Enigmai wrote:No offence taken by me
KO then...assumption is elsewhere offense.
For anyone that doesn't know me (or my methods),
if I offended you then understand that nothing I said was with intent to dink you as 'stoopid' or some such.
I just like a strong debate, and pursue it to its most logical/extreme conclusion.
This is as much to push my own opinion/understanding of a matter as far as humanly possible (to be certain that I feel I am correct for the 'right' reasons) as it is to 'prove' anything to anyone.
If you do know (remember) me, and were offended (chup/corsair), I gots nothing...you should have known the above already!
The rules are the pool we play in collectively, and I find myself regularly challenging/challenged by those rules as a TO more than anything else...though I've taken the last <year as a break from that (and now that my local watering hole has closed, it'll be a bit more before I step up again) I AM working with a fella (or 12) to co-ordinate a GT up here as part of the 'circuit'.
That makes me look at these debates as not only illuminating, but also instructive.
Every step and process involved in a rules argument is important to how I think of the rule, the structures around the rule, the community's conventions as a whole AND the greater synergy of RAW vs RAI vs RAI (written/intended/interpreted).
If I seem to get adamant about it, I really am looking for a RAW challenge (or a missed comma) that can put down a misperception like a lame horse, or a newer understanding of something that is just 'missed'.
A) if I play across a broad area/spectrum, I have to see what everyone does...and why
B) if I RUN across a broad pool/spectrum, I have to rule based on the above
It is a genuine love of the game and hobby, and a wish to perpetuate the same, that makes me so fervent in the involvement.