Warrior Ancient and Medieval Rules

[joncleaves]

"Quahog 25", whoever that is, has left the group. He has apparently been
sending messages from this list to a group of his friends who don't like 7th
ed./Warrior and they have been making snide comments amongst themselves about
the type of issues we discuss here.

He apparently decided our discussion of scythed chariots was his 'final straw'
and sent me a message to my personal email.
My response to his first offline mail was the 'open letter'. I could tell he
was a loss and felt it necessary to recount our philosophy to the whole group in
case there was confusion and to state my feelings, in as polite terms as
possible, concering petty acts such as snickering with your buddies offline
about what is important to others.

Well, he wouldn't leave it alone. He wrote again deriding the group and left
it. I replied with 'good bye and good luck' hoping to end it. That did not.
He just wrote me a third time offline. Here's that mail, snipped to show the
portion (which he felt it necessary for me to read) from him to his gaming group
about us:

<<Final words from the Warrior group, message sent to members of our club-

****You will be pleased to hear that there will be no more reports from the
Warrior board, as I have left.
The final denoument-

<<In a message dated 9/2/01 12:43:10 PM, XXXXX writes:
Greetings,
This guy needs a clue..... >> [ <--this from someone in his group, apparently
about me. the mail continues..]

Well, not bloody likely. I chose to 'take it outside' after my remark that
referring to the 'peeking psiloi' tactic as 'good generalship' was an odd
defintion of that term, and his response slapping me down, which I sent you guys
previously. I dropped it publicly, and had a discussion with Mr Cleaves
off the board, so as not to bore or offend the others . He chose a different
approach, and his response was to publish the following message on the board-
<open letter follows> >>

I published the open letter without identifying the cause precisely. I chose
not to get into a back and forth with this guy as I could tell very quickly he
was a total loss - anyone who sends both group mail and mails from my personal
address to his friends so they can chuckle over me not having a clue is not on
the list of people I would like to see playing Warrior. Instead, I reiterated
our design philosophy so that the good ladies and gentlemen of the group could
decide again for themselves if this system was going to be for them. I don't
believe publishing the open letter violated any trust he might have felt he
placed in me. Especially since he apparently cares less where emails directly
from me to him go.

Sorry if I chose poorly. But I know I won't miss him.
Jon

[Patrick Byrne]

Jon,
I don't think that you need to defend yourself here.

In short, he shouldn't be discussing playtest issues outside of
those on this egroup. It's just not good publicity.

I think that some people just don't realize that the arguing we are
doing now is to make the rules less arguable upon publication.
To discuss these arguements outside of the playtest group is
dumb (for lack of a better term) because it drives off future
Warrior commanders, especially those who lived through the
arguements of WRG 7th ed.

I can see the Tabloid headlines reading, "Warrior just can't get
their act together". Like I said, bad publicity.


So I implore the 183 members on this e-group to just bare out
the playtest arguements and not discuss them outside the
group.
-PB



--- In WarriorRules@y..., JonCleaves@a... wrote:
> "Quahog 25", whoever that is, has left the group. He has
apparently been sending messages from this list to a group of
his friends who don't like 7th ed./Warrior and they have been
making snide comments amongst themselves about the type of
issues we discuss here.
>

[Patrick Byrne]

Jon,
I don't think you need defend yourself here.

In short, he shouldn't be discussing playtest issues with the
public. It just not good publicity.

I think some people don't understand that we are argueing now
so that there will be less arguements when the rules are
published. To take our discussions outside the playtest group is
not smart (for lack of a better term). It prohibits prospective
generals, especially the young & fresh ones.

So I employ the 183 members of this list to just bare with the
playtest arguements and to keep those discussions within the
group.

I thank the four horsemen for creating this playtest group. Let's
not make it that which hurts the game.
-PB




--- In WarriorRules@y..., JonCleaves@a... wrote:
> "Quahog 25", whoever that is, has left the group. He has
apparently been sending messages from this list to a group of
his friends who don't like 7th ed./Warrior and they have been
making snide comments amongst themselves about the type of
issues we discuss here.
>