webdiplomacy.net

damo666 wrote: ↑

Wed Aug 02, 2023 7:45 am

Jamiet99uk wrote: ↑

Tue Aug 01, 2023 12:31 pm

@JECE, @Damo

Available continents for the purposes of this round include:

Asia
Africa
North America
South America
Antarctica
Europe
Australia (or Oceania)

Available continents for the purposes of this round do not include:

Amerindia
Eastasia
Atlantis
Middle-Earth
Stupendous Land
Westeros
Mimby-Pimby Land
Bikini Bottom

What continent is Guatemala in? Nicaragua? Panama?

For continent purposes, Guatemala is in North America.

Nicaragua is in Stupendous Land.
Panama is in Middle-Earth.

Octavious wrote: ↑

Wed Aug 02, 2023 7:37 am

Harriet Stowe?

We have a winner!

Harriet Beecher Stowe (1811 – 1896) was an American author and abolitionist. She became best known for her novel Uncle Tom's Cabin (1852), which depicts the harsh conditions experienced by enslaved African Americans. The book reached an audience of millions and became influential in the United States and in Great Britain, energizing anti-slavery forces in the American North in particular.

Well done, Oct!

Congratulations Octavious!

It was?? Bugger...

Okie dokie, I'll have a little think and hope to get things rolling later tonight

Jamiet99uk wrote: ↑

Mon Jul 31, 2023 5:14 pm

Foxcastle wrote: ↑

Mon Jul 31, 2023 12:50 pm

Known for being royalty or involved in government or politics?

Yes to one of these things.

I'm not clear on how she was known for being involved in politics? She does not appear to have been an activist, and while her book had a significant social impact, I think there's a difference between social attitudes (views on people under slavery) and politics (trying to gain power over legal bodies or change legal outcomes)...

I think you can fairly interpret her to have had an influence on politics. To be honest though, that answer threw me off a little.

How strange. It was the political clue, along with the period in history, that were the biggest clues for me. I can think of few women of the time more obviously political than Harriet, aside from the aristocracy.

There may be a small delay before the next one. Not too long, though

The politics and time period suggested to me that our mystery person was a suffragist.

Octavious wrote: ↑

Wed Aug 02, 2023 8:57 pm

How strange. It was the political clue, along with the period in history, that were the biggest clues for me. I can think of few women of the time more obviously political than Harriet, aside from the aristocracy.

There may be a small delay before the next one. Not too long, though

I guess the thing that threw me was the disconnect from "involved in politics."

Anyway, I'm trying not to grouse too much :)

Foxcastle wrote: ↑

Wed Aug 02, 2023 6:19 pm

Jamiet99uk wrote: ↑

Mon Jul 31, 2023 5:14 pm

Foxcastle wrote: ↑

Mon Jul 31, 2023 12:50 pm

Known for being royalty or involved in government or politics?

Yes to one of these things.

I'm not clear on how she was known for being involved in politics? She does not appear to have been an activist, and while her book had a significant social impact, I think there's a difference between social attitudes (views on people under slavery) and politics (trying to gain power over legal bodies or change legal outcomes)...

You're mistaken.

She was an ardent critic of slavery and supported the Underground Railroad, temporarily housing several fugitive slaves in her own home. She devoted a significant portion of her life to the cause of abolishing the slave trade.

I mean seriously she wrote "Uncle Tom's Cabin" for political purposes.

What more do you fucking want??

Foxcastle wrote: ↑

Wed Aug 02, 2023 10:30 pm

Octavious wrote: ↑

Wed Aug 02, 2023 8:57 pm

How strange. It was the political clue, along with the period in history, that were the biggest clues for me. I can think of few women of the time more obviously political than Harriet, aside from the aristocracy.

There may be a small delay before the next one. Not too long, though

I guess the thing that threw me was the disconnect from "involved in politics."

Anyway, I'm trying not to grouse too much :)

That's good because my responses were accurate and you're just not very precise sometimes.

Foxcastle wrote: ↑

Wed Aug 02, 2023 6:19 pm

Jamiet99uk wrote: ↑

Mon Jul 31, 2023 5:14 pm

Foxcastle wrote: ↑

Mon Jul 31, 2023 12:50 pm

Known for being royalty or involved in government or politics?

Yes to one of these things.

I'm not clear on how she was known for being involved in politics? She does not appear to have been an activist, and while her book had a significant social impact, I think there's a difference between social attitudes (views on people under slavery) and politics (trying to gain power over legal bodies or change legal outcomes)...

She specifically wrote and promoted the book for political reasons.

It's really pretty clear.

As always, I regret engaging with Jamie and this is a good reminder to myself to stop doing that.

