind still open to be changed, or have you completely made it up already?
If the magazine has done nothing to attract your interest, fine, wait
until it does and if it doesn't don't buy it. It's ludicrous, however, to
form a conclusive opinion at this point.
CWM
>alternate between liking your witty comments in WW and hating you for:
>
>1) Insulting posts on rec.arts.comics.misc, where anyone who doesn't
>agree with you must be an idiot
Oh crap. I never insult anybody anywhere on the net, and there's a
difference between calling a stupid idea a stupid idea and accusing
somebody of being an idiot. Anybody who can't sit still to listen to a
strong dissenting opinion doesn't belong on the net. Just because I don't
tolerate bullshit doesn't make me a pit-bull, unless you're the kind who
has to justify his prejudices by pretending they're universal truths. In
short, if you don't agree with what I say, tell me why I was a moron for
saying something so stupid, but save the crap about how I'm just not
sensitive to the emotional needs of whatever poor schlub happened to
articulate the particular opinion I'm responding to. I don't know Schulb
and I don't care if he's sensitive, I'm interested in dissecting his
opinions and maybe raising some reasonable alternatives.
>2) Insulting comments about gamers in general. Your column in WW seems
>predicated on the assumption that gamers are lame. Sometimes you make good
>use of this (I loved the column ripping on types of Vampire players), but
>too often you come across as rather mean-spirited. Which is your right,
>but no one has to like it. In any case, let's see what you have to say...
It's predicated on the assumption that gamers are human, with a fairly
normal distribution of lamers and cool folk. Anybody who finds that
opinion insulting is welcome to get his ego stroked elsewhere.
>Well, I think some of the posts on this do rather resemble whining.
>However, "Net Punks" *is* a rather poor way to address the prospective
>audience. It implies a tone of speaking down to the audience. I'm not
>going to say Ken intended this - but it doesn't get things off to a good
>start, now does it?
Obviously not. But just because the announcement triggered a massive and
absurd over-reaction doesn't mean Ken "had it coming."
>We don't care if you think we're *cool*, that's the fucking point! To
>assume (and you *know* what happens when you assume, right?) that just
>because people like WW magazine and it's games, that they are punk
>anarchist industrial-music listening fiends is pretty moronic. I mean, in
>my case it's true, but what about everyone else? :-)
Look, WW publishes "Gothic-Punk" RPGs, right? That's their target
audience, and has been for years, and they've made no secret of it. If
you don't exactly fit that mold but like the games anyway, presumably you
should already know what aspect does appeal to you, so nothing to whine
about there. "Net-punks" is simply a pretty reasonable address for WW
fans on the net, and the massive outspewing of shocked whining it
percipitated is nothing more than an interesting excersise in mass paranoia.
>I think most of the posts tried to make this point - Ken's entire message
>seemed to be making bad assumptions about what the readers of WW wanted.
Or anyway, what the ones who bothered to post wanted. But nobody's
arguing with anybody's right to express skepticism or offer constructive
criticism. I'm simply annoyed at the closed minds and unwarrented
hostility that this thread's generated. All I'm asking for is a slightly
open mind and a small dose of perspective.
>Well... yes, the market *could* support another entertainment rag. But
>it's not going to be easy, it's a pretty well saturated market as it is.
>What is this new magazine going to offer the "Net Punk" that Wired, Mondo
>2000, 2600, or Details doesn't?
What does WW offer the gamer that Dragon, Pyramid or Challenge doesn't?
And it's never easy, but sometimes you gotta take a chance.
>Magazines are designed for whatever suits their purpose - with as broad or
>restricted a focus as they need. I'd argue that WW was better off focusing
>on gaming, with a little bit of attention to side issues, than trying to
>mutate into the latest, hottest, cutting-edge megazine. But the
>circulation figures a year from now will tell the tale, I suppose. I just
>know I most likely will not be there to care.
And how, pray tell, do you know that? Not even going to take a glance at
the first issue, are you?
>Well, I'm sure you are correct. I guess we would have to assume that some
>thought went into launching this effort. A pity more thought was not put
>into the announcement - it was sloppy and ineffective.
>As far as the game market being a ghetto, you are correct - someone pointed
>out recently (maybe even in this thread, I'm getting forgetful in my old
>age) that RPG's might not really have a bright future. Magic the Addiction
>seems to have sucked huge amounts of $$$ from the industry, and that sort
>of thing is hard to recover from. However, history is full of ambitious
>people who failed due to overextending themselves. I'd rather see a
>cautious effort to expand than this total overhaul. But like I said
>before, we'll see.
Cautious effort can only take you so far. Sometimes you have to put your
chips on the table.
>>Finally, to those couple of folks who expressed sincere and thoughtful
>>concern about the change in direction . . . yeah, we know. But give the
>>new magazine a try anyway, you might like it. As I've been trying to tell
>>people for the last year, there's a lot more out there besides gaming,
>>and a lot of it is pretty interesting.
>
>You are correct. However, it's possible to get this message across without
>telling people they suck because they are gamers. Think about it.
What the HELL are you talking about? Nobody's said any such thing, or
even anything that can be remotely construed to imply that. Are you guys
getting insulted by Ken on some other sub that I don't know about or
something? Where the hell do you GET this stuff.
James Nicoll
>
>What does WW offer the gamer that Dragon, Pyramid or Challenge doesn't?
It offers *me* a small addition to my income, plus, when I crack
open a copy, useful adverts, articles orthagonal to my interests, an
obnoxious editorial style and game reviews which are often charmingly
out of date.
Make that a small and declining part of my income -- the continual
editorial comments have convinced several of my customers to drop the magazine.
James Nicoll
--
"I'm glad I saw the galaxy, but I want to die in Brooklyn."
Douglas L. Vandenburgh
: Finally, your paragraph above makes an interesting point. There are lots
: of general gaming magazines out there too, buy among all those choices
: you found something unique which lead you to White Wolf. How can you be
: so sure that that unique element (whatever it might be for you) won't
: carry over to the new magazine and the broader mission? That's the
: fundamental hypocracy behind your whole line of reasoning. "It was good
: when it did games, but it will suck when it does other stuff." It just
: doesn't add up.
Actually, the reason I, and probably a few others, pick up WW isn't
because of anything unique about it. I pick it up because it's about
gaming. I may find something in there that interests me and helps
me come up with new stuff for my games. I don't find it any more
useful for it's GothpunkKenDoll attitude than I find Shadis useful
for it's geeksonParade attitude.
I think the question I am asking is this: What sort of qualifications
do you guys think you have to cover these new topics? Bringing
a gamer's point of view to topics isn't going to get me to read
a magazine on topics that are quite well covered by experts and/or
people and magazines I've grown to trust. In fact, having other
interests besides gaming often means I don't want to hear a gamer's
opinion on those other interests.
- Doug
Doug Dejulio
>> to cover topics which I know that I have no interest in. That is not
>> to say that I haven't tried and therefore do not know if I have an
>> interest. That IS, however, to say something that I know I do not
>> have an interest in.
>
> God, this is so sad. Stephen, I can understand you not having the time
> or energy to expand your horizons. What I can't understand is your
> persistant and adament pride in the fact.
Stop being a prick and listen to what he's saying.
Let's use the example of skydiving. Let's say I tried it, and didn't
like it. Then someone came up to me and said "try it naked, you'll
like that", and I did try it, and didn't like it. Then someone else
came and said "try it dressed as Elvis, you'll like it", and I tried,
and didn't like it. Let's say I've tried it a dozen times in a dozen
different ways and still didn't like it.
Now someone is coming up to me and saying "try it wearing black
clothes and fake fangs, you'll like it". If I say "no thanks, I
already know I don't like skydiving", am I being closed minded? Does
it mean I "don't have the time or energy to expand my horizons"?
Mind you, I may pick up a copy of the new rag myself, or at least give
it a browse on the newsstand or at a library.
--
Doug DeJulio
mailto:dd...@pitt.edu
http://www.pitt.edu/~ddj/
Paul N. Nagata
: In article <3cdkv0$d...@desiree.teleport.com>,
: Bruce Baugh <bru...@teleport.com> wrote:
: >c...@pentagon.io.com (CWM) wrote:
: >
: >:I mean, Ken types up a announcement about a MAJOR change in direction for
: >:the mag, and what does he get? "`Net Punk'? Is that an insult? I think
: >:I'm being INSULTED." "Yeah, and he didn't wrap his lines right either."
: >:"Yeah, an, an, an he fucked up Ars Magica too!"
: >
: >Synecdoche is a form of metaphor in which mentioning a part signifies the
: >whole (or the whole signifies the part). Our, or at least my, quoting of
: >"Hey Net Punks" is an example of synecdoche in action.
:
: Ooooh, big words. You must know what you're talking about.
Well, I thought that I would throw in my two cents....
I had no real problem with the first post (Ken Cliff's, that is). Ok,
he sounded a bit stupid and mildly insulting (oh well), however these
recent posts from Chris McCubbin are getting a bit irritating. In a later
post, he makes the comment that he is not insulting people (or something to
that effect) I personally think that the above comment would insult me.
I have come to the conclusion that Ken Cliff probably acted out of
ignorance, but McCubbin (who has presumably more net.experience) is not.
In closing, I would say to say to Ken Cliff...learn more about the net
before making a second posting. (Know your customers and all such)
To Chris McCubbin, I would like to say BUGGER OFF! Coming off as rude
because of ignorance is understandable, but deliberately insulting
people and being a prick is not.
Have a nice day,
Paul Nagata
PS. I don't care if you flame me, I'm in Hell already.
rev. roy crisman
>Hey, "Net Punks,"
>Christ, but you guys are pathetic, you know that?
>I mean, Ken types up a announcement about a MAJOR change in direction for
>the mag, and what does he get? "`Net Punk'? Is that an insult? I think
>I'm being INSULTED." "Yeah, and he didn't wrap his lines right either."
>"Yeah, an, an, an he fucked up Ars Magica too!"
If the only problem was 'net fucks' and word wrapping, it'd be a
different story. The only WW material I own is that WW#8 I got sent for
free, long long ago. Yet, I'm a potential customer sitting here just
bursting with money to spend. Not going to Poseurs-R-Us, though.
>"Net Punks" is a COMPLIMENT, fergosh sakes. What do you want? "Hey, fine,
>upstanding net citizens." "Hey, tight-assed reactionary net dorks" (come
>to think of it, from the response so far the latter would have worked
>pretty well). Good God, is it possible that in 1994 anybody this side of
>alt.fan.rush.limbaugh would think that being a "punk" is anything other
>than a state earnestly to be desired? How sad. I used to think you guys
>were cool . . .
As someone who listens to punk music, and has had blue hair for the last
8 some years (though this time is the last, people keep asking me if I
like Green Day and Nirvana) if anything I feel patronized. Patronized
by some tightass who doesn't like or understand the internet or net
punks or even their marketing section. Patronized just as anyone did
when their parents/teachers/whatever tried to use the 'jive' of the
times. Hey o Daddy-O lets go for a cruise. Groovy d00d. I've got some
rad Warez to trade. Ye-fucking-ha. Being a 'punk' (short for
cyberpunk, which means modern tragic-hipness) is so damn cool. And Ken
knows that since we are radical enough to find alt.anything we MUST be
radical d00dz, eh?
Hell, I'm even more what appears to be WW's target audience. I wear too
much black, I smoke cloves, I'm an angstful counterculture artist who
takes himself far too seriously. And I think their games are silly.
The only people I know who are intense WoD fans all seem to be very
Conservative, Far Right Wing types (who enjoy Rush cause he's right,
dammit). I don't understand what the appeal is for them to play what
Rush says is wrong with this Great Country (tm). Frankly, I don't care
if this black clad cyber-vamp anarchist 'tude is cool. i don't want to
be cool, I just want to be roy. But Ken has this amazing power to KNOW
that I AM cool, that I am REALLY cool. He doesn't know me, hell,
doesn't even understand usenet, something he'd at least have a chance of
catching on to, but He Understands how tragically hip n cool I am. The
whole tone of the post seemed to be 'Look here! Advertising Hype. Buy
Now and Even You Can Be Cool. Look At Us, We're Rad d00dz!'
>To the guy who said that if the new mag tried to cover anything other than
>games it would necessarily do an "inadequate" job, get a grip. Magazines are
>designed to cover a wide spectrum of topics. Entertainment Weekly has a
>much broader mandate on not too many more pages and does a pretty decent
>job. Of if you're too cool for EW, take your pick. There's a whole bunch
>of excellent wide-spectrum entertainment mags out there, and there's
>plenty of room for one more.
Course EW is a WEEKLY which kills your argument. They have on a montly
basis 4-5 times the space.
>Finally, to those couple of folks who expressed sincere and thoughtful
>concern about the change in direction . . . yeah, we know. But give the
>new magazine a try anyway, you might like it. As I've been trying to tell
>people for the last year, there's a lot more out there besides gaming,
>and a lot of it is pretty interesting.
You just don't understand. I want a gaming mag that focuses on gaming.
Anyone who needs their gaming company telling them what movies are
Rad-C00l, where to buy cloves, the shade of black for this year's
vampire-wannabe fashions, etc. is REALLY in trouble. These people could
only be harmed by getting it all from a single source. It means they
don't need to leave the house for yet another week. I really doubt a
facetious goth-boy-poseur mag is going to tell me what music I'm going
to like, wheter I'm into gothic music or not. They should of course
inthe name of diversity cover country music in the mag, too. And
Pop-Noise, jazz, classical music beyond backround music for your Rad
Campaign, etc. They should cover the Hollywood figures who's lifestyles
most are like that of the vampires, too. If I wanted to waste money on
crap I didn't need in a magazine, I've plenty to choose from already.
