Page 1 of 1

PostPosted: Mon Apr 01, 2002 6:35 pm
by Nodrog
So far, assuming Alisin is a 'keep him' vote (I don't know), there's a 2/3 result of the Faans, not counting the leader trio.

Now, if you were there: Would you vote Stu in or out, and why?

My? In. First, Stu has demonstrated his ability to act in a crisis. True, throwing that knife apperently did squat, but he acted. A lot of people, myself included, tend to freeze up. I admire Stu's ability to act.

Second, Yeah, Stu is crude, rude, and lewd. But he's honest about it. He doesn't try to manipulate. Who would you rather associate: Someone who enjoys manipulating innocents, being in control, and who despite being in a steady relationship resorted to using sex appeal as a weapon, or someone who honestly states his views?

Third: Lets face it: The club needs Stu and Stu needs the club. Rikk is the hub of the current team; Rikk, Kath, Will, Rumi, and Tim have all been through recent emotional ringers and the result is now Kath and Will, the strongest personalities of the team, look to Rikk for guidance. Tim amd Rumi are nowhere near as independent as they once were. Yeah, Rumi has always been shy, but she used to be 'a sensitive artist'. Now she's in danger of turning into just a token love interest. With Alisin sick, Rikk isn't going to have time or mental resources to be the hub, and without him, the rest of the team is in danger of total failure... EXCEPT STU. He can be the example. He can do what Rikk used to. Rikk used to lead by example; now he's taken over as the mind of the team. I can see it now:

Kath: "What do we do without Rikk?!?"
Will: "What would Rikk do now? We have to think like Rikk..."
Stu: "Shut up you @#$*ing pansies! We need to @$#$* frag some @#$)@(#)!"
-panel of Stu charging off, switchblade in hand-

Well, I may not have said it clearly, but I hope you can understand; it used to be that Rikk lead the team, but they could function without him. That's no longer true. But Stu, undamaged, may be what the team needs. Fresh blood... if the team doesn't manage to reject him. Face it, Stu's the only one who's not a Rikk lover or likely to become one. Even the old geazer was Rikk's choice to bring into the club.

PostPosted: Mon Apr 01, 2002 9:17 pm
by BD
I'd keep him too, even though he is a dick in my opinion. Here's why:

Stu is right. They ARE being hypcrits. Most of them have been outcasted all their lives, and only for being who they are. Stu may be a crude, thoughtless, womanizing prick but that does not make him anything less of a person than they are. By kicking him out based on not liking him, they are doing what others have done to them all their lives. Tim understands this.

PostPosted: Mon Apr 01, 2002 9:52 pm
by My name is Kenny
On 2002-04-01 21:17, BD wrote:
Stu may be a crude, thoughtless, womanizing prick but that does not make him anything less of a person than they are.


Yes, it does.

PostPosted: Tue Apr 02, 2002 11:48 am
by Acradius
First, Kenny, damn straight.

Second: Although I personally hate Stu's guts, I'd have to keep him in too. But only because he's a good shot with the knife. :grin:

PostPosted: Tue Apr 02, 2002 12:03 pm
by LordNicodareus
Acradius, The only reason that Stu is an asset right now is that exact reason. :grin: He has a knife (pronounced ka-nifee). Now J. for example, as we stated here http://phpbb.keenspace.com/viewtopic.ph ... tart=15&20 agrees with me that, while talking your way through situations and all that jazz are cool, nothing is better than a good ole Colt by your side. (I learned this the heard way. My first two Vampire: The Masquerade characters died in their respective first battles because of a lack of firepower that everyone else seemed to have.)

Smith & Wesson--The FIRST point & click interface...

<font size=-1>[ This Message was edited by: LordNicodareus on 2002-04-02 12:04 ]</font>

PostPosted: Tue Apr 02, 2002 12:16 pm
by Aris Katsaris
Well, I may not have said it clearly, but I hope you can understand; it used to be that Rikk lead the team, but they could function without him. That's no longer true.


Umm... examples, please? The last three crises before Brainio were, I think, 'Chord of the Rings', 'Switch' and 'Mad Science'. In none Rikk had a crucial leadership role. In the first Kath took up the reins, same with 'Switch', and in 'Mad Science' it was Shanna who was telling people what to do...

PostPosted: Tue Apr 02, 2002 12:27 pm
by Czhorat
Do you recall that the young hero in Heilein's Have Spacesuit, Will Travel was advised NOT to bring a gun to his survival test? Part of the reason is that carrying too much firepower can make you lazy and overconfident. It's better to THINK about trouble rather than blasting it. The other issue is that there are some things you're better off NOT shooting at, either because they'd have you out-gunned or would eventually be allies.

