Reply to thread

Message: <blockquote data-quote="DinoInDisguise" data-source="post: 9704776" data-attributes="member: 7045806">Or you could address me about my post. And not hold people who like an overarching point as responsible for explaining my lack of nuance.The post in question was a repudiation of the idea that “in-character thespianism” was ever the singular or even dominant focus of the hobby. It was made in direct response to the post making that very claim. Even if you interpret Traveller differently, that doesn't change my argument, it actually reinforces it. It does so by reinforcing the idea that there was a significant number of different styles and play patterns even back in the 80s and 90s.I chose the brevity of glossing over nuance in an individual system to avoid a 10,000 word thesis. That brevity should not be for others to explain. It shouldn't be used in some odd game of performative expertise, where we patrol largely unrelated posts for infractions so we can say "But wait a moment" to people who simply agree with an unrelated point.Not every post people react to is something they agree with in totality. Nor should someone have to explain every nuance in every post they've liked. Instead we should have some grace, and address people's words directly.Edit: I think with that, I'm going to bow out here. I don't appreciate having my words used as a cudgel against other Enworlders.</blockquote>