BrainKing - 讨论板 (Tournaments)

监管者: MadMonkey

Tournaments

Please use this board to discuss Tournaments and Team Tournaments, ask questions and hopefully find the answers you are looking for. Personal attacks, arguing or baiting will not be tolerated on this board. If you have, or see a problem or something you are not happy about or think is wrong, please contact one of the above Moderators OR contact a Global Moderator HERE

Tournaments

Team Tournaments

Apr 2025 - Triple Dice Poker 4 - Starts 11th April

Apr 2025 - Dice Chess 5 - Starts 25th April

讨论板列表
您未权限在该板张贴消息。只有最低脑马级别的会员才允许张贴在该板。

状态: 所有人能发表

25. 五月 2003, 14:47:45

harley

显示此用户所有帖子 | 显示索引 | 链接

I have been desperately trying to stay out of this because I know from experience that debating with Dmitri and TT can go on for days and round in never-ending circles.

But please, Dmitri, dont say that people who truly cannot afford membership are irrelevant to ANY discussion.
I should imagine these people feel worthless enough without being tossed aside as 'irrelevant'. Not to mention being in the category of 'such a low number it has little to no impact on relevent issues'.

This is partly what I believe TT was saying, you are looking down on people who do not have what you have.

" He/she doesn't have membership? Why not? Unbelievable! Freeloaders! "

" He/she canot afford it?? Why not? Lazy scoundrels!! "

Sound familiar?! It reminds me of Scrooge! "If they would rather die, they had better do it, and decrease the surplus population"!!

25. 五月 2003, 20:28:22

Dmitri King

显示此用户所有帖子 | 显示索引 | 链接

题目: Re:

<But please, Dmitri, dont say that people who truly cannot afford membership are irrelevant to ANY discussion. >>>>>

I am confused by your statement Harley. TTJazzberry and I were discussing ability to pay as a sidebar to one of our discussions. I do not believe EITHER of us said that thye are irrelevant to anything.

What we both probably said at some opitn is that the debate is not relevant to the other issues we were debating. If that was not ewhat was said, that was what was implied. I think I may have said that those who treuly cannot afford to pay make up a small percentage of those who are brain Pawns. That is not to say that they are irrelevant, just that they have little statiscital effect on the debate.

There is nothing demaaning about that. If there are 5 millionaires who play here, then those 5 peopel are also statistically insignificant (out of 4800 non paying memberas).

ANyway, my diatribe was actually EXEMPTING those people (who truly cannot afford) from my scorn. I am taking issue with those who CAN pay but don't, then complain. The only thing I said about those who truly cannot pay is that maybe time would be better spent doing something other than playing online games. Of course, if said person is disabled in some way, that might not be possible.

BUT this is all off on a tangent. The real issue is that most brain Pawns can afford to buy a membership, and for whatever reason, do not. I don't think it is because they are dissatisfied with the site, but rather, because they don't feel like getting sometihng for something when htey can get something for NOTHING instread.

And that is theuir choice! I do not object. One of my veyr best friends is a Brain Pawn. But, I guarantee you that never in a million years would he actually complain to Fencer that he isnl;t getting enough. He realizes (unlike some of the loufder brain Pawns) that he is not paying anything, and he is happy with what he has.