If you had any Cultural IQ you might have a slightly different attitude. :cheeky:
Frankly your whole attitude is insulting to most everyone. You make blanket statements as if they were facts and get bent out of shape when you are called on them. I agree with others that find it ironic you work for the Anti-Defamation League -- I am guessing they don't allow you to talk with people.
If the moderators had a fair and balanced approach they would have banned you at the same time they banned Scott -- your personal attacks have been far more egregious than anything Scott has written about MMP IMHO (this doesn't even account for your truly atrocious behavior on the List).
In the 2,500+ posts you have on this forum at least 2,300 of them are negative. This is why I refered you to rule 15 in Stunk and White.
I wonder how you can meet someone's gaze at a tournament when you have insulted their intelligence and assassinated their character. I have heard from people that know you that you are not as bad in person, but that just damns you by faint praise.
YOU have some stones to accuse anyone of making a personal attack. Your posting pattern is even more predictable than Scott's MMP attacks. You post something that is poorly worded and attacks a class of people. Then when you are called on it, you backpedal claiming that is not what you really posted and then attack the various posters until they get fed up with your attitude and cast a mild aspersion at you. Then you get all huffy and claim you have be the victim of a personal attack. Give us a break! This is getting really old. I had you on my ignore list for about 6 months and the number of negative comments I read on this forum dropped dramatically. It is only a accidental mouse click that made your posts visible again.
Virtually every thread you participate in degenerates into a bunch of noise. Your posts come across as surly and condescending -- especially if someone posts something you don't agree with.
I have a challenge for you: Try not to post anything in the negative for the rest of the year. I am betting you can't even go a week. That means if you disagree with a post instead of insulting the poster you just lay out how your opinion differs. That means you post to the idea instead of the person.
Your whole attitude on this thread rejects and insults an entire style of play. You have written off those people as lazy. I doubt that most players when given a scenario care if it is meticulously researched. I have played, designed, and enjoyed a whole host of scenarios that not one history book as been sullied in the process. The scenarios only present situations that might have happened in a purely theoretical sense. The fact that these types of situations are not your cup of tea is no reason to ascribe poor character qualities to those that like them. You have presented your style of play and design as the only correct way to approach the game and that those who disagree with you are beneath contempt.
I personally am much more interested in how well a scenario is put together and how much fun it is to play. I actually prefer DYO and PBDYO type of games to historically researched games. I prefer scenarios that have a ‘hook’ to them besides it was researched. To me interesting tactical situations are the epitome of scenario design. I play ASL because it is a game and not a history lesson.
And by the way I am also a TEXAN. :rifle:
