Annoying Questions I'd Like Answered...

hyzmarca · Post by **hyzmarca** » Mon Feb 29, 2016 4:43 pm

Count Arioch the 28th wrote:Anyone else get irrationally pissed off when you say something and someone replies with "Uh-huh"? You care so little about what I'm saying is that you're making a repetitive gutteral noise rather than engaging me in any way. I have multiple people in my life that will literally chant it and drown me out when I'm talking. Dudes, I'm not retarded, I know you don't give a shit about what I'm telling you. Just tell me to stop talking.

It's because they don't have anything worth saying in reply. really, sometimes a simple acknowledgement is the best reply you can give.

radthemad4 · Post by **radthemad4** » Mon Feb 29, 2016 6:05 pm

Some of them might have lost track of the conversation and/or might have no idea what you're talking about. I once called someone out on this and he admitted as much.

name_here · Post by **name_here** » Mon Feb 29, 2016 8:31 pm

It's supposed to be used as an indicator that they're listening but do not have anything to say at the moment. Naturally sometimes people use it in an attempt to give the impression that they're listening when they aren't.

Occluded Sun · Post by **Occluded Sun** » Mon Feb 29, 2016 9:35 pm

Stahlseele wrote:I am german. This means english is not my mother tongue . . but i think i have a pretty firm grip on the language.
And then shit like this crops up:
Worcestersauce is pronounced "wooster sauce"
WHY?
How?
Why the fuck?

It's the British, dude. American English is far, far more reasonable. And even then it has tons of legacy spellings.

I envy the Teutonic superiority of your orthography. So straightforward... so rational...

Maj · Post by **Maj** » Mon Feb 29, 2016 9:43 pm

I can usually tell the difference. There are a few of them.

1) I-don't-speak-your-language-and-have-no-clue-what-you're-saying (also applies to people who don't know jargon and such)

2) I'm-distracted-by-whatever

3) I-don't-believe-the-words-coming-out-of-your-mouth

4) I-want-you-to-shut-up

5) I'm-giving-you-positive-reinforcement-because-I'm-invested-in-this-conversation

6) I'm-affirmatively-answering-your-question

2, 3, 4 drive me batshit. 5 and 6 are fine, and 1 I have empathy for.

erik · Post by **erik** » Mon Feb 29, 2016 11:13 pm

I'd prefer uh-huh to silence. I'm trying to train my children to give affirmative responses so that I know they are listening and understanding what I'm saying.

Maj · Post by **Maj** » Tue Mar 01, 2016 5:02 am

Oh, totally.

Count Arioch the 28th · Tue Mar 01, 2016 8:07 am

I have about 6-8 different reactions to show I'm actively listening. Most of them are contextual. Mostly, I don't like any repetitive noises, and repetitive human voices literally cause me pain after a short time period.

RobbyPants · Post by **RobbyPants** » Tue Mar 01, 2016 12:43 pm

erik wrote:I'd prefer uh-huh to silence. I'm trying to train my children to give affirmative responses so that I know they are listening and understanding what I'm saying.

Yeah, occasionally I feel awkward just saying non-things like "uh huh" or "mm hmm" on the phone. Sometimes, I'll try to say something more if it doesn't end up sounding weird. Every now and then, I just listen in silence and let the other person speak. That always ends up with them asking me if I'm there. This might be more unique to the phone (because they can't see if you put the phone down), but I could see a person standing in pure silence for any length of time being distracting or otherwise odd.

Ice9 · Post by **Ice9** » Tue Mar 01, 2016 7:26 pm

It's a somewhat awkward situation. If you're facing each-other, then you can just look attentive or nod and not say anything. But on the phone or sitting side by side (driving, for instance) you need something to indicate you're still listening; kind of a verbal ping. I try to vary it up, but there's a limited set that's appropriate for a given subject.

Although if they're saying it more frequently than needed and interrupting you with it, that probably does mean "I want you to stop talking, but I won't say so directly." That or they're inebriated / tired and not following the conversation very well.

hyzmarca · Post by **hyzmarca** » Wed Mar 02, 2016 3:08 am

So, I just learned that Sharkskin suits are apparently made from some sort of deceptively named fabric and not the actual skin of a shark.

Where can I find dress clothing made from the actual skin of actual sharks?

