A few words from the list admin (even though
Shadow is quite capable of defending himself).....
Tom,
I can vouche for Shadow's usefulness to this
ml. He's been on this list for a year and a half and, in that time, has provided
solid technical info. While I have disagreed with him on stuff, he hasn't done
anything worthy of Flaming, and he typically backs up what he says. He
may come across as a little gruff from time to time, but email has that effect,
especially when smileys are left out. :)
His comment, "Then avoid getting overly
specific..." is dead on. "The devil's in the details" as it were. It seemed
to me that Joel's intent was to see if his idea for explaining AG to players was
valid. It didn't seem to be an attempt at a roundtable discussion to try and
work out AG. Therefore, instructing Joel not to try to explain
how AG works, is a valid suggestion. They won't be able to point out the flaws
in an idea if you don't give them any information to go on.
I also have to agree with this: "The ideas
are easy. It's the writing that's hard. And part of that is having folks point
out where you got it wrong or it 'looks wrong'. " I'm working on my
first novel, and the sticking points are always the finer details, the minutiae.
And it's not just tech, but the setting as well. Getting the details wrong can
sink a story, even if it's a good one. If someone reads a passage and his/her
reaction is, "No way. Not possible" then that writer has not only lost that
person from any future book sales, but quite possibly all that person's friends
as well. "I read this book by so-and-so and man did it suck. He didn't get blah
blah right."
I like to keep Flames to a minimum
(they'll always exist, I know). I think I err on the side of free speech, but I
won't hesitate to pull the plug on someone's membership if they go too far. I
don't want this ml to become another TML.
And who cares about Star Trek? This is a
Traveller ml. ;)
\_/
DED
TNE @ Yahoo ml Admin
==============================
> <FLAME ON>
> While you could have actually offerd some kind of suggestion, you
> elected to attack someone's concept. Why?
Because I was tired, and didn't have *time* to go into more detail.
And I *did* make a suggestion. Giving *unnecessary* details *always*
comes back to haunt you. Using technobabble unnecessarily does so
doubly.
> Was your last comment really necessary?
Yes. It's a concise *accurate* statement of the single most basic
rule in SF.
> Did you send these same kinds of flip remarks to
> the writers of StarTrek since they can't even keep their technobabble
> straight in the same episode?
It wasn't a "flip remark".
> Joel has put some thought and effort into his idea where you clearly
> did not put any effort into your reply. In my playbook that makes
> Joel smarter than you. (It is clear that the only reason you would
> have made a post like this is that you wanted to show that you were
> smarter than Joel.)
No. I made it because I wanted to stop him from doing something that
could make him look silly to any player who knew about gravitons.
> Give the rest of us a break.
Sure. And why don't *you* quit *assuming* attacks are being made.
> Try to add to the creative efforts - not throw water on them.
I've added quite a bit to the creative efforts on the TML *ever since
it started* (and elsewhere, I've had a pro SF writer thank me for
some help I gave him on stuff that eventually became part of his
first book).
I pointed out a serious "oops". And might post some ideas when I have
the spare time. Assuming I don't get flamed so much by folks who
can't see that a "that particle doesn't work that way" *is* a
contribution that I decide it's not worth my time.
I've got tax problems, money problems, *several* ongoing stories that
people are after me to finish, and that's just the top of the list.
Just because someone points out a problem, that doesn't mean they are
"sniping" or belittling or trying to show how smart they are.
Pointing out *bugs* is just as important as coming up with ideas.
Hell, ask any writer. The ideas are easy. It's the writing that's
hard. And part of that is having folks point out where you got it
wrong or it "looks wrong".
> <FLAME OFF>
Next time find out what is going on *before* flaming.<<
---- LSpots keywords ?>
---- HM ADS ?>
> While you could have actually offerd some kind of suggestion, you
> elected to attack someone's concept. Why?
Because I was tired, and didn't have *time* to go into more detail.
And I *did* make a suggestion. Giving *unnecessary* details *always*
comes back to haunt you. Using technobabble unnecessarily does so
doubly.
> Was your last comment really necessary?
Yes. It's a concise *accurate* statement of the single most basic
rule in SF.
> Did you send these same kinds of flip remarks to
> the writers of StarTrek since they can't even keep their technobabble
> straight in the same episode?
It wasn't a "flip remark".
> Joel has put some thought and effort into his idea where you clearly
> did not put any effort into your reply. In my playbook that makes
> Joel smarter than you. (It is clear that the only reason you would
> have made a post like this is that you wanted to show that you were
> smarter than Joel.)
No. I made it because I wanted to stop him from doing something that
could make him look silly to any player who knew about gravitons.
> Give the rest of us a break.
Sure. And why don't *you* quit *assuming* attacks are being made.
> Try to add to the creative efforts - not throw water on them.
I've added quite a bit to the creative efforts on the TML *ever since
it started* (and elsewhere, I've had a pro SF writer thank me for
some help I gave him on stuff that eventually became part of his
first book).
I pointed out a serious "oops". And might post some ideas when I have
the spare time. Assuming I don't get flamed so much by folks who
can't see that a "that particle doesn't work that way" *is* a
contribution that I decide it's not worth my time.
I've got tax problems, money problems, *several* ongoing stories that
people are after me to finish, and that's just the top of the list.
Just because someone points out a problem, that doesn't mean they are
"sniping" or belittling or trying to show how smart they are.
Pointing out *bugs* is just as important as coming up with ideas.
Hell, ask any writer. The ideas are easy. It's the writing that's
hard. And part of that is having folks point out where you got it
wrong or it "looks wrong".
> <FLAME OFF>
Next time find out what is going on *before* flaming.<<
YAHOO! GROUPS LINKS
- Visit your group "Traveller_TNE" on the web.
- To unsubscribe from this group, send an email to:
- Your use of Yahoo! Groups is subject to the Yahoo! Terms of Service.