Ad Captandum Vulgus

Symposium Mandated Bibliognostic 'Cyclopedia
User avatar
mountainmage
Mage of the Mountains
Posts: 9601
Joined: Mon May 01, 2006 11:42 am
Location: Right here. Right now.

Re: Ad Captandum Vulgus

Post by mountainmage »

Excuse me Sir Cirtur, but I believe the Master of Ceremonies warned us against placing a specific date for when The Forum was destroyed. Unless you provide some incontrovertible proof, I suggest you retract your statement.
No more white horses ♬ ♫ ♪ ılıll|̲̅̅●̲̅̅|̲̅̅=̲̅̅|̲̅̅●̲̅̅|llılı ♪ ♫ ♬ for you to ride away

User avatar
AHMETxRock
Spam-Bot Trollop
Posts: 5515
Joined: Tue Dec 02, 2008 1:54 am
Location: Box of Cereal.
Contact:

Re: Ad Captandum Vulgus

Post by AHMETxRock »

Zounds to the hounds in the pound, Mr. Bunbury! Surely, our associate Cirtur did not implicate that the forums were destroyed! He must have-rather ineloquently I feel I must add- simply been referring to a mere lull between the 4th and 5th age. Surely we do not need to cast Cirtur's academic integrity under suspicion?

(Out of Character Comment: As far as I can understand, the article you write and your author's notes on your topic are confirmed irrefutable facts, but commenting on the articles of others does not constitute the fact. Essentially, what Cirtur says CAN be wrong, while here, what I say MUST be right. Of course, outside of the writing of the article itself, I want to not be an idiot and make things difficult, but the first round of articles are establishing what is right and what is wrong. If someone wants to, they can write an article that goes completely against what Cirtur says, or only accept parts of it and not others. So if the article about the 4th age, if anyone wants to write it, goes completely against what Cirtur said, even though it was written technically later, Cirtur would be wrong and not right. If I decided to take what Cirtur said and add it to my post RIGHT NOW, however, then there would be no need. But I'm not going to add it. So there you go.)
Just like an std, will never fully go away.

User avatar
mountainmage
Mage of the Mountains
Posts: 9601
Joined: Mon May 01, 2006 11:42 am
Location: Right here. Right now.

Re: Ad Captandum Vulgus

Post by mountainmage »

Sir Edminster stated:

(OOC begins here)
Edminster wrote:It is written a good two centuries after the forums died, but there is one important caveat to this: At NO TIME should there be a definite date regarding the death of the Forums. Infractions of this rule will lead to deletion of the offending entry as well as ten points being docked from the Author's final score.
(OOC ends here)

So, while it is indeed true that The Forum is gone (yet not forgotten), scholars aren't set on a specific date.
No more white horses ♬ ♫ ♪ ılıll|̲̅̅●̲̅̅|̲̅̅=̲̅̅|̲̅̅●̲̅̅|llılı ♪ ♫ ♬ for you to ride away

User avatar
Edminster
Tested positive for Space-AIDS
Posts: 8835
Joined: Fri Sep 09, 2005 9:53 pm
Location: Internet
Contact:

Re: Ad Captandum Vulgus

Post by Edminster »

AHMETxRock wrote:Zounds to the hounds in the pound, Mr. Bunbury! Surely, our associate Cirtur did not implicate that the forums were destroyed! He must have-rather ineloquently I feel I must add- simply been referring to a mere lull between the 4th and 5th age. Surely we do not need to cast Cirtur's academic integrity under suspicion?

(Out of Character Comment: As far as I can understand, the article you write and your author's notes on your topic are confirmed irrefutable facts, but commenting on the articles of others does not constitute the fact. Essentially, what Cirtur says CAN be wrong, while here, what I say MUST be right. Of course, outside of the writing of the article itself, I want to not be an idiot and make things difficult, but the first round of articles are establishing what is right and what is wrong. If someone wants to, they can write an article that goes completely against what Cirtur says, or only accept parts of it and not others. So if the article about the 4th age, if anyone wants to write it, goes completely against what Cirtur said, even though it was written technically later, Cirtur would be wrong and not right. If I decided to take what Cirtur said and add it to my post RIGHT NOW, however, then there would be no need. But I'm not going to add it. So there you go.)
This must certainly be the case. When our esteemed Dean Cirtur from Weiner University referenced the Forum being 'destroyed', he must have been referencing the period where the Forums took on a much more decentralised character. While the 4th era is generally poorly-documented because of this dispersal of the various subtopics, there remain enough records to show that the Forum did still exist, albeit in a pared-down and migratory manner. After all, destroying infrastructure does not mean the people inhabiting the area simply cease to exist, it just means they find a new place to live.

In a way, the destruction of SMB City was a great boon to the community, because it caused all of the inhabitants to proselytise. Without them spreading the word of this event, nobody would have supported the funding of the Ship Project. Without the funding of the Ship Project, there would not have been the necessary technology for the Super Mobile Biome Committee. It's by chaining these events together that we see that there would not be the hulking planetoid form of the Forums if it had not been for the Razing of SMB City in CE 2101.

(OOC: You're kind of right, but I don't think that I have explained this well enough. The commentary of other participants on a particular article are truth as long as they do not directly contradict the main entry. They are there to introduce new facts, and to shade interpretations. When a contribution seemingly contradicts, it is up to everyone else to provide spin coverage to make it jibe with previously-written entries. If there is no way to make it work without substantial editing, then the offending comment will be stricken. As long as everybody is good at Spin Doctoring, there shouldn't even be a need to strike any comments. Unless someone just wants to be a dick.)
ol qwerty bastard wrote:bitcoin is backed by math, and math is intrinsically perfect and logically consistent always

gödel stop spreading fud

User avatar
Cirtur
Licensed Troll Pornographer
Posts: 9964
Joined: Mon Dec 08, 2008 8:13 pm
Location: Europe
Contact:

Re: Ad Captandum Vulgus

Post by Cirtur »

Edminster wrote:Unless someone just wants to be a dick.
Enter Cirtur!

My great-great-great grandfather was indeed quite the troublemaker.

Post Reply