QC: Sideswipe?

The modern comics universe has had such a different take on G1, one that's significantly represented by the Generations toys, so they share a forum. A modern take on a Real Cybertronian Hero. Currently starring Generations toys, IDW "The Transformers" comics, MTMTE, TF vs GI Joe, and Windblade. Oh wait, and now Skybound, wheee!
User avatar
Gomess
Supreme-Class
Posts: 2767
Joined: Sat Jul 19, 2008 1:10 am
Location: Eng-er-land

Re: QC: Sideswipe?

Post by Gomess »

Oh, leather jackets too; I am a longtime Misfits fan. So mine's got overly thick spikes, too. My girl actually has a *leather* *trenchcoat* and thus beats everything. It's green.

I guess the difficulty of long term : short term really depends on the individual, or maybe even the country. =p Or maybe you guys just have a radically different way of getting involved with girls than I do. Heh, are there really that many ways to do it?

Also, I'm darn sure Claire wasn't initially attracted to me because I wanted a long-term relationship. Matter of fact, she knew I was totally unreliable. But we ended up, like, falling into unspoken agreement on our eternal monogamy. If you looked over the opening dialogue of our 'getting together', you definitely wouldn't say *either* of us had a "handle on life". Or maybe we had so MUCH of a handle, it didn't seem like it?

Uhh, what I'm trying to say, I guess, is that Prowl shouldn't take advice from any of us. Or all of us. X]

I wonder who else we can drag into this discussion? If we got Dom, maybe we can get JT and Scourge too! Surprised we haven't snagged CrossRook and MP too, darn nebulous-aged 'child' geniuses off building their space-bending robots...
COME TO TFVIEWS oh you already did
User avatar
Onslaught Six
Supreme-Class
Posts: 7023
Joined: Fri Jul 18, 2008 6:49 am
Location: In front of my computer.
Contact:

Re: QC: Sideswipe?

Post by Onslaught Six »

Ehh. I just keep at it and hope for the best. It seems to have generally worked so far.
BWprowl wrote:The internet having this many different words to describe nerdy folks is akin to the whole eskimos/ice situation, I would presume.
People spend so much time worrying about whether a figure is "mint" or not that they never stop to consider other flavours.
Image
User avatar
Gomess
Supreme-Class
Posts: 2767
Joined: Sat Jul 19, 2008 1:10 am
Location: Eng-er-land

Re: QC: Sideswipe?

Post by Gomess »

Optimism Prime.
COME TO TFVIEWS oh you already did
User avatar
Dominic
Supreme-Class
Posts: 9331
Joined: Thu Jul 17, 2008 12:55 pm
Location: Boston
Contact:

Re: QC: Sideswipe?

Post by Dominic »

A few random points:
-1. Loving G's new AV image. Megaman IV is one of those games I really liked, and almost inspired me to write a comic adaptation back in the day.

-2. I hate spiked leather jackets. Buddy of mine back in HS had one, and more than once I absently approached the man...touching his shoulder in a "hey, Aaron" kind of way, and I was always sorry. I never learned anything but to hate those coats.

3. With the younger girl who I am fairly certain liked me, it was also likely a question of her seeing me as "safe" in that my being a nice guy, and so much older, meant I would not hurt her in an actual relationship. That is common when there is a huge difference between the the attracted and the alttractee, with the attracted being younger and aware of the age difference. (Obviously, if somebody grossly miscalculates the age of another, the principle does not hold.)


Now. to the broader topic of relationships.

Interests, (putting aside its political definition, though that may also be a factor), are things you would engage in or discuss for non-material gain. TF does not make us wealthier or healthier, but we like it. A relationship needs to have common interests. It does not always have to be a question of liking the same things. It can also be a question of one party wants to expand and learn about something, while the other party wants to expand and learn about something else. If one or the other is willing to "teach", there is a basis for a relationship, if only a temporary one. (If one party turns into a parasite and stops bringing anything to the table, things go south fast.)

Interests could be any number of things. A friend of mine met his girl-friend at a campaign fund-raiser and they later got together at the state party convention. It could be based on pets. (If you have a dog, they make great initial screens, and they make you seem like a really nice guy.) It could be, as O6 pointed out, a band or some creative venture.

I think I can see what G is saying about short-term relationships being ore difficult. It all comes down to how you monetize opportunity and (for lack of a better term) administrative costs. The first cost would be in terms of lost chances for real relationships because one is in a time-waster at the time the better prospect appears. (It is possible to miss the better prospect entirely because one's attention is elsewhere.) Even if there are no better prospects around, the aggregated cost in time, energy and (likely) money spent on short-term relationships over time can easily exceed that spent on a long-term relationship for a similar amount of time. For example, if you get into a short-term relationship (lasting a month or so), and (monetizing time and effort), you spend ~$300, it may seem like a bargain compared to the long-term relationship that costs ~$6,000 for a year. Now, most of that will be front loaded, and even assuming ~$300 a month for 12 months, one is only paying ~$3,6000. But, if, (as I suspect Gomess is doing), you monetize your time differently, the convenience cost of the $6,000 becomes a bargain.

