corsairs101@hotmail.com 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]
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
ยทยทยท
At 22:02 22/10/2002, dilipdavid@aol.com 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.
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
