Why? I'm not the one claiming one side's a saint while trying to villify the other. That would be you. Both sides have their share of people acting like asses and hurling insults at the drop of a hat. Your refusal or unwillingness to see it doesn't change the fact.

Yeah, we're not all saints in the anti-Sr4 crowd, but it sure seems that the ProSR4 peeps can't stand the fire. Sure I haven't gone through every thread since the incetption of this bard - And I;m sure you haven't either - but in a majority of them the Pro Sr4 camp has been the least capable of carrying on a decent, non insulting conversation.

True that just look at Goodman.

Try treating each new thread as a completely separate encounter. While it's hard to do all the time, it (in my opinion) promotes far less acrimonious interchanges, or at least requires severe disagreements on multiple completely separate topics to spark lasting acrimony.

You don't get it, apparently. Cain is calling out bad GMing that is a mark of inexperience with RPGs in general. Whether or not it's Shadowrun is irrelevant—I've seen people grow and become good GMs in any number of games.

Which is why none of us ever play other games. Oh, right…

That wasn't called for. Certainly he got way too caught up in people's opinions of SR4, but his departure from the SR4 forum and the manner thereof is a matter of public record that is, this close to its posting, not in any danger of being forgotten.

~J

I have!

Part of why I like having you around, you make me look sane sometimes.

~J

It wasn't an idea you suggested, it was a hypothesis you put forward and asked for opinions on. Then you got opinions, the opinions were that your hypothesis didn't mesh with what we'd been told about SR4, and you got all in a hissy 'cause we didn't say what you wanted us to say (so you tried to call us all stubborn and crazy).

And, yes, quite a few of us have gotten less than civil in recent weeks. You need to understand that most of us have been worrying at the bone of SR4 for a few months, now, very honestly almost from the hour the announcement was made. We've gnawed at every FAQ as it's been released, we've stated and restated the same arguments over and over again (hoping to gain understanding through repetition), and as the release date draws nearer we're all getting more and more frayed tempers over the whole thing. The dev team's getting busier (and more tired) as they deadline gets closer, the crazed fanatical SR3 fans are getting grouchier (and more bitter) as "our" game gets closer and closer to being replaced despite our misgivings over the new mechanic, and the SR4 fans are getting more and more excited (and more and more irritated at us for not being excited) the closer they get to buying a whole new game system.

And, believe it or not, DSF isn't really a haven for calm, rational, discussion even on the best of days. So, yeah. People are getting rude. It happens.

Right. Well, see, that (minus the spelling errors) was my opinion, at the time (and still is). You asked for my opinion, and I gave it. You don't need to back up an opinion with fact, if you don't want, that's why it's called an opinion. An opinion, like what you asked for. And then got. Opinion.

I never expected you to be "put down" by insults (if by "put down" you mean something like "shut down," or "quieted" or whatever) -- I offered my opinion, which you asked for. Because my opinion was negative, and I don't really care how polite some people think I am, I guess I can see how you saw that opinion as insults. When you asked for more detail, I gave it, in a point-by-point list, that tried to explain the matter to you as methodically as I care to.

Then you said something, and I don't remember what it was, because I was busy getting called a liar by Synner. Then I was talking to them, instead of you, because that conversation was more interesting (and because you seemed genuinely incapable of grasping the concepts that I put forth to you, first very generally and then very specifically).

I stated my opinion on your hypothesis about how Edge worked, I (when asked) backed that opinion up with the facts that led me towards that opinion of your hypothesis about how Edge worked. If you can't see how your clunky mechanical idea clashes not only with the clearly documented basic mechanic of attribute + skill, but also how it butts heads with their oft-stated lusting for simplicity, that's not my problem, it's yours. Once it was clear you just didn't get it, I moved on.

Maybe you should, too.

I mean, I guess maybe you didn't notice that maybe I could have been right, since it's not like I saw a whole lot of positive, supporting, posts getting lost in that shuffle, y'know? Nevermind that you're the only person who thought your idea was a good one, I'm the bad guy for calling it like I (and apparently everyone else) saw it. I have yet to see anyone leaping to the defense of your hypothesis (except you, and even you are waffling, now). Maybe you should just let the matter drop, instead of continuing to be so hung up on what some mean man on the internet said when you asked for opinions.

Uhm, well, no. See, that's why it's called my logic. It's not my job to question it. It already makes sense to me, or it wouldn't be called my logic. It's right there in the name. My logic. That's pretty much a giveaway of where I stand, when it comes to that particular logic, right there.

You mean Little Brain-Big Bladder style Debate-fu? The name comes from the Dilbert comic found in Casual Day Has Gone Too Far.

Mind if I add this to my sig Arethusa?

Amen.

Like Adam said, sometimes the PDF/Browser interface gets a little finicky.

Version 6.0 of Acrobat Reader had that problem (actually I was using Acrobat 6.0, but I heard Reader was the same way), but 7.0 has been working fine for me.

They're not "attempting" to view it in their browser intentionally, it's doing it automatically whenever they click on the link (as opposed to opening it outside of the browser or giving them the option to download it). Specifically with links that aren't clearly labeled as .pdf files like, oh, the one in this thread.

IE is preinstalled. You have to install Firefox yourself. For many people, that makes IE better in a very important way.

I am glad, however, that I am not one of those people.

Actually, as of 10.4 IE is no longer preinstalled.

(Yes, I know what you meant, I'm just being snarky )

~J

Agreed.

And I use Win Xp with Adobe Acrobat and I have never had any problems.