There are a small group of people who think trading is “superior” to just giving them away, and I’ve debated with them because they don’t want me intruding on their “fun.” I think this screencap perfectly encapsulates why I think trading playbooks (versus sharing) is elitist and stupid.
It would be nice if Vincent were not so deliberately ambivalent and tight-lipped about trading versus sharing, because often these people seem to think Vincent sanctioned trading over sharing, when he didn’t. But they use that idea as a way of telling me to shut up or go away, and I won’t do either.
If you don’t want to debate about this, then stop bringing it up and don’t follow up your commentary by locking the thread or deleting it. That’s just cowardly.
Apart from calling the act of trading stupid, I’ve never resorted to calling people names or telling them flat out they’re doing it wrong. There is no right or wrong, I just favor sharing over trading because I think it’s more inviting and I think trading is insular. But what is wrong is the way people handle this debate and how they address it.
Well, to be frank, calling people’s actions stupid simply because you disagree with them and not actually because they cause the world to be worse isn’t exactly the kind of generous and thoughtful behavior that would be consistent with your “give away playbooks” policy.
Granted, unnamed commenter isn’t exactly being gracious, but your comment below is sinking to his/her level. If you want to be inviting, try saying and doing things that are inviting instead of calling strangers on the internet stupid.
Yeah, I find either approach to be okay, but what you had done in that guy’s thread was basically threadcrapping, because he was trying to generate new materials for AW by ransoming his own. Again, that’s a perfectly valid approach. What happens to someone’s creative fruits is 100% up to that person, so if you’re going to host them all on your blog, then truth be told, you ought to have the permission of all authors involved. I’m all for sharing creative works freely, but not all authors of such are, and they are entitled to share them how they choose. We are NOT entitled to someone else’s work unless they bless it.
Wow. That guy is way too angry about AW playbooks.
I don’t get why this is still an issue. People who want to trade will trade. People who want to get content from the creator will do that. No way is superior, so why are people trying to act as if they’re more method is more valid. If your mad because somebody got pissy over the internet, the answer isn’t to get pissy back.
Shreyas Sampat In the course of the debate I’ve called it stupid because it’s inherently an isolated feedback loop for generating content.
https://plus.google.com/u/0/104648053315873400268/posts/cz4XJFW1NNo
David Rothfeder I don’t understand why people start arguments with me about it, especially when they haven’t read the previous debate. I wouldn’t even say anything about it if it weren’t for the fact that receive comments like the one in the screencap from a handful of people. There is certainly a lot of churlish and arrogant behavior being bandied about over something so insignificant.
I don’t need to read the previous debate. The issue your arguing when it comes down to it is a matter of personal preference of how people receive and distribute playbooks. There isn’t a right answer so there shouldn’t be an argument. If anybody tried to argue that playbooks should only be traded I’d say the same thing. If somebody is being childish about the issue, then don’t be childish back, just ignore them and do what you do.
No, you’re wrong, but if you’re not willing to read the things that have already been said I’m not going to dance the same steps all over again with you.
Patrick Henry Downs : Man, we get that you’ve taken a vow or whatever to keep calling playbook trading stupid until someone convinces you its not, but seriously? I can’t see you winning the battle for hearts and minds with this tactic…
Drew Harpunea I’m perfectly willing to let the issue drop, but people like David keep perpetuating the debate by linking my name. That’s why I link to the previous debate, because everything that he’s said has already been said, and unless anybody has something new to bring to the table it’s just a lot of noise.
uuuummm, I haven’t linked your name this whole post. I use name links to specify who I’m talking or responding to. My whole concern is that so far I’ve seen you complain on two different people’s request to trade threads. I think doing so is bad for the community and will encourage people who like trading to go else where for their Apocalypse community needs. Personally I prefer sharing over trading but that’s really never been the point that I was making.
I didn’t complain in the last post, now deleted, all I wrote was “_facepalm_” but then you linked my name and tried to start a debate. So I posted the link to the first debate. Then … why am I re-capping something you should remember happening, like, hours ago?!
I don’t know what you’re trying to get out of me David, but if you agree with my position then why are you being such a hardass towards me and trying to keep this going? Because as far as I’m concerned it’s not a debate anymore, it’s just trolling.
All I’ve ever really said was that it’s a preference. If people want to trade, let them trade. You don’t need to point a finger and say ‘you’re wrong for trading’
Sure thing buddy.