Eastshire,
Quote:
Originally Posted by Eastshire
1. Yes, I was a skeptic. Then I was convinced that JM et al were wrong based on their vitriol. Then I actually found a rule that convinced me they were right despite their vitriol.
|
1. Once again, this is pure, unadulterated bull$hit, as any one who can read will easily see. I presume you were using this definition of vitriol:
Quote:
|
2. vitriol - abusive or venomous language used to express blame or censure or bitter deep-seated ill will
|
What I actually said was that you were mistaken (which, even you now understand was simply a statement of fact).
When you persisted in defending your incorrect position, even after I had given you cites from the MLBUM, the OBR rule book, and the FED rule book - and then suggested I hadn't provided "any references" - I suggested "you clearly don't know what you are talking about". Again, a simple statement of fact. I also questioned your eyesight because you apparently couldn't "see" the references I had plainly posted.
Now, if you find that "abusive or venomous", you must have led a very sheltered existnce up to this point, and you really ought to cowboy up and grow a thicker skin.
Quote:
|
2. I'd never heard of the MLBUM before this thread. I'd heard of the PBUM which I suppose this is the successor to. Regardless, I've never worked a game where either of these have been adopted as authorities.
|
2. This does not surprise me. Have you ever heard of the J/R or BRD? How about the JEA? How do you know you've never worked a game where the MLBUM/PBUC Manual has been adopted as authoritative. The fact of the matter is that there are numerous "points not covered" in the FED rules where the MLBUM or PBUC interp IS the "official" FED interpretation. Others where it is not. So, once again, you are mistaken. (In case it's not clear, that is NOT a personal attack. It's a simple statement of fact.)
Quote:
|
3. I'm pointing out it does no one any good to argue the person rather than the rule. The information you are trying to give is discounted when it comes with an attack. For example, you calling me an idiot does what exactly aside from making you feel superior to me?
|
3. I'm still trying to figure out who, other than you, made any kind of
ad hominem argument or personal attack on you. I certainly didn't. And, if you read what he actually wrote, mbyron did NOT call you an idiot. (Neither did anyone else, as far as I can see.)
Listen, all I did was try to help you understand a technical point about the rules (which, I'll grant, is NOT intuitively obvious) which you misunderstood. I provided you with the appropriate cites to back my point, along with an explanation of how they applied to the sitch in question.
You provided nothing in the way of anything to back up your mistaken position, falsely accused me (and others) of attacking you, and claimed I hadn't posted references when I had.
Anyway, you're welcome; I'm glad I was able to assist you in clearing up the misunderstanding you had about this rule. I look forward to our next discussion.
JM