Maybe you should re-think your approach to 'there's a lot more out ther
besides gaming'. There is. Why don't YOU go find it as opposed to
wanting a gaming magazine to drop it in your lap?
roymeo
.sigs suck
Bruce Baugh
:Ooooh, big words. You must know what you're talking about.
Okay, so you really DON'T want my money. Fair enough. It's good to have the
matter resolved that clearly.
Everyone should have standards that guide their purchasing. One of mine is
that I don't give money to people who will be condescending or insulting to
me for anything not urgent - I have to put up with harassment from the staffs
of doctors I need to see, because medical care is a big priority for me. I
don't have to take it from people providing me with entertainment or
commentary.
Some people, I realize, _do_ enjoy mutual condescension and the like. That's
fine. It's good that there are outlets for such things, since their wants
and needs are just as legitimate as mine. But it's not my thing, so I'll
look elsewhere.
I do appreciate, by the way, your effort to explain what may be distinctive
about Inphobia. That was a big help, and if the press release gets rewritten
you might want to see that more such details are included. Since the primary
difference would be an attitude and perspective that bore me at best and
severely annoy me at worst, clearly Inphobia is not the thing for me.
CWM
>read, although at $5.50 a shot, frequent movie going is not well within a
>college student's budget. Music? Oh yes, let me demonstrate how much
>I don't listen to music, or how narrow my mind is, shall we? Lycia, Concrete
>Blonde, DM, Violent Femmes, Black Aria, Orff, Koto music of Japan,
>Tchaikovsky, PoTO, BB King, Charlie Bird, Tom Petty, etc., get the idea?
>And books? Oh my many books...I have my Winnie the Pooh and Tigger colouring
>books, my Lovecraft, my cokkbooks, my American Lit books, my Heinlein books,
>etc., Oh, Chris, you are so right. I don't read either.
>I never said that I didn't do those things. I said that I have no interest
>in reading about those things.
Oh get a grip, Stephen. Nobody's persecuting you and nobody's insulted
you. Since it seems to have flown straight over your head, let me explain
what should have been obvious if you weren't so eager to pick a fight. I
never really believed or seriously charged that you were the
kind of obsessive with no interests or activities other than gaming. My
questions to that effect were intended to establish what you've just
confirmed, that you do have in interest in the new things that Inphobia
will cover.
So you have an interest in games and a desire to read magazines that
cater to that interest, but you have an interest in movies, music and
books and no desire to read anything that caters to that interest? Isn't
that just a tad arbitrary and unreasonable? It looks to me like it is,
and that's why I say you're demonstrating a closed mind. If WW has met
your need for gaming related journalism, why can't Inphobia meet a
similer need for journalism relating to some of your other interests, in
addition to continuing to offer interesting gaming stuff?
>A closed mind? Chris, please do enlighten me as to how I have in any way
>demonstrated that I have a closed mind. If you will recall my original
>post, I posted out how silly and superficial everyone was being by
>insulting Ken. I am sincerly concerned with Whitewolf removing from
>distribution as product which I enjoy and purchase. Now if that makes my
>mind closed, then so be it!
Sincere concern is one thing. It's your prophecies of doom and ongoing
refusal to even consider that the new magazine might possibly have merit
to some reasonable reader that's closed minded.
>Chris, it seems that you have drifted well off the subjects and have
>attempted to turn my concern for a product I enjoy into your
>own personal insult war waged against me. Certainly you have a far better
>way of spending your time, or perhaps we must look into other options.
>Psychologically, people tend to insult others about things that they feel
>they are lacking in their own life. Please, Chris, do not continue your
>petty stream on name calling. If you wish to carry on an intelligent
>conversation/debate concerning the replacement of Whitewolf magazine
>with Inphobia, then by all means continue to do so. If, however, you
>wish to satisfy petty and childish feelings in inadequacy by insulting
>other people, then please do so elsewhere, because I don't think anyone
>here wants to hear you do so.
I've never insulted you or anybody else in this thread, Stephen, and I
haven't once called anybody a name. I've made my points as forcefully and
logically as I know how, and if you choose to avoid them by hiding behind
some non-existant malice on my part, that's your problem. If you're
interested in discussing Inphobia, why don't you talk about that, rather
than carping on my imaginary failings of character? I may have pissed
some people off, who may or may not have needed pissing off, but I've
never once descended to personal characterizations of the sort you heap
on me in the paragraph above.
>Now, my horizons, my time, and my energy is not the topic of this
>conversation. And I really don't remember you ever being privvy to this
>information or it being any of your business. Please, refrain from
>drifting off of the topic of Whitewolf magazines and direct connections.
The point, Stephen, was that Inphobia's going to be covering a lot of
subjects that are just about as important to gamers as gaming, and that
therefore these gamers might owe it to themselves to at least give it a
try before writing it off. Your own interests, as I suspected they
would, completely reinforce that point. I trust you can see the
relevence now.
>Furthermore, and hopefully for the last time, I do significantly more
>than game (please read previous posts if you happen to have forgotten
>any of this, Chris). But that is not the point. The point is, as was
>pointed out earlier, that Whitewolf magazine fills a specific niche. I
>have not seen any other magazine to do so. Therefore, I personally have
>something to lose if the format changes, even if you do not, Chris.
>And if your column and writing is as noteworthy as you appear to believe
>that it is, then you should have no trouble being hired/contracted by other
>magazines which can connect you to "a much wider, larger and potentially
>better connected audience."
And MY point, Stephen, is simply that you need to be open to at least the
possibility that if WW fills a specific niche now, it may well fill a
similer niche after the change. I have no idea why you find this simple
suggestion so personally threatening.
Greywolf
> How the hell does he know it won't interest him before he's even seen it?
Maybe it's because of poor marketing. That is a large part of business, after
all.
>>Pretty poor debate tactic here, Chris. So if we don't see things your way,
>>we have a narrow mindset? Gee, kinda like telling people that if they
>>don't like punk, they must be Lawrence Welk fans? Maybe *you* need to get
> Oh crap. His mind is narrow because he admitted it was closed in so many
> words. Whether or not he agrees with me has nothing to do with it. I'm
> not accusing Stephen of being narrow-minded because I don't like what he
> says, I don't like what he says because it's narrow minded.
You're not winning a friend here. I don't like punk, but that doesn't make me
a Lawrence Welk fan, thank you. I find certain elements of the "World of
Darkness" to be interesting from a role-playing point of view. That does not
necessarily mean I want to be a punk-rocker-neo-goth. Yes, I know I'm probably
just one of many squares to someone like you. Pardon me, but I'll manage to
survive your disdain.
There are a lot of fine folks who happen to like White Wolf products, and I
won't begrudge them their tastes. However, if this sort of insulting,
degrading, profanity-laden attitude is indicative of how White Wolf Games
and its associates present their products, I will be more than happy to spend
my gaming budget elsewhere. Respond to this post with flames all you like, but
insulting potential customers is not a recommended marketing strategy.
--
-Jordan .. PEACO...@cobra.uni.edu <New, improved, friendly,
.OO. Jordan Greywolf (Jordan Peacock) mushy, non-controversial
O/\O 1610 Parker .sig, due to popular
~~ Cedar Falls, IA 50613 demand! =) >
I love ... God, my family, my friends, unicorns, wolves, miscellaneous
critters, LARPs, RPGs, miniatures, doodling, sculpting, writing, gaming,
old cars, giant Japanese robots, anime, computer animation, and donuts. =)
CWM
Bruce Baugh <bru...@teleport.com> wrote:
>c...@pentagon.io.com (CWM) wrote:
>
>:Ooooh, big words. You must know what you're talking about.
>
>Okay, so you really DON'T want my money. Fair enough. It's good to have the
>matter resolved that clearly.
You were going to send me money? First I've heard about it. Or if you're
talking about purchasing White Wolf, you should know that my share of
your monthly White Wolf purchase price is about one half of one cent,
tops, which comes out to, let's see, roughly one eighth of one percent.
If you're threatening to stop buying the magazine because your annoyed
about something I said on the net, you're definitely cutting off your
nose to spite your face.
>Everyone should have standards that guide their purchasing. One of mine is
>that I don't give money to people who will be condescending or insulting to
>me for anything not urgent - I have to put up with harassment from the staffs
>of doctors I need to see, because medical care is a big priority for me. I
>don't have to take it from people providing me with entertainment or
>commentary.
So you're allowed to patronize us, and we're not allowed to respond in
kind. Very fair, there, Bruce. Well, I can live without your half cent a
month, so if you want more respectful treatment from me, I suggest you
consider avoiding sarcastic remarks that might be returned in kind,
rather than relying on economic pressures.
>Some people, I realize, _do_ enjoy mutual condescension and the like. That's
>fine. It's good that there are outlets for such things, since their wants
>and needs are just as legitimate as mine. But it's not my thing, so I'll
>look elsewhere.
Your thing, then, is apparently unilateral condesencion?
>I do appreciate, by the way, your effort to explain what may be distinctive
>about Inphobia. That was a big help, and if the press release gets rewritten
>you might want to see that more such details are included. Since the primary
>difference would be an attitude and perspective that bore me at best and
>severely annoy me at worst, clearly Inphobia is not the thing for me.
Since I have nothing to do with writing press releases for White Wolf
(thank God - what an odious, thankless job), or for that matter with any
editorial or administrative business of the magazine or publisher
whatsoever, other than the preperation of my own 2000 words per month, I
can't "see to" anything. But I'm glad you found my insights useful.
However, I can't see that there's going to be any significant change in
the attitude of the magazine whatsoever. If the current magazine's
attitude "bores and annoys" you that's probably a legitimate reason to
continue to avoid the new mag, but that's not what you said. As for a
broader perspective on pop culture being, in and of itself, "boring or
annoying," I hope I've made it clear by now that that's an attitude I
find perverse and self-defeating.
Taki Kogoma
<3cf8er$d...@pentagon.io.com> in rec.games.frp.misc:
>This is a generalization, of course, and all generalizations are false,
Gee. And I thought irony of this nature wasn't "Cool"...
--
Capt. Gym Z. Quirk | "I'll get a life when someone
(Known to some as Taki Kogoma) | demonstrates that it would be
qu...@unm.edu | superior to what I have now."
Veteran of the '91 sf-lovers re-org. | -- Gym Quirk
Christopher K Bern
This has got to be the longest thread I've ever bothered to keep up
with. 55 posts at the time I'm writing this. So I'll keep this short.
(1) I think that most of this has turned into a flame war between Chris
and Stephen, mostly because of Chris, who can't seem to handle the fact
that people disagree with him and his attitude (yeah, I'm setting myself
up to be flamed by him).
(2) Chris, I think you're missing a major point. I've read every single
one of the 55 posts in this thread, and of them, you're the ONLY PERSON
who's defending the changes. Each and every one of the other posts has
an objection in some form or another. Yes, there's probably lots of
people out there who think that it's a cool idea and agree with you. But
there's plenty out there who disagree and haven't spoken up. You have
every right to change the magazine. But I don't want a
gaming/music/movie/book magazine. If I want to read about a specific
subject, I'll get a magazine on that subject. I want a GAMING magazine.
Okay, I'm not going to go further on that. Basically, everyone except
Chris isn't happy with the changes. Does that say something about the
merits and needs of the change?
--
*-------------------------------*------------------------------------------*
Chris Bern | Teacher: Yakko, can you conjugate?
cb...@unity.ncsu.edu | Yakko: Who me? I've never even *kissed*
| a girl!
NCSU-CVM | Teacher: No no no. It's easy. I'll
Raleigh, NC | conjugate with you.
| Yakko: Goodnight, everybody!
*-------------------------------*------------------------------------------*
Steffan O'Sullivan
>
>What does WW offer the gamer that Dragon, Pyramid or Challenge doesn't?
I'm not sure what you mean "the gamer." It doesn't offer *this*
gamer anything I want at all. Not one word in it is aimed at me.
--
Steffan O'Sullivan s...@io.com Plymouth, NH, USA
Josh Traub
>format change, that's their call, and nobody else in the whole wide world
>gives a shit. But that's not what the harpies on this thread are saying.
>They're saying they won't make time for the new mag, because they have
>already psychically determined that it will suck. That's moronic.
>(Stephen, by the way, is far from the worst example of the above
>attitude, but it nonetheless applies.)
Eh? What is being said is that after looking at the list of topics the new
magazine will cover a large amount of people have no intrest in spending time
reading about say.. the goth scene or album reviews. That is what Ken's post
implied will be in Inpohobia (amoung other things)? Yes? Well there are a
great many magaizines that cover those topics which do not intrest me
in the least. By limited resources and time, what is being said is no one
wants to spend thier hard-earned cash or free-time plowing through a magazine
which disscusses topics they do not care for. What is wanted is a magazine on
Gaming.
. Infact, it seems most people here seem to agree. And if we represent the
audience that Ken is aiming for then he is missing by a long shot. He has
bought into the media-image of the net or has read too much Willaim
Gibson. Most WW players I have meet are fairly average people, same goes for
most people on the net. The Goth/punk/black-clad sucidal scene that the new
magazine seems to be aiming for consist of a very samll minority of WW gamers,
despite what WW seems to think. And out of those I know who fall under that
catgory an even smaller number actaully sit down and play the game.
But, Ken has seen fit to classify us as that type and offer out a
cookie-cutter magzine on that basis.
Am I pre-judging? Yes..but if you honestly think you should nenver do that
with a product( as opposed to a philosophy or person) then I have a bridge to
sell you. I do not like the decription and thus do not care to purchase it.
If open-mindedness consisted of buying itno everything somone else said was
"cool", despite your own interests, then we would all be very broke.
Gator
__
Josh Traub " The human race will begin solving it's problems
Graphic Artist on the day it ceases taking itself so seriously"
Lazy Gator Productions - The Golden Secret, Principia Discrodia
Josh Karabin
[...snip...]
