Reply to thread

Message

<blockquote data-quote="Mouseferatu" data-source="post: 4463309" data-attributes="member: 1288">Sorry, but that's nonsense. There is no objective definition for changes that are &quot;better&quot; or &quot;worse&quot; in this regard. We're talking about purely imaginative, creative endeavors that are 100% opinion-based. If something in this category seems better to someone then it is better to that person. There's no difference and no line of demarcation.Nonsense. The &quot;burden of proof&quot; is on anyone who wants to argue that their opinion is &quot;right.&quot; The design team has no burden to prove anything, because we've already accepted that they're doing things in the way they honestly believe is best. You can agree with them or not, but you're not owed any explanation when you already have that explanation: &quot;Because we thought it was better.&quot;And incidentally, given that the poll attached to this thread shows close to a 2-to-1 ratio in favor of the change, I'd say that the change is substantive--at least for a lot of people.You don't have to like it. You don't have to agree it's better. That's entirely your right. But arguing that it's just &quot;change for change's sake&quot; is not arguing an opinion, as you seem to think. It's ascribing motivations to the people who make decisions.&quot;I don't like this change&quot; is an opinion, and a perfectly valid one.&quot;The people at WotC had no good reason for making this change&quot; is not an opinion. It's an accusation, and it's one that's not born out either by the audience reaction or by your own prior definitions.</blockquote>

[QUOTE="Mouseferatu, post: 4463309, member: 1288"] Sorry, but that's nonsense. There is no [i]objective[/i] definition for changes that are "better" or "worse" in this regard. We're talking about purely imaginative, creative endeavors that are 100% opinion-based. If something in this category [i]seems[/i] better to someone then it [i]is[/i] better to that person. There's no difference and no line of demarcation. Nonsense. The "burden of proof" is on anyone who wants to argue that their opinion is "right." The design team has no burden to prove anything, because we've already accepted that they're doing things in the way they honestly believe is best. You can agree with them or not, but you're not owed any explanation when you already [i]have[/i] that explanation: "Because we thought it was better." And incidentally, given that the poll attached to this thread shows close to a 2-to-1 ratio in favor of the change, I'd say that the change [i]is[/i] substantive--at least for a lot of people. You don't have to like it. You don't have to agree it's better. That's entirely your right. But arguing that it's just "change for change's sake" is [i]not[/i] arguing an opinion, as you seem to think. It's ascribing motivations to the people who make decisions. "I don't like this change" is an opinion, and a perfectly valid one. "The people at WotC had no good reason for making this change" is [i]not[/i] an opinion. It's an [i]accusation[/i], and it's one that's not born out either by the audience reaction or by your own prior definitions. [/QUOTE]

Verification