Score!

Congratulations on your imminent progeny, oh Lord of Chaos.

If it's any comfort, I can think of few people more deserving of obtaining the title than you (none spring to mind). Oh, congratulations by the way. I'm too deep into revisions of my own to say anything really substantial just now, but well, we'll be in touch soon!

Welcome back, Chris :-) Indeed, we're reaching some sort of a consensus, I guess, in the sense that we realise conversation is still happening, but that it is diffuse, often unconnected. Maybe that's how it's always been or how it always seems: it can be difficult to see a tightly knit cluster or network if you're not part of it. As for tumblr: it's a weird place. It is technically possible to include a comment system on your tumblr, but you have to insert it through CSS in your theme. Many blogs don't bother with it, understandably. In addition, it is common practice on tumblr to comment by reblogging someone's post and adding your thoughts below the original post. Like replying to an email, but public. In other words, there is definitely a lot of interaction among tumblr users, but the technology doesn't make it super-easy. (That issue again). Finally, tumblr has become, for whatever reason, a space where minorities of all kinds have been able to carve out a niche (clusters?) for themselves, which is very valuable, in my opinion. I hope that in the wake of the takeover by Yahoo, this will continue to be possible.

Some new musings on the subject, with special reference to the state of videogame blogging: http://www.eveningoflight.nl/subspecie/2013/07/06/the-future-of-videogame-logging/ This is part of this month's theme for Blogs of the Round Table. It seems we kicked something off here.

Gefeliciteerd! (As we say in Dutch)

Hi Chris, thanks a lot for the roundup of our discussion - very convenient! I thought I had something more to say about the technological side of things, but I haven't gathered my thoughts properly, so this is it for now. Cheers!

Et voila: http://www.eveningoflight.nl/subspecie/2013/05/28/on-blogging-online-conversations/ A bit of a rant, but still. :-)

Best of luck with your keynote! Regarding discussion here: it may be that social networks are slurping up too much time for people to invest in conversation here. Perhaps a more aggressive reminder strategy on your part, encouraging people to read and comment on Only a Game, may pull some back? \ Then again, maybe that isn't your style? I know it isn't mine.

Whoohoo! Thanks, Chris. As you know, I'm really looking forward to reading your exploration of ethics and alignment in D&D.

Did people have this issue when they wrote letters to each other? I haven't studied the habits of prolific letter writers, but how many really regular correspondents did they have, could they manage? Would you have to narrow down your 'consumption' of blogs to get back to a deeper interaction with those that are left, and if so, how to decide who?

Congratulations, you've earned your *DING*!

I share your views in this matter, and that final quote by Carney sums it up nicely. However, I'd be interested in your views looking at this phenomenon from another angle: Why do you deliberate provocation of this kind seems so popular among certain members of our society? I always have a pet theory about insecurity about Western secular identity leading to a perverse focus on the flaws of other ethnic groups, but I'm not sure if it would apply in this case. I haven't tried to apply it yet in any thorough sense.

The way I see it, there are a couple of problems that haunt troublemakers on any side of the spectrum: a) Overgeneralisation of observations and analyses. This is behind much of the scapegoating and bigotry we see in the world. b) Unwillingness to empathise with 'the enemy'. This might be a result of a). If your mind about the other (overgeneralised) is already made up, the easier it becomes to hate. There are probably a ton of factors I am ignoring, but these always scream in my face. My personal problem is: what do I do about it, apart from striving not to fall into the same traps? Is it at all possible to curtail the above tendencies in people? This ambition entails a belief in a certain degree of human malleability, but that in itself can spawn political monstrosities. Alternatively, do we simply accept the hollowness and hatred in our politics, and 'ride the tiger', to paraphrase a not wholly savoury Italian thinker?

I'm always relieved when I read a message like this. A good friend of mine fell down his stairs two years ago and never got up again :( So here's to your health, and your son's!

Oh, and tangentially, this: < http://www.wikipaintings.org/en/rene-magritte/the-masterpiece-or-the-mysteries-of-the-horizon-1955 >.

Just beautiful, Chris. Thanks.

As a Dutchman and ex-daily frequenter of Amsterdam, I accept your apology on behalf of the city and its visitors. I would be less likely to forgive you if I pictured you as the sort of loud Brit who is out with the lads to Amsterdam to abuse the local prostitutes as well as our hospitality. ;-) But seriously, it's a difficult issue, and it reminds me of the following podcast in which the issue of drug use as part of spiritual practice came up. < http://www.occultofpersonality.net/membership/altar-of-burnt-offering > Personally I see little moral problems with the use of drugs in itself, as long as you can honestly say to yourself that you believe it is very unlikely you will cause harm to yourself or other as a result. I guess this falls closely under the header of Consequentialism. What you get out of using drugs and if it's worth it to yourself is another question. I guess I would agree with Hume and Kant that a bit of alcohol in whatever form can be conducive to pleasant company, though not essential, of course.

Read the first two chapters and enjoying your perspective immensely so far. I'll post some thoughts on the book on my blog when I'm done and find the time. Thanks for sharing the PDF!