: So you have an interest in games and a desire to read magazines that
: cater to that interest, but you have an interest in movies, music and
: books and no desire to read anything that caters to that interest? Isn't
: that just a tad arbitrary and unreasonable? It looks to me like it is,
: and that's why I say you're demonstrating a closed mind. If WW has met
: your need for gaming related journalism, why can't Inphobia meet a
: similer need for journalism relating to some of your other interests, in
: addition to continuing to offer interesting gaming stuff?
What need? How many of Whitewolf Magazine's current readers have indicated that
they have this need? Sure, I'll look at the magazine and see if the non-gaming
issues that are covered within it interest me, but if some of the tangential
topics covered in Whitewolf Magazine to date give any indication of what to
expect, I don't think that the expanded coverage will be of interest to me.
What's 'arbitrary and unreasonable' about being more interested in one subject
than in another? I'm interested in music, to be sure, but music magazines don't
interest me. I'm interested in movies, but movie magazines don't interest me.
For that matter, I'm interested in food, but not to the point where I want to
read every gourmet magazine I can lay my hands on to. A person who loves
football but is only marginally interested in baseball, basketball, or other
sports might subscribe to 'NFL Digest', but pass on 'Sports Illustrated'
because the magazine contains to much 'filler' material for him. Niche
magazines are great because they cover exactly what you want to read. There's
a difference between having a closed mind and knowing what you want.
However, I'll skip what I *may* perceive to be extraneous commentary if
Inphobia is capable of adding to it's repetoire while continuing, and
hopefully expanding, it's coverage of gaming. If the gaming coverage suffers
at the expense of the new material, however, I can guess that the magazine
won't be worth much to me. If Inphobia brings a gamer's perspective to these
side issues, I wonder how much of a non-gamer market will be be attracted to
it?
[...snip...]
: The point, Stephen, was that Inphobia's going to be covering a lot of
: subjects that are just about as important to gamers as gaming, and that
: therefore these gamers might owe it to themselves to at least give it a
: try before writing it off. Your own interests, as I suspected they
: would, completely reinforce that point. I trust you can see the
: relevence now.
Many of us will give Inphobia a try, and I'm sure that Stephen will take a
look at Inphobia at some point or another. However, 'just about' as important
doesn't mean 'as important.' I think that the prevailing point that many people
here are trying to get across is that nobody wants to see gaming coverage
decline in a Whitewolf Mag. For instance, if 'NFL Weekly' announced that they
were planning on adding coverage of other sports, many of it's readers would
worry about a decline in the quality of the coverage that brought them to the
magazine in the first place. That sounds healthy enough to me.
[...snip...]
: And MY point, Stephen, is simply that you need to be open to at least the
: possibility that if WW fills a specific niche now, it may well fill a
: similer niche after the change. I have no idea why you find this simple
: suggestion so personally threatening.
It's not a threatening suggestion - it just appears to be an unlikely one.
It's hard to believe that any one magazine can cover all of the issues that
Inphobia is setting out to cover, cover them well, and not lose anything on
the gaming front.
--
-----------------------------------------------------------------------------
Josh Karabin email: xe...@pitt.edu
<BR><p><b><a href="http://www.pitt.edu/~xero">My Home Page</a></b><p>
Liam Routt
>If people don't think they're going to have time to read WW after the
>format change, that's their call, and nobody else in the whole wide world
>gives a shit. But that's not what the harpies on this thread are saying.
>They're saying they won't make time for the new mag, because they have
>already psychically determined that it will suck. That's moronic.
No. The way I read it, most of the people are saying tht they are not
going to read the new magazine because they dislike the attitude, or at
least the expressed attitude, of the editor. I'd say that it is pretty
valid to link the content of a magazine with the style and policies of
the editor. And I can see nothing wrong with deciding that you will not
like a magazine because you cannot stand the editor's style. Hell, that's
why _I_ dropped WWM. None of us have the time or inclination to take a
chance that the next Ken Cliffe edited magazine will differ from the crap
he has already been at the head of. No reason we should assume that it
would be any better, especially not the advert for it he wrote himself.
I'm not trying to be inflamatory here, for whatever it's worth.
Another thing satrikes me: Chis is probably one of the few of us here who
has dealt with Ken himself. He probably knows better how to read what Ken
says and translate it into his own version. That is a big problem with
this whole network communication thing - people wreite things quickly,
without consideration (like this post and Ken's :) ), and expect others
to take it with a grain of sand that they do not have nay way of
possessing. Most of us have no idea what Ken wants to say, or how he
would say it, except when he writes a messag to us. At least if we had
met him, we would be able to put a real-life attitude and tone of voice
to his messages. A strong case for spending a lot more time on phrasing
and rephrasing important posts. Every one is a blind mass-media campaign.
Personally I think that Ken should have done some more homework. and if
he wants to be accepted as a "newbie" int eh medium he should have gone
to the trouble to get his own account, at the very least.
On the other hand, people here are always easily inflamed, especially
when they see what they think is idiocy.
Liam
--
"My name is Liam. I too am an agent Liam Routt
of the Lord. I ask your aid." Darcsyde Productions
- Xombi, Issue 3 rep...@zikzak.apana.org.au
Zikzak public access UNIX, Melbourne, Australia.
CWM
Douglas L. Vandenburgh <pig...@prairienet.org> wrote:
>Actually, the reason I, and probably a few others, pick up WW isn't
>because of anything unique about it. I pick it up because it's about
>gaming. I may find something in there that interests me and helps
>me come up with new stuff for my games. I don't find it any more
>useful for it's GothpunkKenDoll attitude than I find Shadis useful
>for it's geeksonParade attitude.
>
>I think the question I am asking is this: What sort of qualifications
>do you guys think you have to cover these new topics? Bringing
>a gamer's point of view to topics isn't going to get me to read
>a magazine on topics that are quite well covered by experts and/or
>people and magazines I've grown to trust. In fact, having other
>interests besides gaming often means I don't want to hear a gamer's
>opinion on those other interests.
>
What are you looking for, Doug, government certification? White Wolf's
editorial staff has professional and personal experience and knowledge
that qualifies them to talk about the popular culture just as much as the
editorial staffs at Spin, bOING bOING, Premier or any other general
entertainment mag.
Steffan O'Sullivan
>White Wolf's
>editorial staff has professional and personal experience and knowledge
>that qualifies them to talk about the popular culture just as much as the
>editorial staffs at Spin, bOING bOING, Premier or any other general
>entertainment mag.
Oh? Got anyone in particular in mind? Define professional
experience? Got paid once to write an article on it?
CWM
Christopher K Bern <cb...@unity.ncsu.edu> wrote:
>(1) I think that most of this has turned into a flame war between Chris
>and Stephen, mostly because of Chris, who can't seem to handle the fact
>that people disagree with him and his attitude (yeah, I'm setting myself
>up to be flamed by him).
You sure are. I'm getting damn sick of hearing this. It's off-topic,
untrue and juvenile. I've been consistantly more polite and reasonable to
Stephen than he has been with me, and if you whiners had anything
resembling a coherent argument in your favor you wouldn't have to resort
to this clumsy character assassination. I've made no personal attacks
whatsoever on anybody during this entire thread, and I'm sick of being
personally attacked merely for strongly advocating an unpopular postition
and refusing to buy into a general prejudice.
OK, I've been publically attacked numerous times, and now I've publically
responded to those public attacks. Now that that's out of the way I'll
take all further communication on this thread regarding my personality to
E-Mail, so don't bother to flame this post. Hopefully, of course, there
will be no further commentary on my personality at all, because y'all
will realize that whether or not you find my online persona warm and
fuzzy has nothing whatsoever to do with the force or failings of my
opinions, and needn't be commented on by anybody with anything reasonable
to say on the topic at hand.
>(2) Chris, I think you're missing a major point. I've read every single
>one of the 55 posts in this thread, and of them, you're the ONLY PERSON
>who's defending the changes. Each and every one of the other posts has
>an objection in some form or another. Yes, there's probably lots of
>people out there who think that it's a cool idea and agree with you. But
>there's plenty out there who disagree and haven't spoken up. You have
>every right to change the magazine. But I don't want a
>gaming/music/movie/book magazine. If I want to read about a specific
>subject, I'll get a magazine on that subject. I want a GAMING magazine.
Actually, there have been about a half dozen folks, so far by my count,
speak out encouragingly about the prospect of Inphobia, and when you
consider how many of those 55 posts are repeat posts by people who'd
already made their opinions noted the equation is a lot less one-sided
than you imply.
Anyway, I refuse to bow to the tyranny of the majority. So far, the only
good reason anybody on this thread has been able to come up with for
disregarding Inphobia this early in the game was, "well, I haven't liked
WW for a while, so I probably won't like the new mag either." Which is
fine, but if that's where you're coming from why bother to post at all?
>Okay, I'm not going to go further on that. Basically, everyone except
>Chris isn't happy with the changes. Does that say something about the
>merits and needs of the change?
Either that, or it says something about the attitudes and prejudices of a
small group of highly vocal people here on the net.
Trent Smith
>Oh crap, Ken implied nothing of the time. What the release did imply was
>that there's a certain kind of attitude that WW plays to, and that after
>the Inphobia change people who respond to that attitude can still find it
>in the magazine. If you're not the kind of person the magazine is
>targeted at, that's your get out. All I'm objecting to is this sadistic
>urge to sneer at those who don't happen to share your attitudes.
>Everybody has a frame of reference that's somewhat limited. That's why
>they call it a "frame." If your not interested in the magazine then your
>not interested. So SHUT UP about it and go do something that interests
>you. I don't have much time, myself, for Jazz, but that doesn't mean I
>feel a need to flame anybody who posts anything about jazz music on a
>music-related sub.
OK, OK, I understand that WW plays to a particular kind of attitude
and that I'm not part of their target audience, which is why I stopped
buying their magazine a while ago. I don't begrudge anyone that, and
that's not why I'm writing here. What i object to is the analogy
about liking jazz, which doesn't fit at all with what Ken and, to a
much greater extent, Chris have been doing here. They have not been
posting "anything about jazz music on a music-related sub", what they
have been doing is the equivalent to getting on a music-related sub and
saying "yeah, jazz music is really cool, but what's cooler is all these
movies and books and other stuff which is why our Jazz magazine is now
going to cover all of this stuff too" and then responding to complaints
by saying "hey, if you only like jazz music and not all this other stuff
then you're some sort of close-minded loser who needs to turn off the
stereo and get out of the house" when the whole point is that it's a
MUSIC-related group and we don't want to hear about all of this stuff,
and we sure as hell don't want to hear about what losers we are because
we don't want to hear about it.
I have a lot of other interests besides gaming and, in fact, since
I've been in school, gaming has been pretty low on the list of my
hobbies, since i don't have time for it usually, but that doesn't change
the fact that if I'm going to read WW, or Dragon, or any other GAMING
magazine then what I want to find in there is gaming stuff, not some
group of people telling me that "sure gaming's OK but all this stuff
is cool too!" I already know! So do all these other people! That's not
the point! The point is the condescending attitude that WW seems to have
towards the gaming community which, if i'm not mistaken, is the same
people who have kept them in business for the past 8 years. When I
want to know that "gaming is a ghetto" or that gaming's not cool enough,
I can look at any non-gaming publication or talk to any of my non-gamer
friends; when I don't want to know that, I read a gaming magazine.
There's absolutely no need to cross the line between "gaming" and
"mainstream" and, even if WW feels that there is, that's still no
reason for them to act like it's us loser gamers' problem if we don't
want to follow them.
I'm sorry if this rambles, or is incoherent, but I've been reading
these back-and-forth flames for the past several days and I finally just
felt the need to vent my anger/disgust at the attitude I've seen here.
Sincerely,
Trent Smith
Paul Jackson
>How the hell does he know it won't interest him before he's even seen it?
I won't speak for him, but in my case I strongly suspect that I won't like it
because I read the press release.
Look, if I go into one of the local bookstores with a good selection of
magazines there are literally hundreds of magazines trying to get my
attention and money. Some succeed in getting me to glance inside, most don't
even merit that much (not because they're bad, but because they don't appeal
to ME). The ones that get my attention, I glance at the inside of. I see
what the articles are and I might even glance at the writing style of a couple.
Total time that it often takes me to reject a magazine is on the order of
5 or 10 seconds.
I've already spent more time than this in reading the press release. Turned
me totally off for all the reasons others have posted. Fine, as far as I'm
concerned I HAVE checked it out. Although I can't be sure, it looks like
this magazine will be of no interet to me.
Thie is NOT being close minded, its just investing my time well. I haven't
enough time to give every book, newspaper, magazine etc a "fair" trial, I
have no choice but to make quick decisions and to live with the fact that
occassionally I'll make the wrong one. As a publisher you have, in general,
at most ONE try to get my attention and to convince me to investigate
further (exceptions oobviously occur when I hear decent word of mouth about
something). You've had that shot and you blew it.
--
Paul Jackson
CWM
Greywolf <peaco...@cobra.uni.edu> wrote:
>In article <3cdon5$2...@pentagon.io.com>, c...@pentagon.io.com (CWM) writes:
>> How the hell does he know it won't interest him before he's even seen it?
>
>Maybe it's because of poor marketing. That is a large part of business, after
>all.
Do you always base your attitude on a new product or service on the first
ad you read?
>>>Pretty poor debate tactic here, Chris. So if we don't see things your way,
>>>we have a narrow mindset? Gee, kinda like telling people that if they
>>>don't like punk, they must be Lawrence Welk fans? Maybe *you* need to get
>
>> Oh crap. His mind is narrow because he admitted it was closed in so many
>> words. Whether or not he agrees with me has nothing to do with it. I'm
>> not accusing Stephen of being narrow-minded because I don't like what he
>> says, I don't like what he says because it's narrow minded.
