: Asylumers? Agree? Weird.
: This is largely because those who do this take the most
: extreme view possible in anticipation of compromise,
: knowing that the fact that their view is highly
: slanted to one side will, probably, lead to the end
: compromise also to be slanted in their favour, and
: probably closer to their actual view on the matter.
: The chances are that those who are unwilling to
: compromise believe that their argument as it stands is
: true, and that to accept compromise would be to accept
: a warping of the truth.
I don't find this true; certainly not for me.
: "The truth from before" being, I assume, your
: interpretation of the arguments from before.
I was extremely unclear. I meant, none of the "truth" dealt with in normal conversations and debates over plots or similar theories is unchanged. This is because we were never debating those things, only debating what is canon or not.
: As for the compromise, it seems
: remarkably similar to your previous argument,
My previous argument was this: GURPS has many mistakes in it. It was never approved by Bungie in any form. It is badly written. It's only a simple RPG which uses a Myth theme. It is not canon material. Therefore, it should be disregarded as crap.
Those facts remained the same. My new conclusion, however, has an addition: As long as its information is not contradicted by anything ingame (or rather, the five pieces of canon, truly Myth material), it is to be regarded as an equivalent interpretation of the truth, just as the other five pieces of canon. However, if a new piece of canon material is produced for Myth, such as Myth III or its manual, whatever it contradicts in GURPS is held over GURPS. Nevertheless, GURPS may serve as a spackle of sorts to fill in the gaps where they arise, until proven differently by solid construction.
Sili's original argument was this: GURPS was approved by Bungie because it has its name on it, it has some artists names in it, who happened to have worked on the original story, and it went through a mysterious screening process (which obviously left many gaps). Not only does this give GURPS the status of full canon, and not only is Myth III and anything non-Bungie Myth under GURPS because GURPS was created by Bungie (which it clearly wasn't), but GURPS has inside information the other canon materials do not. Therefore, GURPS holds sway over the other canon because Bungie was trying to intend some things.
This is ludicrous! Supporting such an argument is impossible and futile, as Sili has proven.
However, I found that my opinion is equally harsh. I therefore concluded that my position was not correct, conceding that extremist point of view, finding a better solution that is agreeable, as written above, that we can use any part of GURPS as material as long as it's not being contradicted by officially produced material for Myth. That's right in between our original two positions, of which I think both were wrong.
: For
: what my two cents are worth, I adhere more to a theory
: of "Anything publised by Bungie or those employed
: by, associated with, approved by of sanctioned by
: Bungie can be considered canon unless it directly
: contradicts ingame evidence from one of the majot
: titles (ie. those beginning Myth [number or blank]
: [word or words]."
I completely agree with you. That's great! If we can use this as a basis, we can have our cake and eat it too, use GURPS when needed, forget it when it's information is contradicted. :-) That pleases me very much. Who says Asylumites can't agree? :-)
I always thought it was strange how Sili, a long-historian of Myth, would take such wild views. Sili wanted to recognize GURPS info over what we see in the games. (I believe he still does too.) That's what I consider his point of view fanatic, in addition to only the original creative team being able write a story.
: Au contraire. Ask the Spartans. :)
I meant by the joke, the Germans tend to have an inherant obstinance in their oppinions. They are usually extremely unwilling to compromise or back down. Germans also tend to be rather rude, never appologizing when running into other people or the like. In America, appologies are just a part of common politeness; they're more rare in Germany, as the culture is different.
This kind of behavior may stem from the language itself. In German, there is usually just one right way to say anything and everything. In English, there are dozens of ways. That's one of the reasons making jokes is more difficult in German; less variety.
Note: I love Germans and Germany a great deal.
