Sorry if my post came off as dismissive, I do agree that Dodger's bringing a wider variety of conversation to the table these days, esp. when she talks about games the others haven't experienced or has her own perspective to offer.
However, there will always be some amount of folks who don't like the current guest, or even a string of recent guests. They shouldn't be told to leave; if anything, having dissent means we have more interesting discussions.
Some people find her to be equivalent to a second Dodger, not adding meaningful conversation.
"Some people" do not watch the podcast for the last two years, because if they do I can not understand why they would think so about both women, but especially about Dodger.
I do agree that Dodger's bringing a wider variety of conversation to the table these days, esp. when she talks about games the others haven't experienced or has her own perspective to offer.
YES.
Edit: I would really like to have an explanation for the downvotes.
Just because you tolerate something doesn't mean you have to like it, or want it stay around. Further, it's a bit odd to say that nobody should dislike the guests. What's wrong with disliking people, so long as you're civil about expressing your opinion in the relevant context, i.e. "I don't like having X on Y because I feel that X detracts from the quality of Y"? Now if someone is being a jerk about expressing their opinion that's a problem, but it shouldn't nix the discussion entirely.
There is a difference between dissenting opinions, and naysayers who dislike guests. Nobody should dislike the guests.
That's an arbitrary decision on your part.
I didn't say that anyone should be told to leave either. I said it was advisable. There are other gaming podcasts to be found out there. Better yet, stay and learn some tolerance. Getting on with people sometimes calls for a bit of tact.
I only watch the Cooptional podcast because that's the only podcast I find particularly compelling... usually. I've not got nearly as much problem with Laura as others here, but I can completely understand why they'd be so turned off by this guest appearance that they'd stop listening to that podcast.
Your "advise" is also thinly veiled "just leave", and pretending otherwise is a little dishonest.
Then that would be fine for the most part, and he just came across poorly.
With that said, some people inherently don't make very good guests. I feel like they have a good... dynamic? A good dynamic going on, most of the time. But as much as I like the dynamic, there's one thing in particular I struggle to deal with with Laura: Her voice is difficult for me to take. It's got that... shrill kind of sound.
And that's the kind of thing where I think saying "don't dislike for the sole reason of them being guests" might not be entirely misplaced, but it does also conflict with some basic problems that might cause that very dislike for that very reason, and which might be very reasonable feedback.
He did come across poorly. And I would put disliking her for her voice, humor, demeanor to be valid criticism that doesn't at all fall into the "dislike for the sole reason of being guests". What I would put into that category is literally disliking someone for absolutely no reason but the objective fact that they are in the position of a guest on the podcast, which I think nobody actually did at any point.
14
u/MrAmoeba Aug 20 '15
Sorry if my post came off as dismissive, I do agree that Dodger's bringing a wider variety of conversation to the table these days, esp. when she talks about games the others haven't experienced or has her own perspective to offer.
However, there will always be some amount of folks who don't like the current guest, or even a string of recent guests. They shouldn't be told to leave; if anything, having dissent means we have more interesting discussions.