Re: Lethality of events
- From: psychohist <psychohist@xxxxxxx>
- Date: 23 May 2007 08:19:09 -0700
Ben Finney posts, in part:
To be clear, IIRC it was me that first used that
term in that thread, as applying to Brian's stated
opinion in that thread -- and asking for
further discussion. That was certainly
forthcoming :-)
My mistake, then, sorry.
That actually explains something that's been puzzling me a bit about
the thread. Brian later stated that his position was roughly that he
personally didn't approve of that kind of game, and wouldn't play in
one himself, but beyond voicing his opinion wouldn't actively try to
prevent people from playing such games. That seems to me a milder
position than how I read the label "BadWrongFun". If that was
actually your label rather than his, the mismatch is easier to
understand.
I also try to avoid repetition, except when my
position is being misrepresented -- leaving those
unanswered leads to more harm than
good, in my experience.
In my experience, misrepresentations usually stem from
misunderstandings. Repetition rarely fixes a misunderstanding; to fix
a misunderstanding, I've found it more useful to go back and see what
I said that was misunderstood, and provide a clarification.
Then again, I've never assumed that silence means assent on a
newsgroup - more like silence means a lack of time to respond.
Warren J. Dew
.
- References:
- Re: Lethality of events
- From: Ben Finney
- Re: Lethality of events
- Prev by Date: Re: Gamesmaster character play
- Next by Date: Re: Lethality of events
- Previous by thread: Re: Lethality of events
- Next by thread: Re: Lethality of events
- Index(es):
Relevant Pages
|
