Reply to thread

Message

<blockquote data-quote="Kannik" data-source="post: 5597089" data-attributes="member: 984">These probably would be my “litmus tests” for whether a conversation is leading towards an edition war (as opposed to a discussion of gaming mechanics or even styles):<ul>
<li data-xf-list-type="ul">An absolute statement is made about the game (“You cannot do X in this game at all” vs “I do not see how the system might elegantly support X&quot;) 
</li>
<li data-xf-list-type="ul">A statement is made about the players of an edition (“Only simpletons could like this system” vs nothing – there is no reason for ad hominem statements) 
</li>
<li data-xf-list-type="ul">A statement is made about the designers of an edition (similar to above) 
</li>
<li data-xf-list-type="ul">A post is made only to say how much they dislike a system or everything that is wrong with it (“I do not like this system because of X, and I thought I would just share it with you for no apparent reason” vs &quot;I have a question&quot; or &quot;I am soliciting suggestions/advice/insight/other experiences&quot;)</li>
</ul>I'd assert it's perfectly possible to have a great conversation and discourse on the plusses and minuses of a system, as well as our own experiences about it, and gain excellent insights and even respect for each other.&nbsp; Being steadfast to your opinion or experience as the only possible one, not being willing to see the other person’s point of view (ie, expecting the other to “see the light” with your post, and not willing to do the same in return), or relying on any of the above bullets as ammunition will derail it beyond conversation to a fight.&nbsp; Peace,Kannik</blockquote>

[QUOTE="Kannik, post: 5597089, member: 984"] These probably would be my “litmus tests” for whether a conversation is leading towards an edition war (as opposed to a discussion of gaming mechanics or even styles): [LIST] [*]An absolute statement is made about the game (“You cannot do X in this game at all” vs “I do not see how the system might elegantly support X") [*]A statement is made about the players of an edition (“Only simpletons could like this system” vs nothing – there is no reason for ad hominem statements) [*]A statement is made about the designers of an edition (similar to above) [*]A post is made only to say how much they dislike a system or everything that is wrong with it (“I do not like this system because of X, and I thought I would just share it with you for no apparent reason” vs "I have a question" or "I am soliciting suggestions/advice/insight/other experiences") [/LIST] I'd assert it's perfectly possible to have a great conversation and discourse on the plusses and minuses of a system, as well as our own experiences about it, and gain excellent insights and even respect for each other. Being steadfast to your opinion or experience as the only possible one, not being willing to see the other person’s point of view (ie, expecting the other to “see the light” with your post, and not willing to do the same in return), or relying on any of the above bullets as ammunition will derail it beyond conversation to a fight. Peace, Kannik [/QUOTE]

Verification