What should you honestly do in this situation?

What should you honestly do in this situation?

Attached: 4E230B42-FE0D-43C9-983E-78C4E9F1C5F4.jpg (1280x720, 46K)

shave your mustache

Probably nothing. I'd just complain about how awkward it was after the fact. I'm not very confrontational.

I wouldn't let some autist sit next to me while I'm trying to prove my autism on the internet.

"I'd really prefer if you showed up to an event with thousands of people watching in something other than pajama bottoms."

I typed up an analysis of this whole shebang for another thread which got deleted, lemme dig this up. Question was "who was in the wrong here?", answer rests on two different ways of being wrong.

If I were Caveman, I'd realize Chibi was only trying to be entertaining and thus control my irritation enough to request that he stop in a firm but collected manner. If I were Chibi, I'd realize that, though unintended, my attempts at humor had become unwelcome, and honor the plainly-worded and civil request put before me.

In other words, I'd do exactly what they did. Neither man did anything wrong.

Yikes

chibi can't even do jumping jacks right, fuck him

Two definitions of "in the wrong".

1) "in the wrong" = "didn't know what they were doing and made 1+ errors". In that context everyone was in the wrong. They all made faulty assumptions, made careless statements and resulted in a painful, awkward experience for no real reason. Hopefully some of them have learned a lesson from the experience and can socialise better.

2) "in the wrong" = "there wouldn't be a problem if they weren't there". In this definition it's definitely the guy who kept blurting things out. The rest of the couch would've been able to enjoy a normal speedrun commentary, but he kept pushing at a boundary he didn't percieve, and they didn't know what to do and acted poorly.

The distinction between the two definitions concerns their focus of correction.

1) is moral. All the parties are equally to blame for the unpleasant time had, which is to say "not much" because at the end of the day an awkward speedrun is not the end of the world. No one individual can be singled out for special moral culpability.

2) is pragmatic, about avoiding these situations. Removing the blurting kid from the couch, and screening to prevent guys like him from reaching it without some tuition, supervision and experience, would go a long way towards resolving these issues.

In conclusion, the following course of action can resolve situations like this in the event of future couches:
1) No moral condemnations for simple misunderstandings
2) Screen for people with "eclectic" notions of boundaries, assess their prescence on a sample gaming couch and provide some pointers and see if they figure them out before allowing them on.

In practice however this would be far too much effort for something as fun, breezy and casual as a fan-driven speedrunning event. So I fully expect SGDQ and the like to become increasingly draconian and homodox in its operating practices in the future to come, with all the shittiness that comes with it. Why? You can answer that yourselves.

Attached: 1551051789288.gif (267x320, 452K)

Speedrunning?
Hah.
More like..
SpEdrunning

Attached: 1561340075213.jpg (630x478, 35K)

Caveman was definitely trying to focus, i'm more baffled that the other people didn't try to tell Chibi he was being the opposite of helpful

Most people are not particularly perceptive, imaginative or forward thinking in any capacity, and suck at imagining the inner processes of other humans. This means that when an outlier case like Chibi comes along, they don't know how to handle it.

Another extremely lowest-common denominator trait is passivity, cowardice, going with the norm, staying shtum and doing nothing and so on. The two combine to equal "say nothing and hope this blows over", which to be fair proves pragmatic in a lot of situations. But as a result, most people are regularly crippled by certain mild outlier events, and sitting on a couch with a guy like Chibi is one of them. Caveman himself was straining to mount up any direct response at all.

This. Mustache man is actually more alpha than most of us, just for daring to request another man stop speaking.

I'm not mean enough to tell the guy to shut the fuck up but I would certainly be thinking it

I feel sorry for most of "us".

Attached: 1454359022825.jpg (413x395, 31K)

they're speedrunners, none of them used to dealing with other people... anyone at any point could've told the "Can you stop" girl that she isn't actually allowed to talk during the speedrun, but nobody knew how to handle the situation.

Lay blame on the people of Israel for corrupting this young soul with their vile media.

>this happened 5 years ago lads

Attached: 1523668022799.png (635x661, 227K)

Who are you talking about? Caveman or Chibi? Caveman took the correct action. If I was Chibi, I would have immediatly apologised, admit I was being hyper to the detriment of the stream, and remain quiet for the rest of the run.

>"Can you stop" girl
Maybe I've forgotten details since it's been so long, who is this?

Who was more alpha in the end?

I wasn't around for this, what happened?
Was it as bad/awkward as "can you stop?" lady?

the one who stood up and wanted everyone to stop the run and pay attention to her personal sob story

Probably say
"Is it okay if we tone down the jokes a little?" or something not quite so directly and forceful.

Still gets the message across but you're using 'we' to set a more global rule so you're not just attacking Chibi.

He'd probably just laugh and say "okay okay" and things would be a bit less autistic and focus more on the run.

I'd have told him to shut the fuck up

i think the original video edit where it zooms in and the sound muffles, is a brilliant way to show the speed and weight of embarrassment coming on. you can feel the cheeks warm up as he realises that this is an awkward moment. truly a moment for the ages, it will be studied for years

Alpha's a discreditted concept, Chad effectively replaced it.

Using the accurate Chad-Virgin dichotomy, the pair are both squarely in the middle of the scale. If you were to break Chad-Virgin into two subscales, you could get a cross axes spectrum with Chibi and Caveman at opposite ends of the line of neutrals.

Axes 1: Active power. High vs Low. Chibi is high, totally going ahead with what he reckoned would be naturally funny and sticking with it. Caveman is low, sticking to safe conventional norms.

Axes 2: Resistive strength. Caveman is high, once pushed enough he made a show of stable solid strength and made his point firm and clear. Chibi is weak, deflating almost immediately and sulking for the rest of the time on the couch rather than addressing or engaging with the others, showing no signs of having understood in the online aftermath.

Chad is high in both strengths, Virgin is low in both. Powerhouse vs doormat. Chibi and Caveman are at the far extremes of the neutral scale. Someone could make an image of this.

Attached: 1532159688899.png (337x320, 47K)

Oh christ, now I remember her. That was exquisite, a perfect, simple encapsulation of the liberal narcisistic victim complex, and how unsuspecting normies, through a mixture of shock and confusion, just try and ignore.

>go to fun video game event
>crack some jokes here and there trying to keep the game lively
>negative nancy tells you "no fun allowed" and is constantly in a state of annoyance

Chibi was in the right and Caveman was in the wrong and anyone who disagrees with this isn't thinking about the situation properly.

Do jumping jacks for chat for the sake of HOYP!