>
>You're not winning a friend here. I don't like punk, but that doesn't make me
>a Lawrence Welk fan, thank you. I find certain elements of the "World of
>Darkness" to be interesting from a role-playing point of view. That does not
>necessarily mean I want to be a punk-rocker-neo-goth. Yes, I know I'm probably
>just one of many squares to someone like you. Pardon me, but I'll manage to
>survive your disdain.
See, here we go again with this bizarre paranoid attitude. My Lawrence
Welk crack was a specific and pointed response to a jerk who posted the
inflamitory and untrue statement "punk music is noise." In that context I
think it was a pretty restrained reaction overall. But here you're coming
along reading the remark at third hand, and turning it into a general
slam against everybody who doesn't share my personal music tastes. I have
no problem whatsoeverwith folks who like different music than I do, I do
have a problem with jerks who feel they have to gratuitously slam my tastes.
>There are a lot of fine folks who happen to like White Wolf products, and I
>won't begrudge them their tastes. However, if this sort of insulting,
>degrading, profanity-laden attitude is indicative of how White Wolf Games
>and its associates present their products, I will be more than happy to spend
>my gaming budget elsewhere. Respond to this post with flames all you like, but
>insulting potential customers is not a recommended marketing strategy.
And another thing, when did I get appointed official net.rep for WW
magazine. I'm a regular contributor, and that's all I am, and I have
absolutely no say in any of their editorial or business decisions
whatsoever. You're not my "customer," potential or otherwise, and even if
you were, nobody's insulted you or insinuated anything insulting about
you. If you don't like the way I express my opinions, you're free to
ignore them, but spare me the wounded whining, OK? I'm not in this thread
to make you feel warm and cuddly, I'm just trying to inject a little
logic and objectivity into what seems to me a ridiculous and inexplicable
prejudice. The general eagerness to turn the thread into a referendum on
my personality only shows how badly reason and objectivity are needed
around here.
So, did you have something to say about Inphobia, or did you just have an
uncontrollable urge to fart in my general direction?
CWM
Not only did you manage genuine sustained venom, you also managed to make
more genuine logical points in one post than anybody else on your side of
the fence has done in the entire thread.
Let's see, basically what you're saying is you're a punk, but not a
goth-punk, so you have no interest in a goth punk magazine. Therefore you
resent Ken Cliffe insinuating in his press release that you might find
the new mag cool. C'mon, what's he supposed to say? "This is a magazine
for pompous jerks with no real taste"? Get serious.
You also say that it's pointless for a gaming magazine to try to expand
its horizons beyond gaming. I've already answered this - if you're
interested in games and you read a gaming magazine, it's reasonable to
suppose that if you're interested in music, film and whatever else,
you might find it equally useful to read a magazine covering those topics
from the same perspective.
Paul Jackson
>difference between calling a stupid idea a stupid idea and accusing
>somebody of being an idiot.
Are you really this stupid, are you just completely illiterate or are you
trying to be "ironic and cutting"? You most certainly HAVE insulted people in
your ramblings on this thread. Not just their ideas, but the people
themselves. I have no problems with your flaming people (its rather amusing
to watch, especially since you do such a poor job of it) but I do take
exception to a bald faced lie like the above.
If you honestly believe that you haven't insulted anybody then I strongly
urge that you work on your writing skills.
--
Paul Jackson
CWM
Josh Traub <ga...@mindspring.com> wrote:
>
>Eh? What is being said is that after looking at the list of topics the new
>magazine will cover a large amount of people have no intrest in spending time
>reading about say.. the goth scene or album reviews. That is what Ken's post
>implied will be in Inpohobia (amoung other things)? Yes? Well there are a
>great many magaizines that cover those topics which do not intrest me
>in the least. By limited resources and time, what is being said is no one
>wants to spend thier hard-earned cash or free-time plowing through a magazine
>which disscusses topics they do not care for. What is wanted is a magazine on
>Gaming.
Fine, but why the urge to announce your lack of time, money and
curiousity to the net, and why slam Ken Cliffe while you're doing it?
>. Infact, it seems most people here seem to agree. And if we represent the
>audience that Ken is aiming for then he is missing by a long shot. He has
> bought into the media-image of the net or has read too much Willaim
>Gibson. Most WW players I have meet are fairly average people, same goes for
>most people on the net. The Goth/punk/black-clad sucidal scene that the new
>magazine seems to be aiming for consist of a very samll minority of WW gamers,
>despite what WW seems to think. And out of those I know who fall under that
>catgory an even smaller number actaully sit down and play the game.
>But, Ken has seen fit to classify us as that type and offer out a
>cookie-cutter magzine on that basis.
First of all, there's absolutely nothing in Ken's post to imply that the
new magazine will be as tightly focused on the goth scene as you imply.
What it did suggest was that the new magazine will appeal to the same
attitudes that that draw people to WW's games, of which, as you point
out, the whole goth scene is only one small (if significant) part. I
don't imagine that Inphobia will be particularly mainstream, but I see no
reason to suspect that it will be as tightly constrained as you seem to
think. I know that my own work for WW has never paid more than glancing
attention to the whole goth thang, and I don't plan on changing that
after the change.
>Am I pre-judging? Yes..but if you honestly think you should nenver do that
>with a product( as opposed to a philosophy or person) then I have a bridge to
>sell you. I do not like the decription and thus do not care to purchase it.
>If open-mindedness consisted of buying itno everything somone else said was
>"cool", despite your own interests, then we would all be very broke.
Unfortunately, the things you seem to object to most strongly in the
announcement seem not to have ever really been there at all. Which is
what burns my butt here - people are imposing a whole set of prejudices
and suppositions on the new mag on absolutely zero evidence. You're more
polite and reasonable in explaining your attitude than most, and I
appreciate that, but your still bringing suppositions to your judgement
that seem to be based entirely on sheer personal prejudice.
CWM
Steffan O'Sullivan <s...@pentagon.io.com> wrote:
>CWM <c...@pentagon.io.com> wrote:
>>White Wolf's
>>editorial staff has professional and personal experience and knowledge
>>that qualifies them to talk about the popular culture just as much as the
>>editorial staffs at Spin, bOING bOING, Premier or any other general
>>entertainment mag.
>
>Oh? Got anyone in particular in mind? Define professional
>experience? Got paid once to write an article on it?
>
Deplore it if you like, but it's not the fault of Ken Cliffe or White
Wolf, so don't blame him.
Sea Wasp
>Stephen E Mynhier <smy...@hubcap.clemson.edu> wrote:
>>No, Chris, I have never said that I do not watch movies, listen to music, or
>>read, although at $5.50 a shot, frequent movie going is not well within a
>>college student's budget. Music? Oh yes, let me demonstrate how much
>>I don't listen to music, or how narrow my mind is, shall we?
[...]
>Oh get a grip, Stephen. Nobody's persecuting you and nobody's insulted
>you.
Generally, calling someone "close-minded", ignoring their
points in order to get across your own attitude, is considered
insulting.
Since it seems to have flown straight over your head, let me explain
>what should have been obvious if you weren't so eager to pick a fight.
"Pot... Kettle... BLACK."
Of course, to you, BLACK is K00L.
>So you have an interest in games and a desire to read magazines that
>cater to that interest, but you have an interest in movies, music and
>books and no desire to read anything that caters to that interest? Isn't
>that just a tad arbitrary and unreasonable? It looks to me like it is,
>and that's why I say you're demonstrating a closed mind.
That's because you've demonstrated a "reading comprehension level"
which wouldn't have allowed you to pass a multiple-choice test in the
5th grade, let alone a literacy test aimed at adults.
To summarize what he, and a number of people, have said:
THEY DON'T **NEED** another magazine pumping out stuff on
these interests. They want a GAMING magazine. There are few gaming
magazines out there, and literally HUNDREDS of magazines covering all
those topics you mention. The shift from one focus to virtually no
focus cannot possibly do anything other than lessen the amount of
coverage of gaming materials, which is the primary interest of the
original mag's readers. The ONLY way that the same coverage for gaming
could be maintained while still covering all those other disparate
topics would be for the magazine to quintuple in size -- and, presumably,
in price.
>I've never insulted you or anybody else in this thread, Stephen, and I
>haven't once called anybody a name.
Ballocks, sir. You have consistently directed comments at
people (ranging from calling them "sad" to denigrating every possible
choice they might make) which are clearly insulting. If you don't
intend them to be insulting, then you have the social competence of
a rabid wolverine. If you DO intend them to be insulting and are
lying about it, you're a hypocrite.
If you'd care to go back and read your own reply to my first
message, you will find a paragraph in which you call me "Waspie" --
a diminutive term which you have not earned the right to use. In
that paragraph, you utilize a superior and supercilious tone which
cannot be taken in any other way than to be insulting.
I've made my points as forcefully and
>logically as I know how
"Forcefully", certainly. Firestorms, either of the physical
or metaphorical sort, are indeed forceful.
"Logically"?
Pfui.
You stated to me (in a sarcastic and clumsily-overwritten manner)
that for anyone to dare expect someone to adhere to their conventions
when entering their domain was ... hmm, how would your pseudo-native
pidgin translate? Close minded and luddite?
To fail to adhere to the proper social customs of an area,
when the people in that area are those you WANT something from, is
to be starting your interaction by sending a message that YOU DON'T
CARE. Yet you still want anything.
To give you a real-world analogy, if Martin Luther King
had chosen to campaign against racism by dressing "black", talking "black",
and acting as that subculture would dictate, he would never have
gained the ability to enter, even slightly, the dominant "white"
subculture. But he acted as the society he was in REQUIRED, only
changing his behavior for the specific points he was trying to make.
By doing so, he was sending a message to those in the culture he
was trying to change: in essence "see? I can be just as civilized
as you, and I therefore feel you should listen to what I have to
say".
If you enter a subculture -- and the Net is indeed a
large subculture -- and don't conform to its usages while also
trying to get something out of it, you come out looking like
a clumsy and arrogant boor. In this case, the press release was
an unfortunate blunder. I must presume it was due to ignorance.
Your behavior, however, is only worsening the effect.
You are, as you state, a writer for the magazine in question.
The attitude you demonstrate is going to be transferred, by many
people reading your vitriolic posts, to include the company for
which you work. This may not be LOGICAL, but it is PREDICTABLE.
Now, I won't assume things about White Wolf based on you --
though I've heard enough from various sources to make me wonder about
a game company focused on "attitude". I'll just judge you instead.
Personally, I suspect you think you're so bloody cool that
you could pee ice cubes, and that in actuality you're nothing but
hot air.
Sea Wasp
/^\
;;;
ŽÍTUKC
Sea Wasp
>See, here we go again with this bizarre paranoid attitude. My Lawrence
>Welk crack was a specific and pointed response to a jerk who posted the
>inflamitory and untrue statement "punk music is noise."
That would be me, Chrissie.
Read what you say above. Remember that I was responding to you
TELLING EVERYONE that "for the last 20 years, Punk has meant". As
other have responded, that is at best ONE definition, used by a narrow
little splinter group.
So you come on here, blasting away because everyone on the
net used THEIR definitions instead of yours.
Well, EXCUUUUUUUUUUSE us for living, but I feel no more obligation
to accept your little sub-group's definitions of words and attitudes
than you do to accept mine. You said, in effect "you shouldn't be using
YOUR definition, you should use mine!" and went ballistic when I, quite
logically, did the same thing to you.
You are either a moron or a hypocrite, or (most likely) a
self-involved pretentious wanker.
Sea Wasp
(who wishes Carl Lydick were here to flame the clown)
/^\
;;;
Liam Routt
>What are you looking for, Doug, government certification? White Wolf's
>editorial staff has professional and personal experience and knowledge
>that qualifies them to talk about the popular culture just as much as the
>editorial staffs at Spin, bOING bOING, Premier or any other general
>entertainment mag.
It's funny how people immediately assume that no special knowledge is
required to be an expert in populsar culture.
Driving a car does not amke one an expert on car styling, engineering, or
even cars. Why do people assume that all it takes to be a qualified
critic of popular culture is some association with something popular? All
that most people are qualified for is saying what they like and what they
dislike. Most of us can work out what we like and dislike for ourselves.
Liam R.
Geoffrey C Grabowski
>What are you looking for, Doug, government certification? White Wolf's
>editorial staff has professional and personal experience and knowledge
>that qualifies them to talk about the popular culture just as much as the
>editorial staffs at Spin, bOING bOING, Premier or any other general
>entertainment mag.
Chris, please stick out your hand.
*stamp*
(Image stamped on hand: [OOO])
Wear it with pride, friend, you've earned it through many long
hard hours!
G. C. Grabowski
"And I sleep with my shovel and my leather gloves"
-(The *ever* so Lawrence Welk-ish) Tom Waits
>Chris W. McCubbin / So I'm sitting there yelling, "Waiter,
>C...@IO.COM/CWMF...@AOL.COM / there's a fnord in my soup," for, like, half
--
--Geoffrey Grabowski|gcg...@pitt.edu|Undergrad, U.Pittsburgh|PoliSci/Econ
--[O] "So put a candle in the window
--[O] and a kiss upon his lips
--[O] while the dish outside the window fills with rain"
Charles Ryan
writes:
> THEY DON'T **NEED** another magazine pumping out stuff on
>these interests. They want a GAMING magazine.
This is a fine point, and one well taken even, I think, by Chris.
Unfortunately, it's not the one that brought him into this, and it
doesn't seem to be the one that's gotten him into so many flaming
screaming matches.
