Paperclyp

Thanks.

Again, you don’t NEED to be sensitive to anyone. I’m telling you the reason why people were upset with you was that Kobe was meaningful to us and your choice of words made that pain that we were feeling worse. I cried watching the tributes and player reactions yesterday. Nobody has a gun to your head to be empathetic to your board members.

Apologies for the double post

Equating what you did to how the media covered it is disingenuous. They all mention accusations of a sexual assault - not a one mainstream media member called him a “probable rapist,” minutes or hours after the event. You are the one changing your narrative. Most people in this thread are open to the topic being discussed and mentioned in pieces in the media. The issue people had was how you did it. You continue to shy it off as silly, but yes, tact matters to many of us. If you want to continue to dig in and pretend to not see that how you phrased it upset people on the boards, that’s your prerogative. But I take issue with you acting like people don’t want it mentioned at all.

Who is asserting he didn’t rape her? We have a guy saying he absolutely did, and we have people saying we don’t know for sure what happened, but it certainly was a bad thing that Kobe did.

These are all legitimate points. I think a lot of this comes down to big life questions. Do you think a person can change? Do you think people who do terrible things deserve forgiveness? It's also easy to forget in the heat of the moment that even if you are generally aquainted with people online, their context of the situation can be extremely unique to your own. Kobe was a big part of my life. He was, frankly, an enemy to me until his last couple years of his career when he became empathetic to me coming back from injuries. I believe his remorse for the situation in Colorado. It's not up to me to forgive him or not, I guess, for that. I honestly do not know what happened. I do not want to bring up the issues the girl had and drag her around just to discuss on a message board, it's not worth it. But I have respect for Kobe as a basketball player, I appreciated his change of heart with how he used homophobic slurs and really tried to make it right, and I think he had done and was going to do some incredible things for women's basketball. I also enjoyed seeing him in public with his daughter, who he seemed to have a really good relationship with. He seemed to be in a really good place in his life. To many, he was just a basketball player that they happened to know his name. Or he was clearly a rapist. And if you truly believe that, his death is appropriate to discuss that issue. I just happen to believe if you're truly interested in doing that, stick with what we know, give it some depth and thought, and maybe don't rush to it in this era when we can know he is dead mere minutes after the fact and a lot of people are truly hurting. Tyson is more of a tragic figure, even in life. He has mental illness and I'm sure he's fighting demons to this day. It always made me uncomfortable how Hollywood seemed to embrace him. I will not shed a tear when Mike Tyson dies.

You are being obtuse. You couldn't wait for the day that we'd celebrate Bill Cosby at his death. You are lumping everyone into this idea that there is no nuance, rape is OK, no big deal, and it just shows to me that you're not actually wanting to have a discussion. It literally went: You: I look forward to the day when Cosby dies and we just talk about our favorite episodes of the Cosby show. Mine is the one where he eats dinner too late and has a crazy dream. Others: Bill Cosby is not the same as Kobe. You: Rape is OK! You want to have a discussion about sexual assault, fine. I never said it should be left out of the man's legacy and said several times it should not be washed away. You do not actually seem to be interested in doing that, and have instead moved from "he was probably a rapist" (minutes after his death) to "he was clearly a violent rapist." I just don't think you are to be taken seriously. I think you are performing theatrics.

Do you think Bill Cosby and Kobe Bryant are the same?

This’ll probably be the last thing I say on the matter. I think you are aware of the difference because you laid it out in one of your posts. These are journalistic eulogies that you’ve linked us all to. They lay out facts, and yes in those types of pieces it would be arguably irresponsible to wash that part of his life away, even hours after his death. You called him probably a rapist. Lack of tact is an apt description there. So you’re right, you’re not a journalist and not held to that standard, which means when you do include that it means it’s not a journalistic obligation, it’s a very specific choice. I agree with @skillzdadirecta that had you laid out facts there rather than phrase it how you did, the reaction would not have been so extreme.

Oh, plenty. His retirement. Any time over the past 10 or so years when it has kind of been pushed to the side and he has made a helluva public perception turn around. When he gets new shows or mini series in ESPN. A few weeks from now. I dunno, any of those times you wouldn’t get near the push back of... literally minutes after the man has passed away in horrific fashion with his teenage daughter and others. It’s not like an intellectual discussion. You’re not serving the wider community about like discussing rape and it really doesn’t seem like you’re earnestly trying to make some larger point about how bad people get their misdeeds washed away. Kobe Bryant was certainly not a perfect human being. But the man appeared to show genuine growth throughout his life. He admitted to horrible mistakes in the past. Did he rape that girl? I don’t rightly know. But by and large he does not seem to have been a bad person in the grand scheme of things. Opinions on that may vary, but that’s not really the point. I know we’re strangers on some level, but I also consider the people on these boards to be acquaintances at the very least, and it is disconcerting to see that shit drug into this. It’s not gun control where it’s like “when is the right time then?” In this case, yeah, it’s the wrong fucking time.

This is hitting me pretty hard.

I’m gonna get a game of KOTOR 2 going one of these days too.

You weren’t the only one who called it turn based though, I wasn’t trying to single anyone out.

I was trying to make it clear that I understood that turn based doesn’t mean paused combat. Again, like I said, KOTOR is absolutely turned based as described. But what I’m saying is that the term “turn based” came to mean a specific (yet somewhat ambiguous) thing, and calling KOTOR a turn based RPG doesn’t really meet those parameters. That is what you’re seeing in this thread - people who have adopted that term to mean something specific in their minds and then seeing it applied to something that it doesn’t match up for. And I realize that may be confusing if you don’t have that association, because, like, Final Fantasy 7 qualifies as “turn based” in my head, but you can be killed if you take no action during the combat (in other words it’s not “paused” combat with enemies waiting for you to take your turn). I really don’t care what you call it. Wikipedia calls it “round based.” I think my friends and I just eventually started calling that style KOTOR or Bioware-style combat, knowing full well it was not the original game by any means to do its combat like that.

KOTOR is turn based in a sense (your characters have to wait a period after taking an action), but I am under the impression that “turn based” is just collectively understood to be a traditional you pick actions, they are carried out, the enemy goes, it comes back to you. Again, that sort of IS what happens in KOTOR, but it doesn’t seem right to assign that moniker to it.