On 2009-04-17, Jim Henley wrote:
Without Part 2, the negotiation part is just limp wristed wrangling relying on social pressure to eventually resolve.
Ralph, I ask this question because I am honestly unsure of your view: Do you think there is negotiation that does not constitute "limp wristed wrangling relying on social pressure?" Is all effort at suasion, in your view, a kind of emotional blackmail, passive aggression or conversational bullying? Is good-faith seeking after mutual harmony possible? If you and I disagree on a point of fiction and hash it out verbally among you, me and the GM, and the GM ends up seeing it your way, is it because you're a bigger bastard than I am? If I end up seeing it your way, does that make me your victim? Inevitably? Is your view instead that there can be good-faith disputation and bad, but that a kind of social Gresham's Law means that the bad drives out the good? You seem to be operating not just from a horror of social disfunction but from a believe in its ubiquity. I'm trying to figure out what I'm missing.