Reply to thread

Message

<blockquote data-quote="barsoomcore" data-source="post: 1580926" data-attributes="member: 812">Hell, as long as I got a cut, they could do what they liked!&nbsp; <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&nbsp; &nbsp; :D"&nbsp; data-smilie="8"data-shortname=":D" />I'd be interested to hear you defend how it might be otherwise. The word &quot;thematically&quot; is kind of the giveaway, here. As is &quot;essence&quot;.But my point, once more, is not that any particular change is or isn't compatible or good or whatever. It's that saying things like &quot;They should do it right,&quot; is just shorthand for, &quot;They should do it the way I think is correct.&quot; And the latter is a superior way to say that because it leads directly to the discussion of why one way is better than another, as opposed to arguing over what &quot;right&quot; means.This has gotten blown rather out of proportion. Psion commented that as long as a conversion &quot;was done right&quot;, he wouldn't complain. I pointed out that &quot;done right&quot; really meant &quot;done the way you want it done.&quot; I maintain that I'm correct in that. The use of subjective formulations makes discussion and debate more difficult. If people discuss, say, the conversion of Dark Sun by saying &quot;There shouldn't be sorcerers because of x y and z reasons,&quot; then they're accomplishing something more or less useful. If they say, &quot;The conversion of Dark Sun must remain thematically compatible with the essence of the setting,&quot; well, they're contributing exactly NOTHING to the conversation. That sentence is meaningless, because you're never going to get two people to agree on what &quot;thematically compatible&quot; and &quot;essence of the setting&quot; mean. And Strunk and White is very clear on the use of needless words. Omit them.</blockquote>

[QUOTE="barsoomcore, post: 1580926, member: 812"] Hell, as long as I got a cut, they could do what they liked! :D I'd be interested to hear you defend how it might be otherwise. The word "thematically" is kind of the giveaway, here. As is "essence". But my point, once more, is not that any particular change is or isn't compatible or good or whatever. It's that saying things like "They should do it right," is just shorthand for, "They should do it the way I think is correct." And the latter is a superior way to say that because it leads directly to the discussion of why one way is better than another, as opposed to arguing over what "right" means. This has gotten blown rather out of proportion. Psion commented that as long as a conversion "was done right", he wouldn't complain. I pointed out that "done right" really meant "done the way you want it done." I maintain that I'm correct in that. The use of subjective formulations makes discussion and debate more difficult. If people discuss, say, the conversion of Dark Sun by saying "There shouldn't be sorcerers because of x y and z reasons," then they're accomplishing something more or less useful. If they say, "The conversion of Dark Sun must remain thematically compatible with the essence of the setting," well, they're contributing exactly NOTHING to the conversation. That sentence is meaningless, because you're never going to get two people to agree on what "thematically compatible" and "essence of the setting" mean. And Strunk and White is very clear on the use of needless words. Omit them. [/QUOTE]

Verification