Are quirks officially counted as disadvantages?

[Crakkerjakk]

Originally Posted by Ze'Manel Cunha

First of all, the optional disad "suggestion" is not RAW, there are lots of optional suggestions, that's mainly what sticks in my craw, when people go on and on about equating an option with RAW.
(Bad reaction modifier, quirk level. *grin*)

It's a rule in a official supplement. The bleeding rules are RAW, even if they're not implemented in every game.

Originally Posted by Ze'Manel Cunha

Secondly, I never said people who use that lame optional disad suggestion are bad GMs, I said using them is"an indication of a bad GM player dynamic", grammatically the adjective bad in that sentence is a modifying the word dynamic, not the word GM.
I went on to describe two of the leading causes of that bad dynamic, antagonistic GMs, which BTW is a style thing and pretty common with many gaming groups, and ham fisting due to being burned by Munchkin players, which again is a style thing and very common in many groups.

Nowhere in there did I say an antagonistic GM is a bad GM.

My mistake. You didn't call anyone a bad GM. You merely implied that anyone who used disad limits must be either:

a) antagonistic
b) ham-handed and lacking balls

And if I insist that I (or trooper6) is neither, then we must be deluded or something.

If I enforce a fixed point total is that also a sign of a bad GM-player dynamic? Or just possibly might it be that some of us (but by no means all) don't have a problem with sticking to a structure? It doesn't hurt baby jesus if I write poetry in haiku form, and it's not a sign that my english teacher beat me with a cane pole in high school when I departed from iambic pentameter. And if we all get together to do a haiku-jam, I'm not being a big meanie if I tell the guy who tries to free rhyme that we're not doing that today.

Originally Posted by Ze'Manel Cunha

However, if I was in your game and came to you with a character concept for a 100 point campaign with a PC which had say ST 9, DX 9, IQ 12, Per 10, Will 10, Sense of Duty (Friends), Duty and Code of Honor (Professional) only to have you turn around and tell me to boost something because you wouldn't allow that many disads in your campaign, then I would say that you have a clear problem with your player GM dynamic and that you have a need to strut, so I'd take it as a get out of Dodge card because I know I wouldn't want to play on the rails you're setting up.

If you don't want to play in those games, fine. But it's not unreasonable for me to say "build a character within these constraints" and expect you to do so. I mean, all games operate within some constraints. What makes "it's a space opera game" different from "don't go over the disad limit"? What if your character concept for the space opera game demands that you be a stone-age hunter gatherer with several hundred points of disads? At what point is "it's part of my character concept" no longer a valid excuse to not stick to character generation restrictions?