OOTS #962 - The Discussion Thread

[Simons Mith]

I am loving the developing dynamic between Durkon and Durkles. or Nokrud or Durkula or HPoH or whatever.

Durkon and Durkoff?

[Chadamantium]

Man I want to smite a tree.

[Jay R]

Hm... I wonder where little Durkon got the stick? I'd imagine that trees would be rather uncommon (and wouldn't last long) near a dwarven settlement.

A tree that didn't last long is pretty much what a stick is.

[t209]

So am I feeling that we should write a rule for "Smite the Tree".

[Banderwock]

But you would put "they should learn from it" out there without so much as a password protecting it, apparently. Ah, ironies.

What exactly do you think you're accomplishing by--how did you put it--insisting that "they have some responsibility"? Do you think if you hadn't posted that, the board would be full of people who think that having naked photos stolen and made public is a desirable circumstance? This "the lesson is valuable" stuff occludes the fact that the one and only thing you've accomplished with your posts, is establishing that you're willing to engage in victim-blaming (even while attempting to claim you're not).

And here I thought we were discussing and disagreeing politely on a subject of debate.

I'm not trying to tell people "having naked photos stolen and made public is a desirable circumstance," but it keeps happening, and there are simple ways to prevent it. Talking about it might help more people realize that they need to take those steps, but feel free to be surprised when it happens again. Either way, I was merely expressing an opinion on the topic of the strip, not proselytizing.

This couldn't have been more obviously prompted by the recent incident. And I don't have a problem with the strip, I just didn't like the punchline because I didn't think it was an apt analogy. Obviously many people did and liked it and that's fine.

[Kish]

And here I thought we were discussing and disagreeing politely on a subject of debate.

I'm not trying to tell people "having naked photos stolen and made public is a desirable circumstance," but it keeps happening, and there are simple ways to prevent it. Talking about it might help more people realize that they need to take those steps, but feel free to be surprised when it happens again. Either way, I was merely expressing an opinion on the topic of the strip, not proselytizing.

This couldn't have been more obviously prompted by the recent incident. And I don't have a problem with the strip, I just didn't like the punchline because I didn't think it was an apt analogy. Obviously many people did and liked it and that's fine.

What, do I need to bold the question to get it answered?

[Barnacle]

Put me in the 'it was just a joke and had nothing to do with anything outside the strip' camp.

Cultural references are iffy to begin with in a webcomic that is intended for physical publication at a later date. Very few people reading this next year in print form are going to think about the recent breach; they'll just go 'ew' and turn the page.

Me too. Since when has this comic been a source of deep cultural analysis of real-life current events? Pretty much never. People are reading too much into the recent comics and looking for any way to twist them into some moral/cultural analysis arguments.

Sometimes a pipe is just a pipe, and in this case there isn't even really a pipe.

[Banderwock]

You don't appear to have bothered to read the post you're responding to. Certainly you're not answering the question I posed in it.

I ignored one of your points to try to be polite. You said it was ironic that I would semi-publicly express my opinion that people should learn from past incidents and be responsible for their data, but I wouldn't say this to a victim's face. I'm not sure you know what irony means, as this definitely doesn't fit. Is there a small chance that one of the victims could be reading this? Yes, but then they would have chosen to read the comments of a strip about this topic, so they shouldn't be surprised to see it discussed. Not the same thing.

What am I accomplishing? Probably nothing. I'm just debating/expressing an opinion, but I have learned something from this, and heartbleed, and others, so maybe other people will too. You seem to think this should only be discussed a certain way, and I disagree. Do I think people enjoy having their pictures stolen? Well, I already directly answered this one, so maybe read it again.

edit: Sorry, I didn't directly answer that last one, although it seemed hypothetical, so: no, I don't think that.

[Math_Mage]

1. It sucks when celebrities, women, and especially women celebrities have to guard their appearances with the kind of paranoia most people apply to their financial information. The asshats who create that environment are 100% responsible for it (and that includes the celebrity-stalking paparazzi as much as the people who stole these photos).
2. That said, the environment exists, and women have to navigate it, even as they (and hopefully the rest of us) fight to change it. Everyone has the responsibility to learn to navigate their environment, even though it's more difficult for some people than others due to issues of class/privilege/etc.
3. That said, from what I hear, many of these people took reasonable precautions with their photos. Besides, delivering the lecture on data security now reeks of schadenfreude.

[Banderwock]

What, do I need to bold the question to get it answered?

Was answering your previous rude comments. Didn't your parents teach you how to disagree politely? (this is not a good example)

[Kish]

I ignored one of your points to try to be polite.

*spluf* I wonder if you realize what you just said.

What am I accomplishing? Probably nothing.

That was the question I wanted answered, yes. (Well, there's sharing your definitions of politeness, so I wouldn't say nothing.)

[Banderwock]

*spluf* I wonder if you realize what you just said.

That was the question, yes. (Well, there's sharing your definitions of politeness, so I wouldn't say nothing.)

