RE: Move Through (take 3)

[Daniel Lawrence <dan@aquest.com>]

-----Original Message-----
From:	Steve Ames [SMTP:steve@ns1.cioe.com]
Sent:	Tuesday, September 01, 1998 1:41 PM
To:	furmansj@expert.cc.purdue.edu; steve@ns1.cioe.com
Cc:	gmlist@ns1.cioe.com
Subject:	Re: Move Through (take 3)


Would like to. But that avenue has been, sadly, denied to us as such
things would not be in the book. And as there was no discent other
than myself and some little backing, I'll agree to be bound by this as
well.

					-Steve


[Daniel Lawrence]  the appropriate procedure for testing out rule changes has always been

1) Letting me know you want to try out a procedure
2) Letting the players know, up front, a rule is going to be tested in a session
3) Making sure that both proponents and opponents to the proposed change have the oppertunity
    to have their say about the result.

	You place words in my mouth when you say that testing new rules has been denied to you. I, last saterday, attempted to move forward and get this local rule change addendum you want put in to writing and made so we are all behind it, and you infer from my attempt that somehow I am trying to restrict you.

	In providing a campaign where the rules are the same between all the groups playing I don't think that I am doing a diservice to the players.

	And I find it very disturbing that when I attempt to impliment something you guys want, rather than anyone taking the tact that I am responding to your wants, you have infered that I am not trying to impliment the very thing you have been talking about.

	you guys confuse me a lot.
								dan