Reply to thread

Message: <blockquote data-quote="pemerton" data-source="post: 4031108" data-attributes="member: 42582">I don't know whether or not I count as an unnamed "usual suspect", but I'll respond to your post, which I originally had let slide.This is not just a passing barb at an anonymous poster (which is par for the course on these threads). It's a real slur against known individuals, and thus warrants refutation (and repeated refutation, if it continues to be made).There is nothing shady about someone asking "May I speak?" and being told "You may speak, if you have nice things to say." At that point the person chooses whether or not to speak, based on whether or not they have nice things to say.So we know that Ari, Owen Stephens and John Rogers had nice things to say. How does it affect the content of their views, or their trustworthiness and/or reliability, that there may or may not be some other people who have different things to say, or nothing to say at all, or are still under a total NDA? Their views are what they are, and surely speak for themselves (unless you regard individual opinions simply as data points on some statistical spectrum of total public opinion).In addition, and as I posted upthread, ARI WAS UPRFRONT FROM THE BEGINNING THAT IN HIS VIEW 4E IS NOT A PERFECT GAME, BUT IS MERELY EXTREMELY GOOD. In a comment on the game that is of necessity very general, what more were you hoping for by way of critique?</blockquote>