Reply to thread

Message

<blockquote data-quote="GVDammerung" data-source="post: 3830338" data-attributes="member: 33060">Couple of things.&nbsp; A) I didn't say I did not care for it, I just said it was unimpressive or &quot;prefunctory.&quot;&nbsp; If I thought it was bad or poor, I'd have said so.&nbsp; I did not.B) I specifically noted that I hoped the future installements improved, recognizing that this was not a stand alone thing but the first of a series.&nbsp; As the first of a series, IMO, it can be evaluated as such, as others have in this thread.&nbsp; I think your response is off base on both the above accounts.&nbsp; You err when you opine that I &quot;don't care for it&quot; when I simply found it so-so or &quot;prefunctory.&quot;&nbsp; You err again when you opine that I did not consider it in its proper context, &quot;the first chapter of a three-chapter 'book,'&quot; when I specifically noted that I hoped the further installments would&nbsp; improve.&nbsp; I think you are reading way more negativity into my comments that is objectively there.Let me star it for you, if that helps.&nbsp; 3 out of 5 stars.When something comes in parts, it is evaluated in terms of each of its parts and then, finally, as a whole.&nbsp; That whole may be greater than or lss than the sum of the parts, but it is fair to evaluate the parts, as well as the whole, if that is how the material is to be presented.</blockquote>

[QUOTE="GVDammerung, post: 3830338, member: 33060"] Couple of things. A) I didn't say I did not care for it, I just said it was unimpressive or "prefunctory." If I thought it was bad or poor, I'd have said so. I did not. B) I specifically noted that I hoped the future installements improved, recognizing that this was not a stand alone thing but the first of a series. As the first of a series, IMO, it can be evaluated as such, as others have in this thread. I think your response is off base on both the above accounts. You err when you opine that I "don't care for it" when I simply found it so-so or "prefunctory." You err again when you opine that I did not consider it in its proper context, "the first chapter of a three-chapter 'book,'" when I specifically noted that I hoped the further installments would improve. I think you are reading way more negativity into my comments that is objectively there. Let me star it for you, if that helps. 3 out of 5 stars. When something comes in parts, it is evaluated in terms of each of its parts and then, finally, as a whole. That whole may be greater than or lss than the sum of the parts, but it is fair to evaluate the parts, as well as the whole, if that is how the material is to be presented. [/QUOTE]

Verification