Warrior Ancient and Medieval Rules

joncleaves · Moderator Joined: 29 Mar 2006 Posts: 16447

Larry and Eric - take this somewhere else.

Man, I tried to be polite, but I do not like being blown off. I have no
problem with positive comments from players about what they'd like to see from
their gaming organizations wrt ancient/medieval wargaming, but that isn't what
you guys are doing.

Come on, guys, this having to moderate you is getting tiresome... If we lose
even one member because of this week's posts, FHE and its playership will
have been done a great disservice.

Everyone else - please be patient while I get us back on course.

Jon

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

joncleaves · Moderator Joined: 29 Mar 2006 Posts: 16447

In a message dated 2/26/2004 17:20:45 Central Standard Time,
larryessick@... writes:
Jon,

Apologies to you and the list.

No one should leave because of Eric and my errors.

Larry
No worries, Larry. I, among all people, appreciate those who are passionate
about the stuff that is important to them.

Jon

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

Larry Essick · Legionary Joined: 12 Apr 2006 Posts: 461

Jon,

Apologies to you and the list.

No one should leave because of Eric and my errors.

Larry

Centurion Joined: 12 Apr 2006 Posts: 1373

Jon,
Just two thoughts.

1. This is like watching that Star Trek episode where one guy is
white on the right side and the other is white on the left side.

2. Notice that none of these guys are ever here about Warrior, but
show up about politics? I suddenly feel like a small backwater in
New Hampshire when the Democrats come to town. Says something
actually about how unstable DBM is that they feel they need this
extra forum. This translates, once again, into kudos for FHE and the
stability of Warrior!

Wanax

--- In WarriorRules@yahoogroups.com, JonCleaves@a... wrote:
> Larry and Eric - take this somewhere else.
>
> Man, I tried to be polite, but I do not like being blown off. I
have no
> problem with positive comments from players about what they'd like
to see from
> their gaming organizations wrt ancient/medieval wargaming, but that
isn't what
> you guys are doing.
>
> Come on, guys, this having to moderate you is getting tiresome...
If we lose
> even one member because of this week's posts, FHE and its
playership will
> have been done a great disservice.
>
> Everyone else - please be patient while I get us back on course.
>
> Jon
>
>
> [Non-text portions of this message have been removed]

Recruit Joined: 12 Apr 2006 Posts: 39

Are we done yet with the political BS, as Jon asked? I joined this forum to see
how things were with the Warrior rules, not to see how many fora could
simultaneously discuss Larry Essick's Napoleon complex.

Thanks
Bob

Jeff Zorn · Recruit Joined: 12 Apr 2006 Posts: 224

Howdy,

Well, I wouldn't say that #2 is quite true. DBM 3.0 will have been around 4
years before the next change comes out. So, that's pretty been stable.
Also, from the short time I've tuned in here I've seen various changes for
Warrior being discussed, so I wouldn't say Warrior is completely stable
either. Not quite so B&W.

I thought the real for the intrusion into the Warrior forum was to explain
a NASAMW decision that may, or may not affect Warrior players down the
line, depending on what sorts of Warrior championships spring up. Didn't
seem to me to have anything to do with the evolution of the DBM rules.

Jeff Zorn

At 02:09 PM 2/27/2004 +0000, you wrote:
>Jon,
>Just two thoughts.
>
>1. This is like watching that Star Trek episode where one guy is
>white on the right side and the other is white on the left side.
>
>2. Notice that none of these guys are ever here about Warrior, but
>show up about politics? I suddenly feel like a small backwater in
>New Hampshire when the Democrats come to town. Says something
>actually about how unstable DBM is that they feel they need this
>extra forum. This translates, once again, into kudos for FHE and the
>stability of Warrior!
>
>
>Wanax
>
>--- In WarriorRules@yahoogroups.com, JonCleaves@a... wrote:
> > Larry and Eric - take this somewhere else.
> >
> > Man, I tried to be polite, but I do not like being blown off. I
>have no
> > problem with positive comments from players about what they'd like
>to see from
> > their gaming organizations wrt ancient/medieval wargaming, but that
>isn't what
> > you guys are doing.
> >
> > Come on, guys, this having to moderate you is getting tiresome...
>If we lose
> > even one member because of this week's posts, FHE and its
>playership will
> > have been done a great disservice.
> >
> > Everyone else - please be patient while I get us back on course.
> >
> > Jon
> >
> >
> > [Non-text portions of this message have been removed]
>
>
>
>----------
>Yahoo! Groups Links
> * To visit your group on the web, go to:
> *
>
<http://groups.yahoo.com/group/WarriorRules/>http://groups.yahoo.com/group/Warri\norRules/
>
> *
> * To unsubscribe from this group, send an email to:
> *
>
<mailto:WarriorRules-unsubscribe@yahoogroups.com?subject=Unsubscribe>WarriorRule\ns-unsubscribe@yahoogroups.com
>
> *
> * Your use of Yahoo! Groups is subject to the
> <http://docs.yahoo.com/info/terms/>Yahoo! Terms of Service.

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

Centurion Joined: 12 Apr 2006 Posts: 1373

--- In WarriorRules@yahoogroups.com, Jeff Zorn <jrz3@c...> wrote:
> Howdy,
> Jeff Zorn

<Political bullcrap snipped>

Jeff it is humor, not politics. Please relax.

Wanax

joncleaves · Moderator Joined: 29 Mar 2006 Posts: 16447

In a message dated 2/27/2004 08:27:44 Central Standard Time, jrz3@...
writes:
Well, I wouldn't say that #2 is quite true. DBM 3.0 will have been around 4
years before the next change comes out. So, that's pretty been stable.
Also, from the short time I've tuned in here I've seen various changes for
Warrior being discussed, so I wouldn't say Warrior is completely stable
either. Not quite so B&W.
Nothing has changed about the Warrior rules, Jeff. And nothing will. They
are completely stable. Any 'discussions' of changes are player musings and
nothing more.

I don't think a thread on this topic would be such a good idea, but if you
want to discuss it offline, I'd be willing.

Jon

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

joncleaves · Moderator Joined: 29 Mar 2006 Posts: 16447

In a message dated 2/27/2004 08:22:14 Central Standard Time,
doctormm@... writes:
Are we done yet with the political BS, as Jon asked? I joined this forum to
see how things were with the Warrior rules, not to see how many fora could
simultaneously discuss Larry Essick's Napoleon complex.

Thanks
Bob
Politics bad here - ad hominem attacks worse.

I have managed to take the politics offline, I think, so we should be good.

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