Mmk. Not gonna keep escalating. Have fun in here.

[Canuck617]

This thread was pretty funny, in addition to the comic.

"Jeesh, how cruddy does a God have to be that literally nobody in the world worships her? I thought Durkon meant figuratively, like how one might say that nobody likes free jazz or eating spam."

"Yes, that would be an interesting thing to learn. One would hope that someone writes a comic strip about it someday."

Hehe, good stuff. (also, I didn't feel like formally quoting The Giant or outing the other guy.)

Also:

Durkon and Durkoff?

Nice!! I think I might start using that! HPOH is elegant, but Durkoff is funny in ways that aren't immediately evident.

So, what, now you see something and a memory just pops up?
Aye, tha's how memory works.

Also, I think the last panel was pretty funny. Both of those exchanges seem to underscore how little Durkoff understands the inner workings of any living person, and that's all I got to say about that.

Furthermore, I'm really liking Sigdi the more I learn about her. As the woman who raised Durkon, Momma Thundershield is pretty darn righteous the more I learn about her. Where's the Momma Thundershield Fan Club?

[Keltest]

3. That said, from what I hear, many of these people took reasonable precautions with their photos. Besides, delivering the lecture on data security now reeks of schadenfreude.

This, I think, is the important bit. People are making analogies about cases full of diamonds in a bad neighborhood, but this is more like going to a storage facility and renting space. Yes, they aren't watching their stuff 24/7, but theres a reasonable expectation by the company providing the storage that they shouldn't have to worry. If your stuff gets stolen, its not because you put it out there, but because the people you paid to protect it did not do their jobs adequately enough, and because some nasty people out there decided to make you miserable.

[colanderman]

Hm... I wonder where little Durkon got the stick? I'd imagine that trees would be rather uncommon (and wouldn't last long) near a dwarven settlement.

It's not a stick, it's a painted rock.

[mlkjhgfds]

I suspect that last panel will be mildly confusing to future readers - it kinda reads like it's supposed to be funny. (didn't know about what it was referencing beforehand)

[Math_Mage]

I suspect that last panel will be mildly confusing to future readers - it kinda reads like it's supposed to be funny. (didn't know about what it was referencing beforehand)

While it's currently topical, it's also referencing a general social issue, so the window of comprehension is wider. IMO it is funny.

[SaintRidley]

Jeesh, how cruddy does a God have to be that literally nobody in the world worships her? I thought Durkon meant figuratively, like how one might say that nobody likes free jazz or eating spam.

Seems the culture of those under her pantheon's guidance is particularly biased against the idea of worshiping her (and probably so by design), so there's that as a contributing factor.

[Knaight]

I like how Rich referenced the celebrity scandal in the last page. Which brings to mind. Did he do this comic to keep the comics moving. Or to make that joke?

It's to do with a recent mini-scandal in which nude photographs of some actresses stored on the web were released.

I suspect that last panel will be mildly confusing to future readers - it kinda reads like it's supposed to be funny. (didn't know about what it was referencing beforehand)

While the recent series of crimes involving the theft and distribution of stolen photographs is pertinent to the joke, and could easily have been part of the impetus behind it, the joke isn't really about it per-se. As Kish says:

I think it's very likely Rich didn't mean it as explicit social commentary on any individual incident--in large part because victim-blaming is nearly timeless. If someone reads the comic in print form in 2045, something will have happened fairly recently that they can associate the final-panel punchline with.

There's a whole bunch of events this could be applied to. The title narrows it down, although the set that the title narrows it down to isn't exactly small. Just the panel? That is widely applicable, and I'm in agreement with Kish as to it likely still being applicable in 2045, though I'm hoping for enough cultural improvements that the applicability is in more of a historical light. I'd also put very, very slim odds on that.

[Rogar Demonblud]

Is it wrong of me to like Sergeant Thundershield much, much more than Cleric Thundershield?

[Angelalex242]

I'd argue what's happening to Durkon is more equivalent to having one's financial information stolen then it is to having nude pictures on the internet stolen.

Durkon wasn't doing racy things. He was simply living his life in a mostly morally upright way. Thus, his violation is not taking advantage of carelessness, rather, taking advantage of information that simply exists.

[Carl]

Only got a few posts in but can someone explain why the first few posters seem to think the last panel had some relevance to current event's? Honestly have no idea what that could possibly reference. I actually found it funny as a joke in it's own right mind, the sheer sarcasam on both sides .

[drazen]

...this is more like going to a storage facility and renting space. Yes, they aren't watching their stuff 24/7, but theres a reasonable expectation by the company providing the storage that they shouldn't have to worry. If your stuff gets stolen, its not because you put it out there, but because the people you paid to protect it did not do their jobs adequately enough, and because some nasty people out there decided to make you miserable.

