I imagine that would be quite out of the question: ad hominem posts are not welcome here. But you are welcome to look up my email address and we can continue this conversation outside.mvincent said:From yours.
I could describe how the constant protests make someone seem to me, but I'm guessing there would be no point. Maybe we could have a poll?
I believe I have been far more polite than you have been towards the Sage, with comments like:Felix said:ad hominem posts are not welcome here.
The FAQ can be a useful document, but it hardly rates as a reliable rules source because of the number of straight out contradictions to the core rules. Similarly with the Sage. If he is purporting to be the font of all knowledge on rules questions, then perhaps some more care should be taken in formulating the answers, otherwise some of his responses undermine his own credibility.mvincent said:While you are entitled to your perceptions of the Sage's credibility, if I made similar comments about my perception of your credibility, I believe you would be (justly) upset, even if I could back it up with logical premises.
Meanwhile, you appear to berate people for following the FAQ as a rules resource. That does not seem like acceptable behavior.