Foxcastle wrote: ↑

Thu Aug 03, 2023 12:52 am

As always, I regret engaging with Jamie and this is a good reminder to myself to stop doing that.

Good evening Fox.

What's up?

I answered your questions accurately.

Foxcastle wrote: ↑

Wed Aug 02, 2023 10:30 pm

Octavious wrote: ↑

Wed Aug 02, 2023 8:57 pm

How strange. It was the political clue, along with the period in history, that were the biggest clues for me. I can think of few women of the time more obviously political than Harriet, aside from the aristocracy.

There may be a small delay before the next one. Not too long, though

I guess the thing that threw me was the disconnect from "involved in politics."

Anyway, I'm trying not to grouse too much :)

She was involved in politics. She devoted a substantial portion of her life towards persuading American politicians to join the abolitionist movement.

Tell me how she was not involved in politics, please?

For fuck's sake. I am actually quite annoyed a Foxcastle's utter fucking nonsense on this one. I'm insulted. Fuck off. I gave you a fair challenge and I played with a straight bat. Octavious won.

Suck my balls, Fox. I dealt with this one fairly and you've decided to insult me. Totally unecessary.

Jamiet99uk wrote: ↑

Thu Aug 03, 2023 1:01 am

Suck my balls, Fox.

I expressed my opinion, I certainly didn't question Octavious's win, I think I was respectful in disagreeing with you without challenging the decision or the outcome, and I get heaps of scorn, derision, and obscenities in return. I don't think I deserve that.

Jamiet99uk wrote: ↑

Thu Aug 03, 2023 1:01 am

Foxcastle wrote: ↑

Wed Aug 02, 2023 10:30 pm

Octavious wrote: ↑

Wed Aug 02, 2023 8:57 pm

How strange. It was the political clue, along with the period in history, that were the biggest clues for me. I can think of few women of the time more obviously political than Harriet, aside from the aristocracy.

There may be a small delay before the next one. Not too long, though

I guess the thing that threw me was the disconnect from "involved in politics."

Anyway, I'm trying not to grouse too much :)

She was involved in politics. She devoted a substantial portion of her life towards persuading American politicians to join the abolitionist movement.

Tell me how she was not involved in politics, please?

For fuck's sake. I am actually quite annoyed a Foxcastle's utter fucking nonsense on this one. I'm insulted. Fuck off. I gave you a fair challenge and I played with a straight bat. Octavious won.

Suck my balls, Fox. I dealt with this one fairly and you've decided to insult me. Totally unecessary.

You okay, Jamiet? This is uncalled for and I'm really disappointed. You've been working on your temper and it really showed for a while, then last game happened and now this outburst ):

Foxcastle wrote: ↑

Thu Aug 03, 2023 12:52 am

As always, I regret engaging with Jamie and this is a good reminder to myself to stop doing that.

You expressed your opinion and then said this - which shaded me unnecessarily and had a very insulting tone. This is what upset me.

Jamiet99uk wrote: ↑

Thu Aug 03, 2023 1:01 am

Suck my balls, Fox.

How is that at all appropriate? No really, please explain to me why you think I personally deserve this kind of obscenity-laced disrespect and why you think that you are allowed to violate forum rules and common decency, because you've done this repeatedly and it's not okay.

I expressed my opinion—and while it's just splitting hairs about a silly game, I think reasonable people can see the point I was making—and I even ended my last message on the matter with a note that I hoped would let people know I was just chatting. It had a smiley face, even.

Jamiet99uk wrote: ↑

Thu Aug 03, 2023 8:31 am

Foxcastle wrote: ↑

Thu Aug 03, 2023 12:52 am

As always, I regret engaging with Jamie and this is a good reminder to myself to stop doing that.

You expressed your opinion and then said this - which shaded me unnecessarily and had a very insulting tone. This is what upset me.

No, I did not express my opinion "and then" say this. I expressed my opinion, and then you laced into me with three (count 'em, THREE) posts that, in order, brusquely told me I was wrong, asked me "What more do you fucking want??" (so an insulting tone is an issue for you, but you don't mind immediately using an insulting tone at someone else?), and then insulted me by pointing out that I have occasionally made errors in running my own sessions of this silly game. You had already lobbed three insulting posts at me before I typed a word of what you say upset you and prompted you to tell me to "suck [your] balls."

Only after you took the time to write three derisive posts to me did I note my frustration that I've had too many bad experiences with you. Maybe spend less time lashing out at that and more time asking yourself why it keeps happening. Because I think I was civil and polite in my disagreement about the game, and it is not okay for you to behave this way just because someone disagrees with you.