<?xml version="1.0" encoding="UTF-8" ?>
<rss version="2.0">
	<channel>
		<title>gdp's Comments</title>
		<language>en-us</language>
		<link>https://www.intensedebate.com/users/752126</link>
		<description>Comments by Hoborg</description>
<item>
<title>Righteous Orbs : Would you sell your pride for 5 minutes?</title>
<link>http://www.righteousorbs.com/?p=1229#IDComment51252211</link>
<description>Fair enough, regarding the group&amp;#039;s logical failure.  I would also have a higher threshold for rejecting a healer than a DPSer.  I think we&amp;#039;re in agreement on the rest.  Thanks! </description>
<pubDate>Sat, 9 Jan 2010 18:27:04 +0000</pubDate>
<guid>http://www.righteousorbs.com/?p=1229#IDComment51252211</guid>
</item><item>
<title>Righteous Orbs : Would you sell your pride for 5 minutes?</title>
<link>http://www.righteousorbs.com/?p=1229#IDComment51125555</link>
<description>I&amp;#039;m not suggesting that you did a worse thing than Mr. Rez Plz, I&amp;#039;m suggesting that you didn&amp;#039;t do a better thing.  You stuck to your stated policy, and I think that&amp;#039;s fine.  In the eyes of your groupmates, though, you did the same thing: cause a delay.  They responded to that, since that&amp;#039;s what has some effect on themselves.  My reason for responding in the first place was to suggest exactly that: While your original post suggests that something outrageous happened (you got kicked), it wasn&amp;#039;t outrageous at all.  For the majority of your groupmates, kicking one or the other of you was the only way to move forward.  I think that&amp;#039;s just logical self-interest on their part.  Two jokers arguing = no progress, kicking one joker out = chance at progress. </description>
<pubDate>Sat, 9 Jan 2010 00:50:57 +0000</pubDate>
<guid>http://www.righteousorbs.com/?p=1229#IDComment51125555</guid>
</item><item>
<title>Righteous Orbs : Would you sell your pride for 5 minutes?</title>
<link>http://www.righteousorbs.com/?p=1229#IDComment51070153</link>
<description>Gah...I want argue my case here, but we seem to disagree on the basics.  On one side, I place &amp;quot;be more fair to the majority of the group&amp;quot;.  On the other, &amp;quot;stick to your guns, retain some small portion of your pride, and teach RP a lesson.&amp;quot;  You choose not to res, because you want to stand up for yourself and/or shame the jerk.  Most particularly, because you like to see people who make bad decisions fail.  Specifically, you note that it&amp;#039;s enjoyable to you to have the power to help and withhold it because someone wasn&amp;#039;t good to you.  In my own experience, the advantage of having a non-combat rez is that I can rez people to speed things along.  What do you use it for, if anything? </description>
<pubDate>Fri, 8 Jan 2010 18:46:56 +0000</pubDate>
<guid>http://www.righteousorbs.com/?p=1229#IDComment51070153</guid>
</item><item>
<title>Righteous Orbs : Would you sell your pride for 5 minutes?</title>
<link>http://www.righteousorbs.com/?p=1229#IDComment50952774</link>
<description>Tamarind, you hit the nail on the head right there.  You take someone who&amp;#039;s fed up with some real-life social garbage they have had to deal with, stick them into WoW, and suddenly they&amp;#039;re dishing out the same garbage.  Refusing to do the expected, reasonable stuff that everyone else simply does.  Acting like everyone ought to bow down to their whims.  Your &amp;quot;rez plz&amp;quot; player is just one example, though.  Stated another way: Exactly who did you extend your understanding to, in this case?</description>
<pubDate>Fri, 8 Jan 2010 04:34:35 +0000</pubDate>
<guid>http://www.righteousorbs.com/?p=1229#IDComment50952774</guid>
</item>	</channel>
</rss>