NOTE: I very much doubt that anything said here will alter Darrell's
opinions, as both of us have pretty much spelled out our positions and
obviously aren't inclined to alter them at this late date. However, I
once again felt the need to point out the flaws Darrell's arguments. 
I apologize to everyone in advance.
--- In mepbmlist@y..., "corsairs game 101" <corsairs101@h...> wrote:
>So, when a famous and respected author (pick your favorite) is quoted
as
>saying "Words build bridges into unexplored regions", the vast
majority
>of people would take such a statement as an axiom. When Hitler is
quoted
>as saying the same thing, the vast majority of people would call it
>nothing but propaganda and lies used to deceive the audience.Sorry, but again I disagree. The trueness of the comment is not
effected by
the intent or identity of the speaker.
Just because Hitler was evil, doesn't mean that there is not a lot of
truth
in the comment "Words build bridges into unexplored regions".
Ahh! But you've left the last sentence off of my comment, which entirely
changes the meaning of what I said, doesn't it? The last sentence of the
paragraph you used was: "Knowledge of the author does affect how we
react to the statements made, regardless of what we might feel about the
logic of the content itself." It's how people REACT to a statement,
(which is obviously part of how much weight it is given), that I'm
talking about. NOT the content.
My name on, or not on, the bottom of the post in no way alters the
appearance of the way AutoTragic was presented.... "We've got
something
great that allows you to do the job thay you've been paying us to do.
If
you don't use it, we'll charge you more for us to keep having to do
the job
we've been doing."
Ahh. Now you're quoting things that were never actually said, aren't
you? While you may believe your paraphrasing accurately depicts what was
said, it is in fact highly biased by your own perception of what was
said, which would be true of almost anyone. (So the content of what was
actually said was perceived to be different for you than for others.)
My name on, or not on, the bottom of a post in no way alters the odds
that
some individuals will alter their behavior in an attempt to get to the
top
of the player rankings. Nor does it alter the odds that being in a
game
with one of those individuals will negatively impact the funness of
the
game.
I agree with your first sentence, but not the second. Since 3 of the 4
new ratings are team based, and don't reward individual high scores, I
sincerely hope that some players' behavior IS altered by the new
ratings. It seems much more likely to have more of a positive effect on
the game, despite the lesser possibility that it will have a somewhat
negative effect for some players.
My name on, or not on, the bottom of a post in no way alters the
possibility
that ME Games had decided to impose this system, long before it asked
for
players input as to the goodness or badness of the system.
I certainly can't say what MeGames had or had not decided to do and
when. (And for that matter, neither can you, at least not with any
credibility.) However, even if they did make this determination, asking
someone what might be good or bad about an idea is NOT the same as
saying that you will scrap the entire idea if someone doesn't like it,
does it? Certainly MeGames can't please everyone, nor can they follow
everyone's recommendations, but at least they actively solicit our
input.
My name on the bottom of an email in no way alters the correctness or
incorrectness of any of the comments. Someone should not be required
to
post their true name to have their message taken into consideration.
I suppose that it doesn't significantly alter the logic of the actual
content. However, as I stated above, knowing the author of a statement
most certainly does affect how people take that statement, regardless of
whether they might agree or disagree with the content. Knowing the
author might disincline someone to even listen to the argument, which
certainly has a drastic influence on the statement's effectiveness.
For example, I'm quite certain that there are many people on this list
that, by now, are not at all interested in what either you or I have to
say on this subject, and quite likely have added both our names to their
junk E-Mail filters. So, our arguments are drastically affected (for
those people), since they are no longer even seeing them. This is due
solely to the fact that they know the authors. Use another Yahoo account
to post anonymously, and voila! Your argument is heard, albeit under a
false or anonymous identity. Knowing someone's real name makes this less
feasable, which makes the message board better.
Mike Mulka
<a.k.a: junk mail to many>