OgreBattle · Post by **OgreBattle** » Wed Mar 02, 2016 3:36 am

hyzmarca wrote:So, I just learned that Sharkskin suits are apparently made from some sort of deceptively named fabric and not the actual skin of a shark.

Where can I find dress clothing made from the actual skin of actual sharks?

I'm not sure if shark or ray skin is any good for something like a jacket where you want it to stay supple and bend. The most widespread specific use for shark leather I know of is making grips for swords, scabbards, and composite bows in East Asia.

Ancient History · Post by **Ancient History** » Wed Mar 02, 2016 3:36 am

You can buy shark leather or shagreen commercially (although it's usually shark ray skin as a byproduct of fishing, or cow leather that's been textured to resemble shark skin). Clothing, not so common.

angelfromanotherpin · Post by **angelfromanotherpin** » Wed Mar 02, 2016 3:42 am

hyzmarca wrote:Where can I find dress clothing made from the actual skin of actual sharks?

http://www.siamleathergoods.com/shark.htm

Maj · Post by **Maj** » Wed Mar 02, 2016 3:52 am

Why would you want sharkskin clothes?

http://store.srulirecht.com/products/a- ... n-is-sr341

Mechalich · Post by **Mechalich** » Wed Mar 02, 2016 4:08 am

Leather made from shark or ray skin is quite tough and suited much more for making cases or veneer than clothing. Also, a considerable number of shark species are now endangered or soon to be, so, not the most tasteful of fabrics.

hyzmarca · Post by **hyzmarca** » Wed Mar 02, 2016 7:15 pm

Maj wrote:Why would you want sharkskin clothes?

Well, I don't. I was just dissapointed when I learned that sharkskin suits weren't made with actual sharkskin.

Here's another annoying question. I left a disk-bottom pot on the stove for too long (forgot to turn the stove off) and it delaminated. Now there is a huge buldge in the bottom where the stainless steel is separated from the aluminum disk. Anyway way to fix this?

Maj · Post by **Maj** » Wed Mar 02, 2016 10:20 pm

Um... Buy a new one? I honestly haven't heard anything other than that.

Prak · Post by **Prak** » Thu Mar 10, 2016 3:49 pm

This is sort of a gaming question, but has more to do with fluff and politics, so I figure this is the better place to put it-

So, since Gygax (if not before), orcs are basically often treated as "fantasy black people," or rather, orcs are basically "stereotypes about blacks made into a species." The other day, while thinking about this, I got the idea to sort of double down on the "orcs are fantasy black people" idea for a setting and set up that they are marginalized, highly discriminated against, and suffer many of the prejudices that blacks do in the real world. This could set up for a sort of "Black Displacer Beasts" or "Green Lives Matter" plot where orcs are fighting for civil rights.

The annoying question comes from the fact that Frank's right, I'm a white liberal socialist who does not know what it's like to be black, so would this be offensive? Would the offensiveness depend on who wrote it (white writer vs. black writer)?

Chamomile · Post by **Chamomile** » Thu Mar 10, 2016 4:03 pm

Prak wrote:The annoying question comes from the fact that Frank's right, I'm a white liberal socialist who does not know what it's like to be black, so would this be offensive?

Yes.

Would the offensiveness depend on who wrote it (white writer vs. black writer)?

No.

The offensiveness of the material doesn't have anything to do with the background of the person who writes it, but rather of how well the person in question understands the issues being written about. Black writers, having had relentless daily experience with the issues in question, are at rather an advantage in that arena, but anyone can make up the difference enough to do a properly respectful work on the subject if they're willing to put the effort in. However speaking about you, specifically, this means you are going to need to go out and do things like talk to lots of black people about their experiences until you have a thorough understanding of that issue and can write with some degree of sincerity about (a fantasy version of) their experiences. And let's be honest: You are not going to do that.

Leress · Post by **Leress** » Thu Mar 10, 2016 4:35 pm

Prak, you remember when you had that idea for Tides in Shadow

http://tgdmb.com/viewtopic.php?t=55542& ... sc&start=0

just go back to that.

hyzmarca · Post by **hyzmarca** » Thu Mar 10, 2016 9:13 pm

Prak wrote:This is sort of a gaming question, but has more to do with fluff and politics, so I figure this is the better place to put it-

So, since Gygax (if not before), orcs are basically often treated as "fantasy black people," or rather, orcs are basically "stereotypes about blacks made into a species." The other day, while thinking about this, I got the idea to sort of double down on the "orcs are fantasy black people" idea for a setting and set up that they are marginalized, highly discriminated against, and suffer many of the prejudices that blacks do in the real world. This could set up for a sort of "Black Displacer Beasts" or "Green Lives Matter" plot where orcs are fighting for civil rights.