When Ken posted his press release, it was followed up for three days by
dozens of flames, all of which were obsessed with his net-lingo
ignorance, specifically the term "net-punk." A few people were upset
about text-wrapping or some such thing, and several vented spite towards
the "White Wolf Attitude." Not a single person, prior to Chris getting
involved, voiced any real opinion on the content of the announcement--I
didn't read a single post that said "I think Inphobia is a bad idea," or
even a less venomous "sounds like White Wolf Magazine is going from bad
to worse." Instead, they all said "Ken Cliffe is an asshole for writing
that post, and incidently (or by extension) I hate White Wolf."
Charles Ryan
Chameleon Eclectic
c...@bev.net
Jacob A Hester
in fact. The note if from smy...@hubcap.clemson.edu -the first line was,
"A word in the defence of White Wolf". This was also the comment which
drew fire from Chris and, resultantly, started this entire string.
Stephen E Mynhier
I would like to defend Whitewolf and say that Chris' attitude is
NOT characteristic of any employee and WW that I have met. Sam is a very nice
man and so are numerous other people that I have met that work there. ANd
to allay any comments, Chris, yes, I do know several of the staff. I am
deeply disturbed at the nonchalant attitude with which you come onto
A.G.W, present yourself as a staff writer and begin a constant barrage of
insults against the consumers of WW products. I am disturbed that this
sort of attitude which you have will injure WW's business. As a
dedicated consumer of WW products, this bothers me.
Now, Chris (who, coincidentally, posted that he WOULD NOT post
again on this thread and then continued to do so. Won't he either
learn or shut up?), I would like to point out that, in one of your recent
posts, you called us (I'm sorry, perhaps it was me inparticular) stupid
and whiners and then turned around and said that you have never insulted
anyone. Why don't you just stop whining about your own actions and perhaps
that would eliminate a significant amount of the meaningless banter that
your posts contain.
Now, please listen, Chris. Slow down, and read this with an open
mind:
1) I like music. I like movies. I like books. I like gaming.
2) I have no interest in reading about music
I have no interest in reading about movies.
I have no interest in reading about books.
I receive far more information than I could ever care
to digest on these topics from a multitude of
free <no $$ out on my part> sources.
3) I DO have an interest in reading about Whitewolf gaming.
At present, I recieve this information from WW mag.
It is not a perfect source, but it is a decent source, and
the best available.
4) I do not want to lose my best source of information on WW games
in exchange for other information (see point #2).
5) If an attempt is made to take away my best source of information
on WW games, I will not like it. Furthermore, I will
do everything possible to attempt to prevent the loss
of the source of information.
6) I still have no interest in reading about music, movies, or books.
This has not changed between points #2 and #6. Remember the
multitude of other free sources thing. Remember that, in
addition to the free commentary that I can receive from
these other sources, I can listen to the music at Sam
Goody's, watch the movie excerpts on TV, and pick up a
copy of any number of books in any number of bookstores.
And I am more than capable, despite your beliefs to the
contrary, to make my own judgements on these topics.
7) I am not able to go to Sam Goody's, watch the TV, or go to
a bookstore and pick up commentaries and ideas on and
for Whitewolf products (excepting the current format of
Whitewolf magazine.)
8) If Whitewolf wishes to create a completely new magazine
(separate from WWM) to cover the topics listed in
point #2, then more power to them so long as it does
not affect the coverage that I am getting on WW games
in WW magazine.
Now, do you see my problem? Thank you.
Signed,
Stephen "Getting highly perturbed at the large amounts of insults directed
at me by you" Mynhier
Geoffrey C Grabowski
>In article <3cgdgn$6...@africa.lm.com> Sea Wasp, sea...@telerama.lm.com
>writes:
>
>This is a fine point, and one well taken even, I think, by Chris.
>Unfortunately, it's not the one that brought him into this, and it
>doesn't seem to be the one that's gotten him into so many flaming
>screaming matches.
What seems to have brought Chris into so many flaming screaming
matches is the fact that he is pushing his personal beliefs and
subculture with a hucksteresque intensity. Further, he is denigrating and
insulting the people he is arguing with. I'm one of the people who posted
the original comments, which I know, and knew, were indefensible, at
least in the terms of their couching. Note that I did not rise to my own
defense, and didn't jump in again until today, despite a great deal of
temptation to do so, especially circa Lawrence Welk.
>
>When Ken posted his press release, it was followed up for three days by
>dozens of flames, all of which were obsessed with his net-lingo
>ignorance, specifically the term "net-punk." A few people were upset
>about text-wrapping or some such thing, and several vented spite towards
>the "White Wolf Attitude." Not a single person, prior to Chris getting
>involved, voiced any real opinion on the content of the announcement
>--I
>didn't read a single post that said "I think Inphobia is a bad idea," or
>even a less venomous "sounds like White Wolf Magazine is going from bad
>to worse." Instead, they all said "Ken Cliffe is an asshole for writing
>that post, and incidently (or by extension) I hate White Wolf."
Perhaps you missed my post? While acidic, I said essentially this.
I happen to think Ken is a pretty bad line developer. I haven't read WWM
recently enough to see what he's doing first hand, but the reports of a
dozen or so trusted and knowledgeable others probabally aren't wrong. I
said, quite specifically, that Inphobia would be a) too diverse to cover
anything, b) would lose it's focus on gaming, which is the reason I
buy/read gaming mags, if I wanted to read on other topics, I'd consult the
magazine for that particular topic. I specifically cited Interzone in
regards to fiction and reviews (I don't know if IZ is down the tubes
recently, the local co-ord at the only decent sci-fi shop in the town left
for a better job and they screwed it up completely, and stopped carrying
IZ) and c) that the post was so poorly phrased that it was completely
insulting. I will certainly admit I was vitriolic. Vitriol is one of the
things I do best. However, these things were said. Again and again. Mr.
McCubbin simple seems not to have noticed.
So far as I care, if the staff of White Wolf chose to dress up in
tutus and green wigs and publish a magazine on how Jesus was a space
alien and that you can find Him by dancing the polka, it would be fine by
me. Similarly, if Inphobia makes them all instant household names, with
their praises tumbling from 200 million lips, I will be equally
unperturbed. I will, however, not be buying Inphobia to service my gaming
needs. If I am spending what precious few dollars I have on gaming
material, it had better be *gaming* material. I am not a member of the
White Wolf subculture, the poseur 'cyberpunk' movement (how many of you
'punks out there have read Involution Ocean, eh?), or really any other
subculture but the bright-but-twisted-security-studies-major-
and-gamer-named-Geoff subculture, a small group, admittedly, but we get
along fine, me, myself, and I. I'm not interested in how White Wolf will
open my horizons and instantly show me all the things I just have to
belive this week, make me cool, or brighten my teeth. I'll find my own
way, thanks.
The funny thing is, I really like WWG$ games, at least until
Mage. I can't stand the supplements, and I hate rewriting the rules so
they work, but in priciple, they're really decent. I happen to like
dystopic and bleak futures/presents. The alychmical wedding of these to
the k-rad twentynuthin culture and the company holier than thou policy
combine with horrendous munchkinesqe supplement development to leave me
pretty cold, though. I've decided to go over to OtE for more workable
mechanics and less attitude. No art by Cobb either.
>Charles Ryan
>Chameleon Eclectic
>c...@bev.net
Hey, nice job on Millenium's End. Not quite to my taste, but I
really thought the combat resolution system was innovative.
I-buy-odd-games-and-yes-I-own-WarpWorld-too,
G.
Tor Iver Wilhelmsen
>
>So you have an interest in games and a desire to read magazines that
>cater to that interest, but you have an interest in movies, music and
>books and no desire to read anything that caters to that interest? Isn't
>that just a tad arbitrary and unreasonable? It looks to me like it is,
>your need for gaming related journalism, why can't Inphobia meet a
>similer need for journalism relating to some of your other interests, in
>addition to continuing to offer interesting gaming stuff?
Because: a magazine that is a little bit of everything covers by
definition a small part of each of those things. It will be a watered-down
games magazine plus movie mag plus music rag, and all in all will not be
able to do its job sufficiently in any of the areas to be of any interest.
You seem to make the inpression that just because Stephen does not want to
buy an "all-in-one" magazine he has a closed mind. Ever considered
leapfrog competitions? You leap to so far-off conclusions that the world
record is at stake. For my own sake: If I want to read about music, I buy
Rolling Stone (for instance). When I buy Rolling Stone I do not expect
to find articles on, say, roleplaying games in it. It's all a question
of interest, and just because we don't want to buy "your" magazine is
no reason for insulting people.
>
>Sincere concern is one thing. It's your prophecies of doom and ongoing
>refusal to even consider that the new magazine might possibly have merit
>to some reasonable reader that's closed minded.
No, it's an opinion. It differs from yours. It happens. Deal with it.
Everything goes better with Coke.
>The point, Stephen, was that Inphobia's going to be covering a lot of
>subjects that are just about as important to gamers as gaming, and that
>therefore these gamers might owe it to themselves to at least give it a
>try before writing it off. Your own interests, as I suspected they
>would, completely reinforce that point. I trust you can see the
>relevence now.
Do you mean that Inphobia will give as good coverage of the movie industry
as Premiere magazine? That if I buy Inphobia I will not have to buy
neither Premiere, Rolling Stone nor (say) Skeptic? How endlessly cool! How
many pages was that magazine did you say?
- Tor "Pyramid reader" Iver
--
Tor Iver Wilhelmsen <tor...@pvv.unit.no> CS student at NTH, Trondheim, NO
Info: http://www.pvv.unit.no/~toriver/ Member of The Software Workshop, UNIT
"There ain't no coming back!" - T-Bone, "The Crow" * Halfway, European Country
Lizard
>
>smy...@hubcap.clemson.edu (Stephen E Mynhier) wrote:
>:A short word in defense of White Wolf:
>:Granted that what Ken did was not very tactful, but this is obviously
the
>:effort of someone who is completely unfamiliar with the medium that he
was
>:attempting to work in (while trying to act as though he was).
>
>This is not an excuse. This is reason to write something to the effect
of,
>"We at White Wolf are (mostly) not very familiar with the net
environment.
>We'd like to reach out to you. What do you want to see in a new,
improved
>version of WWM? If we were to put some articles online, what would you
>most (and least) want to see online? What turns you on, what turns you
off?"
>
I managed to miss the beginning of this, due to my $%%#$%@!# service
provider screwing up about a week's worth of news. ("Oh, there's a
problem with one of the disks." "Which one?" "Er..Joe knows that, but
he's on vacation.") But, I think, I get the gist of it. Here is my
thought:
The average WW reader/player is precisely the sort of person who would
call themself a "net punk" and be proud of it. (Note I said:AVERAGE.
Average implies many exceptions to that rule) You know -- 14 years old,
dresses in black, has a shiny new Mac or PC w/a modem, and thinks they
are K00L because they figured out how to uudecode pictures off of
alt.binaries.erotica.nekkid-wimmin. And they are SO much more hip than
those THIRTEEN year olds who play D&D. (Us 29 year olds play
GURPS&Hero&Rolemaster -- REAL gamers aren't afraid to roll dice and
cruch numbers 'till they SCREAM. (The numbers, that is -- not the
gamers) (Er..maybe the gamers as well)) When I was 14, I called myself a
"hacker" as soon as I had written my first program in Applesoft BASIC;I
have no doubt today's 14 year olds are equally self-aggrandized.
--
Evolution Doesn't Take Prisoners:Lizard
Democracy:The Crude Leading the Crud:Florence King
Misanthropology:The study of why so many people are so stupid, and why
most of them should die, soon!
Frederic Garber
HEY! could someone lease REPOST the orignal letter so that thse
of us wihtout a wordwrap can see what all the fuss is about?
- If they have more ad space, maybe they will lower the
price for us poor gamers.
- and I AM an Net Punk, Dammit! Not all of use are blase
about modems and internet and cyberpunk ideals yet.
--
I'm the best there is at what I do. And what I do isn't very nice
- Hal Costigan, New Jersey Sanitation Engineer.
(among others)
Holger Alsmeier
*YAWN* Aren't they done yet? Just when I wondered why Chris and Stephen
didn't quit posting their feud and resort to mail instead, so we might
be spared from this boredom, I stumbled upon a posting from neither...
#(1) I think that most of this has turned into a flame war between Chris
#and Stephen, mostly because of Chris, who can't seem to handle the fact
#that people disagree with him and his attitude (yeah, I'm setting myself
#up to be flamed by him).
Yep, there are those who never realize that if others can be wrong, so could
they...
Mind you, I am one of those... :-)
[sometimes]
#(2) Chris, I think you're missing a major point. I've read every single
#one of the 55 posts in this thread, and of them, you're the ONLY PERSON
#who's defending the changes. Each and every one of the other posts has
#an objection in some form or another. Yes, there's probably lots of
#people out there who think that it's a cool idea and agree with you. But
#there's plenty out there who disagree and haven't spoken up. You have
#every right to change the magazine. But I don't want a
#gaming/music/movie/book magazine. If I want to read about a specific
#subject, I'll get a magazine on that subject. I want a GAMING magazine.
Oooh, you shouldn't have put it that way, Chris will be mad...
He'll assume that you think your opinion to be superior to anybody else's.
MAYBE because his own mindset just works that way; I'm no judge in this.
Funnily, your interest in magazines and mine coincide (don't flame me if I
used this word in a wrong way; after all it's not my first language).
#Okay, I'm not going to go further on that. Basically, everyone except
#Chris isn't happy with the changes. Does that say something about the
#merits and needs of the change?
Sorry, but here you contradict yourself. There may be people who appreciate
the oncoming change, but they happen to have no internet access or just won't
post anything. Anybody out there?
