Re: [Fwd: Re: The T'or Ruling]

[Steve Ames <steve@ns1.cioe.com>]

Wow Wright. You are just totally off base. These threads are not
about rules bickering. They are about accoutability. You seem to
believe that Dan does not have to be accountable. That's cool, at
least one other person agrees with you. The T'orite issue is all
over a bad call on Lyle's part. I would back Lyle right to the
hilt if someone broke a rule and he said something needed to be
done. I would even mostly back him if he was the one to do it.
But its unclear if a rule was actually broken. You say Dan explained
it to you two years ago... yet he didn't explain all of it? It
shouldn't need explaining, it should be documented. Lots players
out there without the benefit of being able to ask Dan for a ruling.
And if a rule was broken, I disagree with the way it was handled.
Lyle and I both understand that that disagreement is philosophical
and so isn't really being argued. But it would seem a large number
of people also disagree with its handling. Hence if it had been
bashed out ahead of time a better solution could have been found.

Yeah, debates get heated sometimes. People get badgered. You have
a delete key and can choose what to read and/or respond to. We
are all adults here (or play them on the net). Going off because
of a little pressure is immature.

On the portal issue, all that was asked for are the facts of the
matter. If I as a GM ever do anything and someone calls me on it
I would only have two possible answers: (A) "I can't answer that
directly without revealing plot that you are involved in, hit me
up again next week"; (B) Here's how. I was not involved in Dan's
adventure nor do I intend to be. I spent a lot of time and energy
(in game and out) doing what I thought was a good thing for
Rougtero. I hence felt justified in asking the question. Go
figure.

						-Steve