Re: [mepbmlist] Ratings, Ratings, and more Ratings

[dilipdavid@...]

30+ emails in under 2 hours and all from the same 5-6 eddresses ... *sigh*
say it all at once, please! Can't possibly be that many original thoughts on
a subject that's already been floating around for several days!

- Dilip



[Non-text portions of this message have been removed]

[corsairs game 101]

>30+ emails in under 2 hours and all from the same 5-6 eddresses ... *sigh*
>say it all at once, please! Can't possibly be that many original thoughts
>on
>a subject that's already been floating around for several days!
>
> - Dilip

This is a discussion. In a discussion, you reply to what others say. It is
impossible for you to know what they will say before they say it.
Therefore, there will be lots of emails as people take turns speaking and
listening. Can't be helped.

Darrell

[dilipdavid@...]

corsairs101@... writes:

> This is a discussion. In a discussion, you reply to what others say. It is
> impossible for you to know what they will say before they say it.
> Therefore, there will be lots of emails as people take turns speaking and
> listening.


Lately, all I've seen is rephrasing of the same points. Seems like a lot of
people are tuning in and tuning out, which is to be expected when a thread
drags on this long. Most people seem to have stated their position and most
people also seem inflexible on their viewpoint, so I fail to see the point of
further discussion.

If the ratings system is implemented, maybe comparing the % of games with a
4-1 or 5-0 neutral split "before ratings" and "after ratings" will let
everyone argue over hard numbers rather than speculate over what "will"
happen.

In the meantime, this whole topic came about because Clint wanted
comments/criticisms on the proposed ratings system. So Clint, unless someone
has something new to add, I think it's time for the next topic ... please!!

Don't we have something else to discuss? Extended DVD coming out in 3 weeks
.... doesn't anyone have a bootleg copy that they want to gloat about or
something?

:-)
Dilip




[Non-text portions of this message have been removed]

[Laurence G. Tilley]

At 22:02 22/10/2002, dilipdavid@... wrote:
>Most people seem to have stated their position and most
>people also seem inflexible on their viewpoint, so I fail to see the point of
>further discussion.

So why bore us with your input? Are we to feel that your judgement on our
"inflexibility" and extent to which others have stated their position is in
some way superior? Forgive me, but I don't remember the point at which you
were elected Chairman, and given the authority to tell others when they
must stop talking. This is the second offensive post of this nature today,
I acknowledge the apology for the previous one.

If YOU are not interested in what others have to say, then delete the
posts. Everyone has been responsible in keeping the subject line
clear. But do not presume to squash the conversations of others. I just
downloaded another dozen or so posts on PRS. They were all interesting (to
me, and to some others quite evidently) and they were mostly composed with
effort and care. The only unwelcome one was yours.

Laurence G. Tilley

http://www.lgtilley.freeserve.co.uk

[dilipdavid@...]

laurence@... writes:

<< So why bore us with your input?* >>

* Because you have no problem hogging huge bandwidth boring me with your
input (I don't presume to speak for anyone else, so I'll leave out the
"we"s).

<< Are we to feel that your judgement on our "inflexibility" and extent to
which others have stated their position is in some way superior?* >>

* Superior to what? I haven't noticed a lot of people changing their
minds because of what someone else on the list said. "Inflexible" was not
meant to say "bullheaded," it just meant "not bending."

<< Forgive me, but I don't remember the point at which you were elected
Chairman, and given the authority to tell others when they must stop
talking.* >>

* Consider yourself forgiven. And if my post is sufficient to stop
anyone from talking, I'd like to take this opportunity to tell those people
to send me all their money (preferably in non-sequential bills).

<< This is the second offensive post of this nature today, I acknowledge the
apology for the previous one. If YOU are not interested in what others have
to say, then delete the posts.* >>

* And your delete button no longer functions?

<< Everyone has been responsible in keeping the subject line clear.* >>

* Thank you everyone!

<< But do not presume to squash the conversations of others.* >>

* Once again, those who tremble at the mention of my name are invited to
come grovel before me and hand over all their worldly possessions.

<< I just downloaded another dozen or so posts on PRS.* They were all
interesting (to me, and to some others quite evidently) and they were mostly
composed with effort and care.* The only unwelcome one was yours. >>

* Ah! So we should only post what's interesting to you? Or do you
presume to squash only my post?

- Dilip



[Non-text portions of this message have been removed]

[Middle Earth PBM Games]

>In the meantime, this whole topic came about because Clint wanted
>comments/criticisms on the proposed ratings system. So Clint, unless someone
>has something new to add, I think it's time for the next topic ... please!!

*** I wanted to make sure that I had not missed anything before working on
the next bit of the project. I know it can be a pain sorry. Thanks to all
those that have spent the time to reply - much appreciated.

Clint