This could be because one's paycheck influences how one monetizes their time. When I was working retail a few years back, i would spend more time to save money, because my time was worth less to me than the money saved. Now, being semi-professional in the field I like, I am a bit more wililng to spend, despite economic jitters. Similarly, one could monetize time differently based on task, and the routine inherent to a long-term relationship carried a value by virtue of saving time drawing up a schedule. (Never mind time spent pursuing, essentially random, prospects.)

I actually agree with the above line of thinking. But, that factors in maintaining and replacing. If we are talking about strictly finding and getting into a single relationship, the short-term one is still easier/cheaper because one does not have to think about it. Many of the variables one would consider important for a long-term relationship are simply not worth considering for a short-term relationship. (For example, in a long-term relationship, families or pets eventually become variables. Not so in a short-term relationship.)

Since my frames of reference are political, I recommend applying the principles in "The Art of War" to this. Know the enemy and have a defined condition for victory. A more modern take on this is the Weinberger doctrine.

Have a defined goal. (A relationship. Be sure to define what kind of a relationship you want, and what you want from it.)

Have a definite plan, and a way to get out if thing go wrong. (What are you worried about going wrong, and how would you handle it?)

Have public support. (This is where knowing the enemy comes into play. Remember what O6 said about playing to your strengths and good points? Market those ideas to your prospective paramours.)


The key is to be honest with yourself. Even if you want a relationship based on lying, you have to be honest with yourself about that much. If you want a dominant girl, do not select for passivity because everybody else is. On the other hand, do not take a passive girl unless you want consistent executive authority. (This will often carry over into mundane decisions that you may not want to be troubled with.) Do not try to get one like your best friend's girl, no matter how well they work, if she is not what you would want. (I know more than one person in relationships that would make me crazy, but they are selecting for traits in their mates I would not be looking for.) If you like kids, and are curious about being a dad, select for single mothers. (This works for some people.) If you want nothing to do with children, avoid them. (They may be wonderful people, but if they have a kid, you are likely to be a male figure in that kids life, even if you do not want to.)

So, now, (and you do not have to do it openly), define what you want. Then, figure out how to get it.

I hope this helps Prowl.

Dom
-has somewhat dingy trench-coat for autumn and a bomber for winter, and looks like a scalper or a dock-worker for all seasons.
User avatar
Gomess
Supreme-Class
Posts: 2767
Joined: Sat Jul 19, 2008 1:10 am
Location: Eng-er-land

Re: QC: Sideswipe?

Post by Gomess »

And now for my final thought.

Nobody wins when Sideswipe's quality control comes under scrutiny... But we can all leave at least a little wiser.

Oh, and yeah, Dom, with regards to my "short-term is harder" schtick, you got it. I do, however, feel the need to point out that my avvie is from MM7. I'd like to pre-emptively point out that I realise it may've just reminded you of Mega Man in *general*, and 4 just happened to be your favourite, of course.

But, just for the record. 7. Spring Man, to be precise. Use Slash Claw. Not Thunder Bolt! Ooo nelly!
COME TO TFVIEWS oh you already did
User avatar
Dominic
Supreme-Class
Posts: 9331
Joined: Thu Jul 17, 2008 12:55 pm
Location: Boston
Contact:

Re: QC: Sideswipe?

Post by Dominic »

I thought that was Drillman in your AV image.

Dom
User avatar
Onslaught Six
Supreme-Class
Posts: 7023
Joined: Fri Jul 18, 2008 6:49 am
Location: In front of my computer.
Contact:

Re: QC: Sideswipe?

Post by Onslaught Six »

But the colours should've tipped you off. And the fact that Drill Man's portrait is entirely different.

http://benandalice.com/images/megaman4_3.gif

Ka-kow!

(This post seems a lot more douchebaggy than it actually is supposed to be.)
BWprowl wrote:The internet having this many different words to describe nerdy folks is akin to the whole eskimos/ice situation, I would presume.
People spend so much time worrying about whether a figure is "mint" or not that they never stop to consider other flavours.
Image
User avatar
Gomess
Supreme-Class
Posts: 2767
Joined: Sat Jul 19, 2008 1:10 am
Location: Eng-er-land

Re: QC: Sideswipe?

Post by Gomess »

Word, boyee, Drill Man is a good three games older than Spring Man. Do love MM4 though, it's one of my fave NES ones; right up there with MM5, MM2, MM6, MM1, MM3....
COME TO TFVIEWS oh you already did
Post Reply