Chris Pinson wrote:
> Dear all,
>
> In an effort to resolve the current argument between Dave and myself I
> would like to suggest the following....
>
> Do we, in general, need to determine a code of standards regarding use
> of this list ???
>
> Some people (such as Richard Bright) have disappeared due to this,
> others clearly don't mind.
>
> Everyone knows my opinion on the topic as well as those of Thane and
> Dave.
(not really related to the message above, but this is a good as any to
put it out in the open)
.
<rant>
Gee, can we PLEASE go back to flame wars about targeting rules and army
morale?
I post 2 LONG things that are 100% on topic, and I don't see even one
(1) "that's nice, but don't you think 300+ points for a demon is a bit
high" sort of thing. It's like I posted it to the void. Instead I get
20+ plus badly formatted whining about GW and 10+ messages whining about
people whining about GW then 5+ whining about people whining about
people whining about GW. I think we even got some 4th level whining in
there some place. It gets to be a bit of a bother.
Are y'all saying that you don't want me to post army list any more? If
so, please say so, because I am planing on doing 4-6 more of them this
week.
</rant>
--
Sillyness is the last refuse of the doomed. P. Opus
http://www.spellbooksoftware.com
--
-----BEGIN GEEK CODE BLOCK-----
Version: 3.1
GAT d-- s:- a38 US++ P+ L+ E W+++ N++ K++ w++ O- M- V-- PS+ PE++ Y PGP
t++
5 X R+++ tv+ b++++ DI+++ D G+ e+ h--- r+++ y+++(**)
------END GEEK CODE BLOCK------
Received on Tue May 26 1998 - 13:35:16 UTC