Not really. I rent a storage locker from Public Storage. There are explicit rules about what you can and cannot put in storage (Cash, jewelry, fireworks, and firearms are prohibited, for example). These rules are largely there to prevent me from doing something dumb, like storing $10,000 in cash with a simple padlock that can be busted open with bolt cutters. I'm also required to purchase insurance on stored items, despite the company's supposed assurance that my locker is secure and monitored. Prohibited items are not insurable, so while I might think my $10,000 *should* be safe, it isn't, and I wouldn't have thought so anyway.

An iCloud account isn't like a bank's safety deposit box (jewels) or a bank account (cash - insured by the FDIC up to $100,000). An iCloud account is more like a flimsy locker that they bust open on Storage Wars, or a shed in your backyard in a heavily trafficked community. The security is largely pretense. And an iCloud account is an even worse proposition, because everyone in the world can pick the lock, undetected.

I don't protect my cash by putting it in a weakly guarded facility. It would be equally irrational, were I a famous actress, to protect my naked pictures by making them accessible over the Internet.

My car is locked and alarmed when I'm not in it, but I don't leave $10,000 in the center console.

You can be a victim AND lack common sense at the same time.

[Keltest]

Not really. I rent a storage locker from Public Storage. There are explicit rules about what you can and cannot put in storage (Cash, jewelry, fireworks, and firearms are prohibited, for example). These rules are largely there to prevent me from doing something dumb, like storing $10,000 in cash with a simple padlock that can be busted open with bolt cutters. I'm also required to purchase insurance on stored items, despite the company's supposed assurance that my locker is secure and monitored. Prohibited items are not insurable, so while I might think my $10,000 *should* be safe, it isn't, and I wouldn't have thought so anyway.

An iCloud account isn't like a bank's safety deposit box (jewels) or a bank account (cash - insured by the FDIC up to $100,000). An iCloud account is more like a flimsy locker that they bust open on Storage Wars, or a shed in your backyard in a heavily trafficked community. The security is largely pretense. And an iCloud account is an even worse proposition, because everyone in the world can pick the lock, undetected.

I don't protect my cash by putting it in a weakly guarded facility. It would be equally irrational, were I a famous actress, to protect my naked pictures by making them accessible over the Internet.

My car is locked and alarmed when I'm not in it, but I don't leave $10,000 in the center console.

You can be a victim AND lack common sense at the same time.

Youre missing the point. Would it make you feel better if I had said "bank deposit box" instead of a storage locker? They were told their property was secure. It was not. If common sense says "never put anything on the internet you aren't prepared to lose." then everyone with internet access is a walking violation of common sense for putting things like account information, passwords, bank info, etc... on the internet. They were promised a level of security they did not end up possessing, so unless youre advocating being so cynical that you never trust anyone to do anything correctly, they didn't do anything wrong.

[Sange]

So basicall what we learn is that Durkon had boring parties while young and that for the HPOH, the end justifies the means.
What I find really interesting however is Hel trying to raise her own clerics. That suggests some people do actually worship Hel. Interesting.

[zimmerwald1915]

*Disclaimer: this is a random thought that has little to do with the strip or with current events, motivated to a significant degree by a desire to have posted SOMETHING. Please feel free to glaze over it and not reply.*

Could Thor, now that sending storms to bother the Mechane has more or less failed, start sending visions to Haley?

[Keltest]

So basicall what we learn is that Durkon had boring parties while young and that for the HPOH, the end justifies the means.
What I find really interesting however is Hel trying to raise her own clerics. That suggests some people do actually worship Hel. Interesting.

Under a certain definition of "people", sure. But she has no mortal followers per word of Rich earlier in the thread.

*Disclaimer: this is a random thought that has little to do with the strip or with current events, motivated to a significant degree by a desire to have posted SOMETHING. Please feel free to glaze over it and not reply.*

Could Thor, now that sending storms to bother the Mechane has more or less failed, start sending visions to Haley?

Something tells me that if Thor could be that direct in the matter, it would have been his first choice. Any visions that are as or less direct than the storm would suffer similar problems of nobody knowing what to make of it.

[zyxophoj]

Durkon wasn't doing racy things.

At at least one point in his life, he was. If there is ever a reason for Durkula to replay that particular memory, then poor Durkon suffers yet another indignity :(

[ti'esar]

Ignoring the latest attempt to set a new record for argument absurdity in discussion threads: I find myself increasingly interested by the High Priest of Hel's claim that his "mission justifies everything". I get the sense he really does think it's justified in some objective sense, not just in a Xykon-style "No one matters but me so everything I do is justified" sense.

[Math_Mage]

I'd argue what's happening to Durkon is more equivalent to having one's financial information stolen then it is to having nude pictures on the internet stolen.

Durkon wasn't doing racy things. He was simply living his life in a mostly morally upright way. Thus, his violation is not taking advantage of carelessness, rather, taking advantage of information that simply exists.

You're implying some kind of incompatibility between "living life in a mostly morally upright way" and having private nude photos of oneself. Please stop doing that.