Talk:Dr. schwan’s Research and Development Team/Combat Revive Policy

Hear hear!

Hear hear! --Itsacon ^{(Talk | Grungni | Ikhnaton)} 23:16, 3 July 2010 (BST)

Objection

There are many retarded arguments on this page but I'm just going to focus on this one for now:

Is combat reviving a breach of decorum? Let the frequency of the action speak to that. Most zombies of high level will attest that at several points they have been combat revived. Additionally, the largest group tag active in Malton is “dual nature” which is composed of individuals who, by definition are never looking for a revive. If revivification without prior request was not a standard occurrence, these individuals would all remain permanently zombies. Facts attest that this is not the case as several can be spotted in each suburb populating survivor-held buildings. In fact, Combat revives are not irregular and are part of the standard way in which zombies and humans in Malton interact with each other.

This is retarded logic. Duel natures get revived a lot because they have DUAL NATURE in their profile, idiot. They are "safe" CR's. Jesus fuckin Christ I'm not even saying CR's should not be done but this is an idiotic argument. Oh btw, you could say all this shit in about 80% less words. Less is more. Fuck.--

| T | BALLS! | 06:17 4 July 2010(UTC)

Interesting, now allow me the chance to respond. First of all, I am sorry that Zombie Lord does not care for the language I use under my group’s name space but I will attempt to phrase things here more colloquially. The part of the argument with which he takes issue is intended to dispel the idea that CRs are rare or unusual. Whether or not he personally believes that they are, many people consider them to be beyond the scope of usual survivor/zombie interaction. To put this in other terms, Imagine you are at a polite dinner party and someone shares an unsolicited “yo Momma” joke. This would be rude because that is not supposed to happen at a dinner party. Now suppose you are at a “Snaps” battle; the same statement would not be unexpected. For the sake of clarity, I am saying that Malton is a “Snaps” battle and CRs are a “Yo Momma” joke. Part of my evidence(and I would stress that there is more to support this claim) is that regarding Dual Natured zombies. Zombie Lord objects to this evidence calling such unsolicited…excuse me…un-asked for revives “Safe CRs”. The consequences of the revive are immaterial (do not matter); it I still an un-asked for revive. Dual nature players know this and plan for it. My point is that it happens, it happens often, and it is therefore to be expected. Taking offense (getting mad)about an action that is expected does not make sense. If there are any other parts of my argument that are seen as “retarded” feel free to bring them to my attention, but please try to do so in a less disgruntled (mad sounding) way in future. Anddo please use subject headings if you are going to leave feedback: that way your comments are separated from those of the previous person. I have added them to the first two posts.

-- Albert Schwan  07:07, 4 July 2010 (BST)