Upgrade your account to a Community Supporter account and remove most of the site ads.

Reply to thread

Message: <blockquote data-quote="Mistwell" data-source="post: 4029183" data-attributes="member: 2525">OK, you're both repeating a misrepresentation.  So, I guess it's time to correct it again.First guy, you phrased it "they've been given clearance to give only positive opinions on their experience thus far. "  Not accurate.  They were given clearance to give their opinion if their opinion was positive.  That is not the same as given clearance to give only positive opinions.  If you read it, then their opinion was positive.  It is not the case that these people had both positive and negative opinions and only offered the positive.  Their posts were about general impressions, and their general impression was positive.  To imply otherwise is to misrepresent what happened.Second guy, you said "...comment with no indication that they're restricted in what they can say."That is a misrepresentation of what happened also.Three people asked to be able to say their opinion about 4e.  They were told if their comment (an opinion already formed before being told this) is positive they can post it, and if it is negative then tell WOTC so it can be corrected.So if you see a comment by one of these people, it's said without a restriction on what they can say beyond the "no details" rule that they all posted about up front.  There is no evidence, at all, that anyone (including themselves) edited their comments, or had negative things that they felt they could not say, or were influenced to say something different than what they honestly thought about the game.Your paraphrasing of the issue implies different.  And I think it's inappropriate to continue to misrepresent what happened.  Unless you have any evidence, at all, that the three people who posted their opinions edited their comments in any manner to not offer a negative impression of the game, it's simply inappropriate to continue to repeat that their comments themselves were somehow restrained in what they said (beyond the "no details" restriction that they all mentioned up front in their posts).In conclusion, do you guys get that it's not a case of "don't say the negative part of your opinion, just the positive parts"? That isn't what happened.  And by continuing to imply that friends of people here, and of this board, and fellow peers of yours, are somehow lying in their opinions or leaving part of their opinion out after they already said they are not doing that (which is another way of you saying they are lying), is at best impolite.</blockquote>

Verification