#*-------------------------------*------------------------------------------*
# Chris Bern | Teacher: Yakko, can you conjugate?
# cb...@unity.ncsu.edu | Yakko: Who me? I've never even *kissed*
# | a girl!
# NCSU-CVM | Teacher: No no no. It's easy. I'll
# Raleigh, NC | conjugate with you.
# | Yakko: Goodnight, everybody!
#*-------------------------------*------------------------------------------*
Just my general opinion: STOP THIS THREAD!!!!!!
+ --- --- --- --- --- --- + --- + --- --- --- --- --- --- +
| ASSEL is a member of | MIN | HOL...@radar.sauerland.de |
+ V i R e M a X + I2C + --- --- --- --- --- --- +
| - dealing with ya Reality! | ? | Holger Alsmeier |
+ --- --- --- --- --- --- + MIN | Ostenbergstr. 109/02 |
| nihil absolutum | NTT | 44227 Dortmund, Germany |
+ --- --- --- --- --- --- + --- + --- --- --- --- --- --- +
Michael D. Steeves
= So you don't listen to music, never watch movies and don't read? Hmmm,
= guess the magazine won't appeal to you.
OK, let me have a go at this.... I have a wide variety of tastes in movies,
literature, and music. However, I can pretty much honestly say that I
have *never* listened to, read, or watched something because of what some
"critic" says. Hell, I don't think I even do these things based on what
friends say...I'll give stuff a listen, or borrow a book, (don't really
have time/$$$ for movies...tres expensive for a college kid like myself...)
but just because a friend of mine (one that I knew for about 3 years at the
time) like Marillion didn't make me go out and buy a tape of theirs.
= >And I am afraid that I must admit that I am not clairvoyant, so I have
= >no method of "psychically" <your word> determining it will suck. Nothing
= >so grand and elaborate. Just plain, simple common sense tells me that
= >if Whitewolf announces that additions of things that I already know that I
= >do not like, then if the changes are implemented, I will not like them.
= >No psychics needed.
=
= Things you don't like? Don't you do ANYTHING except game for fun? If
= that's really the problem, then I take it back. Your mind's not narrow,
= your life is.
Can't some people make their choices about music, books, and movies
*without* WW's opinion...? I like WW's games. I don't give a rat's ass
what they (or anyone else, for that matter) have to say about anything else.
Look, it's like this. There are forums for information about books,
movies, and music. There are also forums for information about games. WW is
used to tell about games, and that's where the interest in the mag is. It's
WW's raison d'etre. If you change the purpose of WW magazine from telling
about WoD/gaming to gaming, music, books, movies, the club scene, etc., then
suddenly the central idea isn't central anymore. If the only thing about
a magazine that I read it for goes from being the only thing to being one of
four or five things, then what's the point...?
I've probably horribly mangled a brilliant idea here, but I hope you can
get the gist of the concept.
-darkelf
--
And you listen / With a tear in your eye
To their hopes and betrayals / and your only reply
is Slainte Mhath...
-Marillion
Douglas L. Vandenburgh
: When Ken posted his press release, it was followed up for three days by
: dozens of flames, all of which were obsessed with his net-lingo
: ignorance, specifically the term "net-punk." A few people were upset
: about text-wrapping or some such thing, and several vented spite towards
: the "White Wolf Attitude." Not a single person, prior to Chris getting
: involved, voiced any real opinion on the content of the announcement--I
: didn't read a single post that said "I think Inphobia is a bad idea," or
: even a less venomous "sounds like White Wolf Magazine is going from bad
: to worse." Instead, they all said "Ken Cliffe is an asshole for writing
: that post, and incidently (or by extension) I hate White Wolf."
A reality of posting to the net is that some people are going to flame
you if they already don't like you. Sure, it's not a good thing but
it is a real thing. It does Inphobia no good whatsoever to have McCubbin
come on with a flamethrower, ranting and raving, because someone said
mean things about them. Losing your cool ain't cool.
- Doug
James Nicoll
much deleted
> A few people were upset
>about text-wrapping or some such thing (...)
Not upset. If someone is trying to communicate and appears not to
know something basic about the medium they are using, it might be considered
polite to point out the problem to them. Not knowing that other people's
systems might not line-wrap is a fairly common failing among USENET newbies.
James Nicoll
--
"I'm glad I saw the galaxy, but I want to die in Brooklyn."
Isaacs, Ross
is pointless and more than a little silly.
And let me preface my remarks by saying that I like WWM and Chris McCubbin's
articles have been interesting and enlightening. I *don't* like Ken Cliffe'
s annoying editorial comments in the body of the articles. To my mind, he
has an editorial to vent his opinion, he doesn't need to constantly remind
me that he's a funny guy. I also find it distracting. Editors should be
invisible.
So why am I here? Chris McCubbin off-handedly mentioned that he thought
only a few vocal members of the minority were against Infobia. I don't know
about that, but I'm not interested in it, just from what I've read.
I buy gaming magazines to see reviews, new information, advice and coming
attractions. In short, I buy a gaming magazine to read about gaming. I
want gaming news and new gaming information. If I want movie reviews, I
read movie magazines. If I want to read about music, there are already many
music magazines.
I don't see the purpose of covering these subjects in a gaming magazine.
I can already get this kind of information from someplace else? So what is
being proposed is to take something away from me, and give me something I
can already get.
I like WW's take on the gaming community, and look forward to it every
month. I do not want WW's take on movies, fashion and music. It just does
not interest me. Am I closed minded and narrow? Not really. I know what I
want, and the description of Infobia is not it. I may pick up an issue to
see it. But I'll miss WWM.
I think Ken Cliffe and Chris McCubbin should listen to their customers,
rather than writing them off.
Thank you.
Ross A. Isaacs
Mitchell J. Gross
>The average WW reader/player is precisely the sort of person who would
>call themself a "net punk" and be proud of it. (Note I said:AVERAGE.
>Average implies many exceptions to that rule) You know -- 14 years old,
>dresses in black, has a shiny new Mac or PC w/a modem, and thinks they
>are K00L because they figured out how to uudecode pictures off of
>alt.binaries.erotica.nekkid-wimmin. And they are SO much more hip than
>those THIRTEEN year olds who play D&D. (Us 29 year olds play
>GURPS&Hero&Rolemaster -- REAL gamers aren't afraid to roll dice and
>cruch numbers 'till they SCREAM. (The numbers, that is -- not the
>gamers) (Er..maybe the gamers as well)) When I was 14, I called myself a
>"hacker" as soon as I had written my first program in Applesoft BASIC;I
>have no doubt today's 14 year olds are equally self-aggrandized.
Jesus Christ! I said my piece at the beginning of this thread and had no
intention of jumping in, but you sir have shown yourself to be such an
ASS that I had to jump back in. Thanks so much.
For your information Mr. All Knowing, perhaps the only WW fans you have
met fit your description, but it certainly does not sound like you have
gone out of your way to meet many. If you have met any at all, which I
doubt. I have been involved with WW games and the fandom of these games
for several years. During that time, I met many HUNDREDS of WW fans in New
York, Boston and Atlanta (I move around a lot). I also communicated with
many, many more over the internet.
Perhaps 10% of the people I have met, if even that many, came even close
to ASPECTS of your rather narrow-minded and biased description. Many fans
of Vampire (as well as the other games) have a sincere interest in the
gothic and vampiric mythos. This does not mean they wear black, it does
not mean they smoke cloves. Sure, some of them do. But to say they ALL do
is ridiculous. Furthermore, often the cloves, black and other
stereotypical aspects are part of a character the person is playing at
the event. It has NOTHING to do with the real person.
For example, when helping run a chapter of the Camarilla fan organization
in Boston, the chapter roughly broke up as follows:
The officers of the club included a health care professional, a freelance
graphic designer, a systems administrator and an administrative assistant
(all in our mid to late 20s), an accountant (in the late 30s) and the
owner of a gaming mail order business (in early 20s). None of these
people made a practice of smoking cloves or wearing black on a daily
basis. The rest of the group was extremely varied in age, religion,
profession, interests and so on. Frankly, in all my years of gaming, the
WW fandom has MORE variety in it than fans of any other games out there.
Except Magic of course! :)
I am not that active within the fandom anymore. I have moved on to other
things. But to hear someone who obviously has NO clue what he is talking
about make such a sweeping judgement over a group I have been very
involved with for years and have made some wonderful friends through just
annoys the hell out of me. Open your goddam eyes. Look beyond the 'Oh he
plays Vampire, he must be a clove-smoking, black-wearing goth-punk.'
Furthermore, look beyond the 'He plays ____________, he must be a
_______.' stereotypes. It is RIDICULOUS to say someone must fit into a
certain mold just because they enjoy ROLEPLAYING a certain kind of character!
Grow up!
--'---,---'---,--`--'-,-'-`---'-,--`-'---,---'-----,---'---`---'-,-`-`-'---,--
Mitchell J. Gross * m...@io.com
http://www.io.com/user/mjg/visionary/
Check out alt.arts.storytelling!
"You can't mail order attitude!" - Jana Wright
"Fools allow others to rule them. Wise men rule themselves."
-`---,---'-,---`---`--'--,--`-'-,--`--'--,---`--'-,--`-'-,--,-'-`--'-,-`--,---
James Nicoll
>call themself a "net punk" and be proud of it. (Note I said:AVERAGE.
>Average implies many exceptions to that rule) You know -- 14 years old,
>dresses in black, has a shiny new Mac or PC w/a modem, and thinks they
>are K00L because they figured out how to uudecode pictures off of
>alt.binaries.erotica.nekkid-wimmin. And they are SO much more hip than
>those THIRTEEN year olds who play D&D.
That doesn't match the demographics of my WW customers.
George Novodvorsky
: In article <3cfo1j$c...@taco.cc.ncsu.edu>,
: Christopher K Bern <cb...@unity.ncsu.edu> wrote:
: >(2) Chris, I think you're missing a major point. I've read every single
: >one of the 55 posts in this thread, and of them, you're the ONLY PERSON
: >who's defending the changes.
: Actually, there have been about a half dozen folks, so far by my count,
: speak out encouragingly about the prospect of Inphobia, and when you
: consider how many of those 55 posts are repeat posts by people who'd
: already made their opinions noted the equation is a lot less one-sided
: than you imply.
: >Okay, I'm not going to go further on that. Basically, everyone except
: >Chris isn't happy with the changes. Does that say something about the
: >merits and needs of the change?
: Either that, or it says something about the attitudes and prejudices of a
: small group of highly vocal people here on the net.
O.K., I have tried to put my time where everyone else's mouth seems to be,
and get some semi-hard numbers behind the name-calling.
Scorecards, get your hot and spicy scorecards, fresh scorecards here!
Email names of the parties involved, and their apparent stand on this
particular flamewar. I don't guarantee to perfectly express any specific
party's opinion in one line - this is just what I have gathered from my
reading of the posts. YMMV (pronounced "Flame On!").
FOR Ken Cliffe's posting style and/or the WWM change:
Sam Chupp (raga...@netcom.com, tore...@aol.com) (presumably...)
as...@orion.alaska.edu Scott(?) at University of Alaska
c...@pentagon.io.com Chris W. McCubbin at Illuminati Online
and, arguably,
josh...@solutions.solon.com Dave Rust at Solutions Online Internet Service
dp...@cleveland.Freenet.EduFrederic Garber at Case Western Reserve University
cber...@magnus.acs.ohio-state.edu Catsclaw at The Ohio State University
AGAINST Ken Cliffe's posting style: 'net punks' reference and >78 columns
bru...@teleport.com Bruce Baugh at An IP With A View
ayo...@vcd.hp.com Andrew Young at HP VCD Software Quality
m...@panix.com Mitchell Gross at Public Access Internet & UNIX
jam...@coulomb.uwaterloo.ca James Nicoll at University of Waterloo
gcg...@pitt.edu Geoffrey C Grabowski at University of Pittsburgh
Roderick_J...@ccm.hf.intel.com Roderick Robertson at Intel
szie...@us.oracle.com Stephan Zielinski at Oracle World HQ, Redwood Shores
rob...@inviso.com Beamish Boy at My Own Private Hell
mud...@uxa.ecn.bgu.edu Donald G Bixler at Malkavian Madness Network
sha...@cube.net Alexander Siegelin at CUBENet Multiline BBS
jj31...@SABLE.ADELPHI.EDU Adelphi University, Garden City, NY
cbm...@psu.edu Your Name at Penn State University
sea...@telerama.lm.com Sea Wasp at Telerama Public Access Internet TCP/IP
dhe...@plains.NoDak.eduDavid R. Henry at North Dakota Higher Education Comput
tfs...@pomona.edu Trent Smith at Pomona College
dst...@mercury.cis.yale.edu Daniel Starr at Yale University
fra...@mundens.equinox.gen.nz Frank Pitt at Munden's Bar
doug...@delphi.comDouglas E. Berry at Delphi (in...@delphi.com email, 800-69
wild...@delphi.comWild Mule Games at Delphi (in...@delphi.com email, 800-695-
tor...@pvv.unit.noTor Iver Wilhelmsen at or.gan.i.za.tion, n., ... 5. a body
bcks...@crl.comAndrew Finch at CRL Dialup Internet Access (415) 705-6060 [L
AGAINST the general neo-goth editorial style in WWM:
peaco...@cobra.uni.edu Greywolf at University of Northern Iowa
ro...@soda.berkeley.edu Eric Rowe at UCB Integrative Biology
ru...@brahms.udel.edu Matthew James Ruane at University of Delaware
tha...@runic.mind.orgAlexander Williams at Runic Writings UUCP Site - Lawren
liz...@vnet.net Lizard at Ferengi School of Business Ethics
AGAINST WWM style change (these are generally least vitriolic):
jac...@sonata.cc.purdue.edu Bryan J. Maloney at Purdue University
ap...@erzo.Berkeley.EDU Shannon Appel at JSNTG
jdr5...@uxa.cso.uiuc.edu Quynne at University of Illinois at Urbana
smy...@hubcap.clemson.eduStephen E Mynhier at Clemson University, The Great
Scott.R...@launchpad.unc.eduScott Ricketts at The University of North Car
pig...@prairienet.orgDouglas L. Vandenburgh at Prairienet, the East-Central I
ga...@mindspring.com Josh Traub at MindSpring Enterprises, Inc.
