Reply to thread

Message

<blockquote data-quote="Ariosto" data-source="post: 5021500" data-attributes="member: 80487">You have not answered the question of just what this &quot;depth&quot; is that you imply must be lacking.If you really do not see how the implication is baiting, then you could pay attention to our explanation and put on your thinking cap -- or just take our word for it and quit the futile repetition of rhetoric that we are unlikely to find any less inane the umpteenth time.As I have stated, I wash my hands of that because if I define it so as to mean what I thought it meant when I had use for it, then any number of people -- who either have no interest in, or are actively opposed to, that sharing of history and experience -- will proceed to insist that I am using the term wrong and ... so therefore whatever I may have to say is (but of course!) wrong as well.I am heartily tired of the absurdity. Not only do I know damned well what I experienced in the first quarter-century of D&amp;D, but significant parts of that are matters of record. &quot;Sandbox&quot;? I never needed it before, and I can do without it now.What would be helpful, if Hussar really wants an answer to his &quot;question&quot;, is his definition of depth -- and for him to quit insisting on baloney (that is insulting as well as simply false) that has been repeatedly identified as such.</blockquote>

[QUOTE="Ariosto, post: 5021500, member: 80487"] You have not answered the question of just what this "depth" is that you imply must be lacking. If you really do not see how the implication is baiting, then you could pay attention to our explanation and put on your thinking cap -- or just take our word for it and quit the futile repetition of rhetoric that we are unlikely to find any less inane the umpteenth time. As I have stated, I wash my hands of that because if I define it so as to mean what I thought it meant when I had use for it, then any number of people -- who either have no interest in, or are actively opposed to, that sharing of history and experience -- will proceed to insist that I am using the term wrong and ... so therefore whatever I may have to say is (but of course!) wrong as well. I am heartily tired of the absurdity. Not only do I know damned well what I experienced in the first quarter-century of D&D, but significant parts of that are matters of record. "Sandbox"? I never needed it before, and I can do without it now. What would be helpful, if Hussar really wants an answer to his "question", is his definition of [B]depth[/B] -- and for him to quit insisting on baloney (that is insulting as well as simply false) that has been repeatedly identified as such. [/QUOTE]

Verification