The annoying question comes from the fact that Frank's right, I'm a white liberal socialist who does not know what it's like to be black, so would this be offensive? Would the offensiveness depend on who wrote it (white writer vs. black writer)?

Making orcs fantasy black people is incredibly stupid for many reasons, not the least being that humans exist in setting and some of them are black.

But a prejudice metaphor can be done well if you don't hit people over the head with it so bluntly and blatantly. Subtly is the name of the game.

MisterDee · Post by **MisterDee** » Mon Mar 14, 2016 3:17 am

I strongly suspect my router is dying on me. It gave me years and years of faithful service with its proud wireless-G components, so I think I will finally let it go to its rest.

Now - obviously, I need a replacement. Ideally one that works well for really cheap.

My main issue is that we now have way more than 4 devices that want connectivty. Old Faithful really had trouble with that - the TV can't connect to Netflix without kicking one of the tablets out of the wifi, and lately it's gotten worse. I was under the impression that the router could only handle four devices (you know, exactly the same amount of potential cabled connections & series of blinking lights - which would made sense since it was bought in the pre-tablet, pre-SmartTV and pre-smartphone era.)

Now, after some reading on the subject, I gather that my cargo-cultist belief in the Holy Truth of Router Holes may be misguided, at least as far a modern routers go.

In other words, can I buy the basic thirty-bucks four-slot router and still manage to have more than four devices connected to it via wi-fi?

tussock · Post by **tussock** » Mon Mar 14, 2016 4:29 am

So, since Gygax (if not before), orcs are basically often treated as "fantasy black people," or rather, orcs are basically "stereotypes about blacks made into a species."

J.R.R. Tolkien. He had Elves as the great old landed/forested aristocracy who die out by marrying into the common Man, Dwarves as having died out and just not noticed yet because they were so isolated, and Halflings as blissfully ignorant country folk full of fine qualities that educated town sorts lack.

Orcs were what an arch-Angel did by fucking with Elves. Literally mixing their fine blood with mud to make ... well, mudbloods, not particularly subtle. Tolkien also has actual Black people, with elephants and whatnot, who are of course on Sauron's side. And mountain-peoples, and sea-peoples, and nomadic horse-peoples, and so on.

It's sort of a British Ur-myth story of Hannibal against the Romans and the old Anglo-Saxon tribes and the horrible threat of miscegenation and how awesome everything was in the past before people had to marry for money and how the Welsh aren't even a thing any more, are they?

Then D&D had Orcs for the same reason it had the Balrog and mighty Wizards and whatnot, because Tolkien fantasy was retro-popular in 1974 thanks to the rush of cheap fantasy pulp and they just stuck it all in there.

OgreBattle · Post by **OgreBattle** » Mon Mar 14, 2016 4:35 am

Prak wrote: So, since Gygax (if not before), orcs are basically often treated as "fantasy black people," or rather, orcs are basically "stereotypes about blacks made into a species." The other day, while thinking about this, I got the idea to sort of double down on the "orcs are fantasy black people" idea for a setting and set up that they are marginalized, highly discriminated against, and suffer many of the prejudices that blacks do in the real world. This could set up for a sort of "Black Displacer Beasts" or "Green Lives Matter" plot where orcs are fighting for civil rights.

I remember when Obama was running for president some WotC post was about "are we ready for a half orc president?" talking about orc rights movements in games and... I just didn't touch that mess. Forgotten Realms kind of did that with Many-Arrows establishing Orc-City and trade with 'good races'. It felt awkward to read.

Then again I prefer my greenskins spelled with a 'K' as hooligan monster men you can kill without guilt as they don't have mommies or daddies and pop out of the ground as war-ready adults.

If you want to do Black civil rights, how about using Black humans. Even Robert E Howard had a bit where Conan finds out those nasty not-Arabs had enslaved his old crew of not-Africans, so he went and broke their chains in an orgy of liberating violence until "the only White man alive on the boat was Conan!".