s...@pentagon.io.comSteffan O'Sullivan at FUDGE Bunnies & Burrows players of N
xe...@pitt.edu Josh Karabin at University of Pittsburgh [CIS]
pa...@turing.toronto.edu Paul Jackson at CSRI, University of Toronto
rep...@zikzak.apana.org.auLiam Routt at Zikzak public access UNIX, Melbourne
tor...@pvv.unit.noTor Iver Wilhelmsen at or.gan.i.za.tion, n., ... 5. a body
mste...@cs.uml.edu Michael D. Steeves at UMass-Lowell Computer Science
l...@cs.tu-berlin.de Lutz Hofmann at Technical University of Berlin, Germany
roy...@iastate.edu rev. roy crisman at Iowa State University, Ames, Iowa
AGAINST Chris W. McCubbin specifically (some names repeated from previous
listings, generally very vitriolic):
sea...@telerama.lm.com Sea Wasp at Telerama Public Access Internet TCP/IP
smy...@hubcap.clemson.edu Stephen E Mynhier at Clemson University, The Great
msu...@tiamat.umd.umich.edu Mike Suzio at Univerisity of Michigan - Dearborn
bru...@teleport.com Bruce Baugh at An IP With A View
jac...@hubcap.clemson.eduJacob A Hester at Clemson University, The Great Stat
Ph...@philm.demon.co.uk Phil Masters at Myorganisation
dd...@pitt.edu Doug Dejulio at University of Pittsburgh
pnna...@mtu.edu Paul N. Nagata at Michigan Technological University
cb...@unity.ncsu.edu Christopher K Bern at North Carolina State University
gcg...@pitt.edu Geoffrey C Grabowski at University of Pittsburgh
pa...@turing.toronto.edu Paul Jackson at CSRI, University of Toronto
pig...@prairienet.orgDouglas L. Vandenburgh at Prairienet, the East-Central I
doug...@delphi.comDouglas E. Berry at Delphi (in...@delphi.com email, 800-69
nikc...@aol.com NikChick at America Online, Inc. (1-800-827-6364)
morn...@aol.com MORNINMAN at America Online, Inc. (1-800-827-6364)
For those who missed the original post starting this flamewar, here it is:
By the way, the original post had _no_ line breaks within a single
paragraph (one of the causes for the flames). In order to make it available
to those without a good newsreader, I inserted them. Otherwise this is
verbatim, with even the path and .sig left in. (Yes, I know I'm wasting a
little bandwidth. I will surely be flamed enough without someone claiming
that I deleted something which changes the whole meaning of the post in the
.sig.)
-----begin quoted post------
From news.bu.edu!bloom-beacon.mit.edu!gatech!howland.reston.ans.net!
ix.netcom.com!netcom.com!ragabash
Mon Dec 12 12:45:34 1994
Newsgroups: alt.games.whitewolf,rec.games.frp.misc
Path: news.bu.edu!bloom-beacon.mit.edu!gatech!howland.reston.ans.net!
ix.netcom.com!netcom.com!ragabash
From: raga...@netcom.com
Subject: And Now, a word from Ken Cliffe, Editor of White Wolf Magazine
Message-ID: <ragabashD...@netcom.com>
Organization: NETCOM On-line Communication Services (408 261-4700 guest)
Date: Wed, 7 Dec 1994 05:23:08 GMT
Lines: 23
Xref: news.bu.edu alt.games.whitewolf:13284 rec.games.frp.misc:54483
WHITE WOLF'S MAG ONLINE
Hey, Net Punk,
It had to happen sometime. With upcoming changes in WHITE WOLF Magazine,
the cutting voice of White Wolf will soon be on the net!
Sure you're into games, but we realize that you love movies, computer games
and innovations, comics, collectibles, weird fiction, music and
games. Starting with issue #51, the mag covers 'em all!
Don't worry, we'll still offer articles on our own games and those from
throughout the industry. We'll also maintain our irreverent, biting
style. It wouldn't be our magazine if we didn't! In tribute to the change,
look for White Wolf INPHOBIA (tm), the thicker, glossier, more colorful
phoenix that rises from WWM's ashes. It's a new name, a new look and a new
approach, but all the attitude and style that you either loved or hated
before lives on!
So what was that about the net? Starting in January, articles will be
selected from each issue of INPHOBIA(tm) and posted online. You'll get a
taste of what's coming to stores and mailboxes in the real world, and will
have an opportunity to respond to each issue directly. Just post your
comments and opinions on each issue's few articles at raga...@netcom.com,
with 'INPHOBIA COMMENTS' in the subject line and you'll become part of this
transforming animal.
Hope you like it (or can deal).
Ken Cliffe
Editor
White Wolf INPHOBIA and INPHOBIA are trademarks of White Wolf, Inc.
--
Sam Chupp (raga...@netcom.com, tore...@aol.com)
White Wolf Game Studio 404-292-1819
Internet Representative / Assistant Creative Director / Playtest Coordinator
Try The Storyteller's Circle, White Wolf's MUSH: draco.unm.edu 6666
----end quoted post------
George, self-appointed net-scorekeeper ("Kill the Ump!").
FollowUp set to .advocacy, as should have been done a long time ago.
Greywolf
> In article <1994Dec11.1...@cobra.uni.edu>,
> Greywolf <peaco...@cobra.uni.edu> wrote:
>>In article <3cdon5$2...@pentagon.io.com>, c...@pentagon.io.com (CWM) writes:
>>> How the hell does he know it won't interest him before he's even seen it?
>>
>>Maybe it's because of poor marketing. That is a large part of business, after
>>all.
>
> Do you always base your attitude on a new product or service on the first
> ad you read?
No, but in your case I might make an exception. Face it, image means a lot to
the public. White Wolf's whole "attitude" schtick is an "image thing", I would
presume. In my case, I thought Vampire (and the rest) seemed interesting
because of the premise of playing "immortals" of various sorts. I was turned
off, however, by the prominence of "punks" in the (borrowed) books that I read,
and by the anarchistic-let's-beat-up-the-mundanes attitudes exhibited by what
V:tM and W:tA players I know. I've got enough trouble with players in my own
campaigns thinking they can just go and push the "mundanes" around without any
repercussions, and then they get upset when the "cops" turn out to have enough
firepower to manage a scratch or a bruise.
So, along comes the "net punks" ad, with a promise of more attitude and more
"biting commentary". I thought the ad was presumptuous and silly. In my
original response, however, while I was eager to decline the honor of being
called a "net punk", I still thought it was nice that yet another gaming
company is getting 'net-connected -- even if I may not think that their
products cater toward my particular interests. (SHOULD they cater to my
interests? Well, I'd be happy if they did, but it's a free country, and
there are plenty of other, larger markets to tap into.)
There wasn't any vitriol from me at this point. No, I started getting annoyed
when YOU jumped into the fray. Sure, I can understand a bit of defensiveness
on your part when something you're a contributor to gets waylaid by popular
opinion, but you've done nothing to help the situation. Instead, you've
blasted everyone who dares to have /anything/ negative to say about White Wolf
or Ken Cliffe, even tearing into those who originally started by putting in a
few words in DEFENSE of White Wolf.
> See, here we go again with this bizarre paranoid attitude. My Lawrence
> Welk crack was a specific and pointed response to a jerk who posted the
> inflamitory and untrue statement "punk music is noise." In that context I
> think it was a pretty restrained reaction overall. But here you're coming
> along reading the remark at third hand, and turning it into a general
> slam against everybody who doesn't share my personal music tastes. I have
> no problem whatsoeverwith folks who like different music than I do, I do
> have a problem with jerks who feel they have to gratuitously slam my tastes.
It wasn't a big stretch of the imagination to sense a degree of condescention
in your whole approach. The repeated use of profanities, references to
"jerks", "whining" and such does indicate a degree of condescention and, yes,
insulting behavior. Oh yes, you've said that you've not personally insulted
anybody, hm? Well, then, who are these "jerks"? Is it that if you don't
mention the name of the person you're referring to in the same sentence that
it's no longer a "personal attack"? I could perhaps say "Well, maybe YOU see
it that way", but your own whining about "personal attacks" levelled at
yourself indicates that you're using a double standard.
By the way, am I insulting you? Am I making a personal attack? I'm
disagreeing with you, yes, and I'm suggesting that you're doing a few things
that IMHO you ought not to. This is, however, nothing at all worse than what
you've been doing.
> And another thing, when did I get appointed official net.rep for WW
> magazine. I'm a regular contributor, and that's all I am, and I have
I do believe I understood that much quite a distance back in this thread.
However, you're piping up for White Wolf, you're a contributor to its material
(and, I would presume, its attitude), and since Mr. Cliffe hasn't seen fit to
make any follow-ups -- Congratulations! Until White Wolf officially distances
itself from your inflammatory posts, you're no doubt shaping many readers'
minds on just what White Wolf represents.
> absolutely no say in any of their editorial or business decisions
> whatsoever. You're not my "customer," potential or otherwise, and even if
> you were, nobody's insulted you or insinuated anything insulting about
> you. If you don't like the way I express my opinions, you're free to
Ah yes, I'm not your "customer". You know, I think some people just don't see
how things connect together in this world. I /could/ be a customer for White
Wolf. After all, while I do not subscribe, I do occasionally pick up various
gaming magazines that have some article or another that interests me. Now, if
I were to complain to some company and were to get the response, "You're only
one person. We don't give a #@!$% what you think. If you don't like the rag,
don't buy it," that would be really bad PR. I would probably stop buying it.
Nay, let's strengthen that a bit. I DEFINITELY wouldn't buy it. On top of
that, I'd tell all my friends about it, and show them the letter to show just
what a bad attitude those guys at Generic Games have. Those friends probably
wouldn't amount to much, either -- or else some of them might actually think
it's funny and resolve to buy some Generic Games products to spite me. Who
knows? The human mind is a fickle thing.
For some reason, however, most companies do well to present their best side to
the public. Bad attitudes don't usually do well. Maybe this is all inverted
in White Wolf's market, if they're catering to Bad Attitudes in the first
place. Who am I to say? I'm not a marketing major. However, this whole
thread is reinforcing the notion that White Wolf is geared toward the Bad
Attitude crowd, and the rest be darned. I guess that leaves me out. So you
can deal with it? Grand. I'd like to know what somebody who /really/ claims
to represent White Wolf Games would think about this.
In any case, you've indicated your status as a regular contributor to White
Wolf ... but you have nothing to do with the product?
> ignore them, but spare me the wounded whining, OK? I'm not in this thread
No, sir, I am not "wounded". I can handle your insults.
Since all I've seen of your posts consist of vitriolic spiel, and I've seen
nothing to the contrary for comparative purposes, it has lost its impact. As
for "whining", well, I've seen that word thrown around so much that I'm not
sure what exactly whining IS anymore. However, if I qualify for it, you most
certainly do as well. Welcome to the wonderful world of whining. It's a
national pastime, you know.
> logic and objectivity into what seems to me a ridiculous and inexplicable
Logic? Objectivity? Give me a break.
> So, did you have something to say about Inphobia, or did you just have an
> uncontrollable urge to fart in my general direction?
Your colorful phrases are not very persuasive. No, sir, I most definitely did
not have an urge to fart. I'm anal-retentive, after all. You, however, seem
SO much more expressive.
--
-Jordan .. PEACO...@cobra.uni.edu <New, improved, friendly,
.OO. Jordan Greywolf (Jordan Peacock) mushy, non-controversial
O/\O 1610 Parker .sig, due to popular
~~ Cedar Falls, IA 50613 demand! =) >
I love ... God, my family, my friends, unicorns, wolves, miscellaneous
critters, LARPs, RPGs, miniatures, doodling, sculpting, writing, gaming,
old cars, giant Japanese robots, anime, computer animation, and donuts. =)
Stephen E Mynhier
Perhaps this was an exercise in the absurdity of extremes, perhaps not.
However, I am in my 20s, as are most of the WW gamers that I know (This
even extends beyondmy immediate gaming group and extends into the players
that I run for at the conventions that I attend). So to this group (that
is to assume that everyone that he is addressing is an average WW gamer)
PUNK would still be considered an insult. Some would view it as such.
Some would not. But I personally do not know of any WW gamer that would
consider punk a compliment.
Stephen
Charles Ryan
jac...@sonata.cc.purdue.edu writes:
>1: He likes using cheap rhetorical tricks, especially the false
opposite and
>the straw man. Note that he stated that anyone who didn't like punk rock
>only listened to Lawrence Welk. Those who didn't like the "punk"
attitude
>were dittoheads, according to Chris.
Actually, he didn't say this. He responded to someone else who said,
specifically, the "punk music is noise," by saying that that attitude
belongs to those who listen to Lawrence Welk on eight-track tapes. Maybe
that's still overstating things a bit--but if you're going to accuse
someone of cheap rhetorical tricks, you might want to be a bit more
accurate in supporting your accusation.
I, for one, happen to like both Punk and Swing, although I wouldn't be
caught dead listening to an eight-track...
Bryan J. Maloney
Okay, I think I'll jump in again.
I play the Storyteller games and I think they have stupid rules. I think
the settings are pathetic, badly researched, and present the most egregious,
adolescent crap in the veneer of "philosophy" without managing to present
even the beginnings of real philosophy, occult knowledge, or other such things
that are supposed to be the subjects of the games.
