Reply to thread

Message: <blockquote data-quote="Cheiromancer" data-source="post: 3426666" data-attributes="member: 141">I'll believe it when I see it. <img src="https://cdn.jsdelivr.net/joypixels/assets/8.0/png/unicode/64/1f600.png" class="smilie smilie--emoji" loading="lazy" width="64" height="64" alt=":D" title="Big grin    :D"  data-smilie="8"data-shortname=":D" /> I admit the IH looks like it is in the home stretch, but I am reminded of some paradoxes of Zeno.  Besides, if Gods and Monsters hadn't been split off you'd still have a ways to go.  IIRC the prerelease of IH was to have been only a few updates away from the completed work- a month or so of work.  But my memory might be playing tricks on me after all this time.I'm still sore at you for your arrogant refusal to justify your changes with any mathematical evidence or argument.  But it's not quite the seething fury it was a month ago.  I'm warming to the idea of CR x 2 = EL + 6, but there is really nothing to accept until the revised CRs are published in v6.  Or until a conversion algorithm is established (I don't think dividing the v5 CRs by 2/3 will do it).Incidentally, do you actually use those tables (like the ones on your website) in your own research?  I can't imagine not using polynomials myself; tables and graphs are strictly ancillary.</blockquote>