Case study of LII-C PoLR

[tcaudilllg]

Guidelines of Level Editor Design

We're used to thinking of LII PoLR in the accepting mode, where the LII demurs from exercising their rights for fear that SLE will beat them up. (basically) But in the producing case, it's a matter of the LII creating a new system, and them using Se to force conformance to it. Thus, it's SEE, not SLE, who takes issue because where SLE would respect the use of force (probably), SEE becomes incensed over the feeling that someone is trying to control their rights to think and feel as they wish.

[ArchonAlarion]

Tcaud, you have to demonstrate your ideas to people. This has more to do with Te ignoring, than anything else. You are assuming that these people have the same thought process as you. They do not. The idea must become a tangible product before you can truly provoke confirmation (Te) and admiration (Fe). I'd recommend showing them rather than telling them about this theory.

[ashlesha]

Tcaud, you have to demonstrate your ideas to people. This has more to do with Te ignoring, than anything else. You are assuming that these people have the same thought process as you. They do not. The idea must become a tangible product before you can truly provoke confirmation (Te) and admiration (Fe). I'd recommend showing them rather than telling them about this theory.

[tcaudilllg]

Eh I wrote an NES decompiler (using their input), so I've shown them already.

I think it's a C vs N thing, with conservative vs liberal undertones. The ROM hacking community is notoriously normalizing. Like they said, they want their independence, their individuality... with a general bend towards not caring if everything they produce is actually useful or not.

[tcaudilllg]

Oh noes, I got a warning from that forum telling me not to politically type people. It's apparently "not very friendly".

You go, ILI EM normalizers!