Nevertheless, I play them.
Why? I have fun. I like the people I play with.
I have no interest in "goth" subculture (for me, a Goth is a Germanic barbarian
who sacked Rome). I don't bother trying to be hip (if you have to try, you're
not). I don't give a damn about deriving any deep meaning from something that
is nothing more than a damned game. If you want to understand life, live.
If you want to understand the "darkness within us all", it waits within you,
ready to come out and play for real.
I never wear black (passe), wear LOTS of animal products (and eat them, too).
On those rare ocaissions I do smoke, it's a big stogie in my mouth, not some
cigarette. My drinks are ale and scotch not wine thingies. My drug is
caffeine.
I still play the games. I still enjoy playing them. I don't have to think
that a game is brilliant to enjoy it as a GAME. I don't have to have the
least bit of respect for a game system to play it. I just remember that
Storyteller and all their gothic-punk settings are about as realistic and
really serious as Muppet Babies on bad acid and go from there.
Remial
If it's on the net it's free and it don't cost me nothing!
I nolonger have to deal with the confused looks of the storekeeper's
faces when I ask about the mag.
Ok so i have to put up with a bit of small minded-ness. Big deal I get
that from my family.
In the long run I get the best of the deal!
******begin sig file******
Click. And I resist the impulse to say, "Wait a minute. Hee Haw is my
favorite show."
My opinions are mine and may be shared at any time so beware.
Be Seeing You.
James Wallis
> So you don't listen to music, never watch movies and don't read? Hmmm,
> guess the magazine won't appeal to you.
I listen to music: that's why I subscribe to THE WIRE (not WIRED),
a magazine which covers my personal taste in music -- avant garde,
experimental, electronic, post-industrial and world. Even assuming
the new-look WW will cover those fields of music, why should I pay
for its 2-3 pages of coverage when I can get 60 pages of more in-
depth coverage by more knowledgeable writers instead?
I watch movies: that's why I subscribe to SIGHT AND SOUND, a
magazine relevant to the sort of movies I enjoy watching. Even if
the new-look WW's film coverage talks about the sorts of films I'm
interested in, why should I pay for its 2-3 pages of reviews and
articles when I'm already getting interviews with the likes of
Scorsese and Tarantino, and thirty pages of in-depth reviews by
some of the best film journalists around every month?
I read books; that's why I subscribe to THE LITERARY REVIEW. I
already know that WW will not be reviewing or talking about the
sort of books I enjoy, but even if I thought there might be some
overlap between the journalists' tastes and my own, I would rather
read a magazine that devoted all its content to the subjects I'm
interested in, rather than one that covered four or five fields,
none of them in much depth.
I play RPGs; that's why I read magazines about RPGs. Etc.
--
James Wallis <> Publishers of INTERACTIVE FANTASY
HOGSHEAD PUBLISHING LTD <> <> and other stuff we can't discuss
(ja...@hogshead.demon.co.uk) <> yet. Please use new email address
Personal capacity.
Ed Pegg Jr
fireworks."
Seems like it worked. I just finished reading through 90+ responses to
the original composition. The whole topic would have died if Mr CWM
hadn't kept adding fuel to it, so I'd like to applaud him for his
incredible ability to stick his foot into his mouth over and over and
over again.
Case in point: Dictionaries.
Over and over again, Mr. CWM has berated people for judging a magazine
based on one lousy press release. Immediately thereafter, he judges the
most respected dictionary on the planet as trash without a second of
thought. He asked about the word 'bad' in the OED. Here's one definition:
BAD
"Possessing an abundance of favourable qualities." As slang, this def
dates back to 1928.
And it even has the WW def of Punk. So, Mr. CWM, take your own advice,
and don't slander something before you check it out.
Personally, my own favorite dictionary is Webster's New International
2nd Edition (1934). The Oxford English Dictionary 2nd edition comes
next, followed by Merriam-Webster tenth Collegiate, then Random House 2nd
edition, then NI3. I have some others, but I only have so much space. :)
Back on topic, I'll repeat what a whole lot of other people have said.
A gaming magazine should be a gaming magazine, first and foremost. It's
okay to have occasional asides (I still remember Gary Gygax's movie
review of Conan the Barbarian in Dragon, for instance) -- they can be a
lot of fun. But when the asides take over, you lose everything.
And finally a quote from Cafe Angst, my favorite comic:
"DON'T PATRONIZE ME!!"
Good advice. :)
--ED!!
--
__________________________________________________________________________
Ed Pegg Jr xei...@netcom.com
Changing QU to Z will communiZe a communiQUe
Philip Masters
> ... A publisher can't afford to listen to such
> nancy-boy minorities...
Is it only this side of the pond that the above line reads as homophobic?
Tres punk, Chris. Tres macho.
--
Phil Masters
-------------------------------------------------------------------------
"Skool according to headmaster's pi-jaw is like LIFE chiz if that is the
case wot is the use of going on? There must be give and take, fair weather
and foul, triumph and disaster but he do not give the exact proportions."
Geoffrey Willans, "How to be Topp".
Philip Masters
cb...@unity.ncsu.edu "Christopher K Bern" writes:
> ... I've read every single
> one of the 55 posts in this thread, and of them, you're the ONLY PERSON
> who's defending the changes. Each and every one of the other posts has
> an objection in some form or another.
Mine didn't. It might have done if I'd bothered. But I didn't. So it
didn't.
Sorry. Nitpicking.
Remial
We can call it alt.flame.ken.cliffe
that way we can get back to decussing whitewolf games ok?
Christ I've been waiting a year for the school to get this group then all
i get is spam on Re: And Now, a word from Ken Cliffe, Editor of White
Wolf Magazine
If i wanted spam I'd read alt.sex !
I, and maybe several others here on the net, subscribed to this group
because whitewolf makes the best games around. So what if Ken doesn't
know what the net is about. How about we ignore him. Maybe he will go away.
Consider yourselves flamed
CWM
Tor Iver Wilhelmsen <tor...@pvv.unit.no> wrote:
>c...@pentagon.io.com (CWM) writes:
>>
>>So you have an interest in games and a desire to read magazines that
>>cater to that interest, but you have an interest in movies, music and
>>books and no desire to read anything that caters to that interest? Isn't
>>that just a tad arbitrary and unreasonable? It looks to me like it is,
>>and that's why I say you're demonstrating a closed mind. If WW has met
>>your need for gaming related journalism, why can't Inphobia meet a
>>similer need for journalism relating to some of your other interests, in
>>addition to continuing to offer interesting gaming stuff?
>
>Because: a magazine that is a little bit of everything covers by
>definition a small part of each of those things. It will be a watered-down
>games magazine plus movie mag plus music rag, and all in all will not be
>able to do its job sufficiently in any of the areas to be of any interest.
Can you say "quality, not quantity?" Looking at a wide variety of
things from a unique and interesting perspective can be just as
interesting and legitimate as looking at one thing in exhaustive detail.
This equation of more topics = less substance just doesn't hold up in the
real world.
>You seem to make the inpression that just because Stephen does not want to
>buy an "all-in-one" magazine he has a closed mind. Ever considered
>leapfrog competitions? You leap to so far-off conclusions that the world
>record is at stake. For my own sake: If I want to read about music, I buy
>Rolling Stone (for instance). When I buy Rolling Stone I do not expect
>to find articles on, say, roleplaying games in it. It's all a question
>of interest, and just because we don't want to buy "your" magazine is
>no reason for insulting people.
Not that it's relevent, but I have to ask - how long has it been since
you actually read an issue of Rolling Stone? It hasn't been a music mag
since, oh, 1984 or so. It covers music, film, fashion, culture, politics
(all of them, I might add, in a uniquely tedious fashion).
And, just for the record, I haven't insulted anybody.
>>Sincere concern is one thing. It's your prophecies of doom and ongoing
>>refusal to even consider that the new magazine might possibly have merit
>>to some reasonable reader that's closed minded.
>
>No, it's an opinion. It differs from yours. It happens. Deal with it.
>Everything goes better with Coke.
Yes, Stephen has an opinion. Yes, Stephen is perfectly entitled to his
opinion. Stephen expressed his opinion on the net. That's legal.
I too have an opinion. It is my opinion that Stephen's opinion is a bit
narrow minded and prejudicial. I expressed my opinion, and my reasons for
holding it. That, too, is legal.
There is no reason whatsoever to conclude that I therefore consider Stephen
himself narrow-minded or prejudiced on any issue in the world other than
this one. Any insinuation to that effect drawn from any of my posts
exists entirely in the mind of the reader.
I never insulted Stephen or any other individual. I expressed distate
with a certain attitude (an attitude which, by the way, I never
associated with Stephen) and went on to challenge a specific opinion of
Stephen's.
>>The point, Stephen, was that Inphobia's going to be covering a lot of
>>subjects that are just about as important to gamers as gaming, and that
>>therefore these gamers might owe it to themselves to at least give it a
>>try before writing it off. Your own interests, as I suspected they
>>would, completely reinforce that point. I trust you can see the
>>relevence now.
>
>Do you mean that Inphobia will give as good coverage of the movie industry
>as Premiere magazine? That if I buy Inphobia I will not have to buy
>neither Premiere, Rolling Stone nor (say) Skeptic? How endlessly cool! How
>many pages was that magazine did you say?
>
Well, Inphobia will hopefully have a unique perspective on films, music,
unexplained phenomenon or whatever. It may not have as much coverage of
all those things as the major national mags devoted to them, but that
doesn't mean that the coverage there is won't be "as good."
--
Chris W. McCubbin / So I'm sitting there yelling, "Waiter,
C...@IO.COM/CWMF...@AOL.COM / there's a fnord in my soup," for, like, half
Freelance writer/editor / an hour . . . and the bum never even
games/comics/fiction/opinion / LOOKS at me!
CWM
Michael D. Steeves <mste...@cs.uml.edu> wrote:
>
>OK, let me have a go at this.... I have a wide variety of tastes in movies,
>literature, and music. However, I can pretty much honestly say that I
>have *never* listened to, read, or watched something because of what some
>"critic" says. Hell, I don't think I even do these things based on what
>friends say...I'll give stuff a listen, or borrow a book, (don't really
>have time/$$$ for movies...tres expensive for a college kid like myself...)
>but just because a friend of mine (one that I knew for about 3 years at the
>time) like Marillion didn't make me go out and buy a tape of theirs.
Well, that's one approach, but it's a bit haphazard. I mean, there's a
lot of stuff out there, and it's hard to experience it all directly.
Sometimes it's helpful to have somebody to help you with the preliminary
screening.
>= Things you don't like? Don't you do ANYTHING except game for fun? If
>= that's really the problem, then I take it back. Your mind's not narrow,
>= your life is.
>
>Can't some people make their choices about music, books, and movies
>*without* WW's opinion...? I like WW's games. I don't give a rat's ass
>what they (or anyone else, for that matter) have to say about anything else.
My problem is not that some people have no particular interest in WW
Opinions. There are certainly lots of valid and unique opinions out there
that I don't go out of my way to seek out, even though they might do me
some good.
My problem is with those people who have already dismissed WW's opinion
as valueless - not even potentially interesting, given even an infinite
supply of time and resources. People who have already convinced
themselves that because of something in WW's nature their effort is
already doomed to irrelevance and inferiority.
And, for those of you who are starting to frantically type, "hey man, I
never said that! I just said I'd probably rather spend the four bucks on
something else," my only response is, I wasn't talking to *you.* I think
you're probably going to miss out, but hey, we all miss out on lots of
little worthwhile things all the time. That's one of life's little tragedies.
>Look, it's like this. There are forums for information about books,
>movies, and music. There are also forums for information about games. WW is
>used to tell about games, and that's where the interest in the mag is. It's
>WW's raison d'etre. If you change the purpose of WW magazine from telling
>about WoD/gaming to gaming, music, books, movies, the club scene, etc., then
>suddenly the central idea isn't central anymore. If the only thing about
>a magazine that I read it for goes from being the only thing to being one of
>four or five things, then what's the point...?
To find out more about the four or five things?
CWM
Sea Wasp <sea...@telerama.lm.com> wrote:
>In article <3cg8li$3...@pentagon.io.com> c...@pentagon.io.com (CWM) writes:
>
>>See, here we go again with this bizarre paranoid attitude. My Lawrence
>>Welk crack was a specific and pointed response to a jerk who posted the
>>inflamitory and untrue statement "punk music is noise."
>
>
> Read what you say above. Remember that I was responding to you
>TELLING EVERYONE that "for the last 20 years, Punk has meant". As
>other have responded, that is at best ONE definition, used by a narrow
>little splinter group.
So you admit that my definition is accurate in the proper context?
> So you come on here, blasting away because everyone on the
>net used THEIR definitions instead of yours.
>
> Well, EXCUUUUUUUUUUSE us for living, but I feel no more obligation
>to accept your little sub-group's definitions of words and attitudes
>than you do to accept mine. You said, in effect "you shouldn't be using
>YOUR definition, you should use mine!" and went ballistic when I, quite
>logically, did the same thing to you.
Actually, Mr. Wasp., I do accept your definition as valid in a certain
context, and all I was complaining about was your refusal to extend the
same respect to mine. You were the one who insisted on imposing your
personal definition in a context were it was obviously unintended and did
not, in fact, apply.
(Obviously, the net is badly in need of rec.games.frp.semantics.pointless).
> You are either a moron or a hypocrite, or (most likely) a
>self-involved pretentious wanker.
>
For those of you who may have been concerned that some of my prior points
may have been needlessly personally insulting, I'd like to draw your
collective attention briefly to the above sentence. See, this is a
needless personal insult. I don't do that. Thanks for your attention.