[Crunch]

Actually your entire first paragraph in your response (and it was a response, not an independent thought - that is the first indicator) was just putting words in my mouth combined with an absolute, contrarian statement on a matter of my opinion. That's not a characteristic of an open, helpful discussion. And while I'm not the type to start bandying about accusations of personal attacks, it didn't contribute to the post at large either. Not to mention you've posted twice now without a bit of on-topic discussion to your post. If you're no longer contributing, then what are you doing?

It was a response. That's how conversation happens.

 And I reserve the right to respond when attacked. All in all I've been a damn sight more polite than you have been here. My chief sin seems to be not having totally agreed with you.

More polite? Hahahaha! That's great. I needed that after my day at work.

Neither he nor I are the ones putting words into another person's mouth and claiming that the other person is saying that negatives shouldn't come into play at all.

If you'll show me where I said that I'll eat my words, but quite frankly I never did. I've simply presented, explicitly as my opinion, the position that negative qualities should be expressed in play.

And there's a difference between disagreeing with a position and attacking a person. At this point I'll simply apologize and walk away because you're right this isn't contributing. Why you feel the need to go personal with anyone who disagrees with you is something you should probably reflect on.

[All4BigGuns]

Actually your entire first paragraph in your response (and it was a response, not an independent thought - that is the first indicator) was just putting words in my mouth combined with an absolute, contrarian statement on a matter of my opinion. That's not a characteristic of an open, helpful discussion. And while I'm not the type to start bandying about accusations of personal attacks, it didn't contribute to the post at large either. Not to mention you've posted twice now without a bit of on-topic discussion to your post. If you're no longer contributing, then what are you doing?

It was a response. That's how conversation happens.

 And I reserve the right to respond when attacked. All in all I've been a damn sight more polite than you have been here. My chief sin seems to be not having totally agreed with you.

More polite? Hahahaha! That's great. I needed that after my day at work.

Neither he nor I are the ones putting words into another person's mouth and claiming that the other person is saying that negatives shouldn't come into play at all.

If you'll show me where I said that I'll eat my words, but quite frankly I never did. I've simply presented, explicitly as my opinion, the position that negative qualities should be expressed in play.

And there's a difference between disagreeing with a position and attacking a person. At this point I'll simply apologize and walk away because you're right this isn't contributing. Why you feel the need to go personal with anyone who disagrees with you is something you should probably reflect on.

The following is a direct quote from you. Notice that nowhere in the text you were responding to did it say that negatives shouldn't enter play at all, and yet you plainly were making an implication that it did.

Seeing as how the Lifestyle negatives only give a very slight reduction in the cost of the lifestyle and don't really add anything which can be used to strengthen the character in any really meaningful way, they should only be occasional minor annoyances, but anything that can potentially be life threatening for the character should elicit the player making use of The Book.

In general if you don't want to deal with a negative quality you shouldn't take it.

[Reiper]

How many GMs allow these? how do you handle them?

It really depends on the game really.

If it is just a quickie 1 shot, then I may not allow them since they are milked easily and serve on real purpose. For a long term game, I'll allow them, but make sure that they make sense. And if they do choose NQs, then I will ensure that those NQs (and the PQs as well) actually are involved in the gameplay, this is especially true for the ones that are huge NQs. AI in house, I'd have them being really annoying but it wouldn't really play a huge factor most of the time (although occasionally I may have the AI keep them awake all night to either force them to run their character tired, or find somewhere else to sleep.

[Raiden]

How would said ai do that.

[Reaver]

How would said ai do that.

Turns the vidlink on REALLY loud at random times. Makes the cleaning drone decide that cleaning the bedroom and making the bed while you're in it, is OK. Runs the blender randomly. Strobes the lights in the house constantly. Has the drone re-enact "Twilight" in your bedroom. The list goes on.

[Raiden]

This is why I love things like select sound filter or sound damper  .

[Reaver]

Personally, I find a character's home to be the perfect place to have that wonderful NQ "Germlins" to act up