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

Reply to thread

Message: <blockquote data-quote="SavageRobby" data-source="post: 4375132" data-attributes="member: 51573">Hmm. I busted TB for snark? Could you maybe point that out? I agree with the previous posters, you seem a might bit touchy today. Perhaps decaf?You seem to think that buying both a PDF and physical copy of a book is "irresponsible". I don't think owning copies of each are - nor do I think your example above is relevant. Two copies of a movie offer you the same thing. A PDF and a physical book may have the same content, but offer different benefits.I love books. I like to be able to see/feel/touch them. I love the smell of books. But I can't copy information out of one and port it to another document easily. Searching for specifics term is slow, especially if said term isn't in the TOC or Index. Even moreso if you're not sure which term a book is in. (But those seaches are damn easy with PDFs!) And you ever try to travel with 100 gaming books in your backpack/luggage? Not the most efficient use of space. You know, it occurs to me that we have a television upstairs, one in the bedroom, and one in the living room. We pay for cable for each. Is that a waste? Is that irresponsible? I have a variety of wedges in my golf bag. Is that a waste? Is that irresponsible? Last night we went to a Quote-a-Long showing of the Princess Bridge, despite the fact I've seen it dozens of times, and own the DVD. A waste? Irresponsible?Utility comes in a variety of forms. Too bad so many folks seem to be of the opinion that their definition can be the only one, and decide</blockquote>

Verification