Look at it another way: The only reason The General was not skewered is that she has reflexes that would put Mike Richter to shame. If Stu's knife had hit her, Shanna's Mom (do we have a name for her?) would not be cured.

PostPosted: Tue Apr 02, 2002 12:36 pm
by LordNicodareus
Well yes, a gun is not the answer to everything, and a lot of things would be better off without guns at all. A gun is a tool, and I would prefer to carry one through a dangerous situation than be thinking all the time, "Damn, I wish I had brought that..."
That, and the gun represents the proverbial ace up the sleeve. The allow you to, when there are no other options, have a chance of coming out alive. Guns are not the answer to everything, and there is alot of better ways of dealing with stuff, but it's nice to have the insurance. ^_^

PostPosted: Tue Apr 02, 2002 1:10 pm
by PDI
I'd keep Stu in, with a warning, and assign someone to watch over him, a sort of cultural translator, to help teach Stu alternative ways of looking at things.

If it gets called to a vote again, even with this help, he's gone-zo.

PostPosted: Tue Apr 02, 2002 1:15 pm
by Nullset
"Your weapons, you will need them not."

"What's in there?"

"Only what you take with you."

PostPosted: Tue Apr 02, 2002 1:23 pm
by LordNicodareus
Good point, Null, but Luke had one thing we don't, Midichlorians....trying not to laugh...And anyways, The Force, in itself, is a weapon. So luke oulda had one anyways, and I know thats not the point. We could get three diff threads going on the topics of guns and still not get anywhere...oh waitaminute....ahh ferget it.

PostPosted: Tue Apr 02, 2002 1:39 pm
by Muttley
As I've said a couple of times already, I vote he stays, with an explanation of why his attitude is unacceptable and a warning to change or find another hobby - - -

Muttley

It is important to keep an open mind, but not so open that your brains fall out.

PostPosted: Tue Apr 02, 2002 2:51 pm
by BD
On 2002-04-01 21:52, My name is Kenny wrote:
On 2002-04-01 21:17, BD wrote:
Stu may be a crude, thoughtless, womanizing prick but that does not make him anything less of a person than they are.


Yes, it does.


All right, that's your call. But keep in mind Stu's only real fault seems to be not knowing any better. He's obviously very uneducated and probably didn't have a good moral upbringing. That doesn't excuse what he did by a long shot, of course, but with a little work he could probably become a half-ways decent human being.

Do you know what the real difference is between misguided and evil? Misguided is doing bad things because you don't realize they're wrong. Evil is doing bad things, knowing they're wrong, and doing them anyway.

PostPosted: Tue Apr 02, 2002 3:21 pm
by Jarnor23
Let me play Devil's Advocate for a sec here...

If it turned up that Stu was also a Klansman, should you keep him? After all, Klansmen are people with different opinions too, and shouldn't we be accepting everyone's opinion and keep them in the group?

Where does the line get drawn about who will really be an asset to a group doing things this important?

Jarnor23

PostPosted: Tue Apr 02, 2002 3:27 pm
by SteveB
On 2002-04-02 15:21, Jarnor23 wrote:
Let me play Devil's Advocate for a sec here...

If it turned up that Stu was also a Klansman, should you keep him? After all, Klansmen are people with different opinions too, and shouldn't we be accepting everyone's opinion and keep them in the group?


That's not what we're saying. Or at least not what I'm saying. See my comment about my grandfather in the other post. If Stu had grown up all his life around Klansmen, if he knew no other way of looking at the world, I would certainly try to enlighten him. Only if he rejected that enlightenment (and, yes, I'd probably give him several chances before I got fed up with him and gave up) would I vote to kick him out of the club.

Would I understand a black club member who, on Stu's first racial insult, immediately demanded he be booted out? Hell, yeah. But I wouldn't vote with him. I'd try to explain why, but if it cost me a friendship, well, he'd be being just as narrow-minded as Stu, in his own way.

I repeat, NO ONE has taken Stu aside and explained the facts of life to him. Obviously, none of the skiffies have. All the anti-Stu posters seem to be saying, well, of course, obviously someone must have at some time. One doesn't get to be 20 and not learn these things. Stu's the way he is because he's ignored them. But it just ain't so. Some people DO get to be 20 years old and have no idea how to behave in polite society.

And some can't learn. Stu might even be one of them. But he hasn't really been given a chance.

Steve Bolhafner