Do ‘Losers’ Matter?

A guy came to the FA about a year ago presenting his “vision for a real Sith Order” and advertising his website. I think it (the guys website) has actually progressed a little since then to. It’s not exactly my kind of thing, especially in that even when measured to other similar sites his Sith Academy is still a relatively young one, but I also don’t think it’s a waste of time to browse through it every now and then.

Of course, I guess you’ve got to keep in mind that I’m generally not as dismissive of people like Sean or his efforts as others tend to be; I find the newer sites, especially those in their infantile stages and/or appealing to a younger audience base, to be interesting most of the time, and I like watching how they progress… and, more often than I would like, how far they go before they’re shelf life runs out. But getting back to the discussion started at the Force Academy…

Sean (aka Imperius) decided to call it quits and, I guess because nobody really jumped at the idea he was talking about and people criticized the content and mannerisms of his little presentation, said that the FA was a forum of losers, and that moderators could feel free to lock or delete the thread. (Because of the loose regulation/moderation there niether of those actions were taken , so you can still read through it if you want: My vision of a real Sith Order.) That brings me to what I really wanted to post about: Irvine’s response to the guys decision to abandon further discussion.

“Surely your model of gaining social control requires precisely that you would gain the support of ‘losers’. ‘Winners’, after all, would be potential competitors.”
~Richard Irvine

The funny thing is that, at the time, everyone seemed to be treating Sean/Imperius like a loser, yet what Richard said could just as fairly have been applied to us. Granted, most people at the FA probably don’t have even remotely similar aims to those expressed by the would-be Sith Master, but Darksiders tend to be elitists and – assuming some degree of prudence in how one might deal with people one might deem lesser – the approach suggessted by Richard still seems relevant – and in the context of this discussion, could have just as easily been suggested to us.

(Originally Written December 8th, 2012 // Last Revised January 30th, 2013)



    1. I won’t disagree with that, but a) I don’t think it hurts to understand where other people are coming from, if only to better piss on them, but also to get an idea of what value they might have (even if only as what not to be/do/whatever) and b) more importantly, my main point here is that my answer to the title is generally a “yes”. How much, and how depend on context. But they do tend to ‘matter’.
      “Hate [or whatever] the weak all you want, but the weak have their uses.” ~Me
      lol And naturally the ones getting it turned back around at them would want to dismiss it, so there’s that to. You say it doesn’t mean it can be applied back and forth equally, and sure it’s a fair point, but how seriously was it taken from Sean’s perspective when *he* was on the receiving end? Probably about as seriously as you’d take it. The main difference being you tend to make headway and say more reasonable, sane shit than someone like Sean, whereas he’s a bit… well, nutty, so he tends to hit a block wall that won’t move when he tries to convince people he matters.

Leave a Reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in: Logo

You are commenting using your account. Log Out / Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out / Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out / Change )

Google+ photo

You are commenting using your Google+ account. Log Out / Change )

Connecting to %s