The return of the troll... << Congratulations on: >> Thank you. I pride myself on my work. << 1) resorting to profanities right out of the gate >> Well, seeing as how you were the first to resort to ad hominem attacks, I didn't see any reason not to call things by their real names. In short, you acted like a jackass and I said as much. I stand by that. << 2) magically reading into my words a thesis on euro/non-euro history which I never even addressed in my first message (#7683) >> Hmm... If I recall correctly, here is what you said: "Just so your deluded mind is set straight, let me say that <b>_the importance of things such as crusades, kings, and wars_</b> far outweigh the importance of wackass music and novels written by people that 99.9999999% of the world has no idea exist." The bolding (I hope it shows up) is mine. So you made a direct assertion about the importance of something, and my response to that was that your notion of importance is rather skewed, i.e. everything in history is equally important in the sense that this world is the sum total of the consequences of all previous events. << 3) wondering into the minefield of your own making by suggesting that only a cretin suggests that someone quit playing, and then directly asserting that to me >> Well, here is what I said: "I would suggest that you are the one who seriously needs to reevaluate the reason that you play quiz bowl." I didn't say, "Get out of the game." Perhaps you interpreted it as such. If so, I guess I should have elaborated. What I meant to say was, "do you play quiz bowl because you like to hear the same thing over and over again and pat yourself on the back for knowing it, or do you play to (among other things) expand your horizons a little bit?" Far be it from me to say to anyone that they should not play. However, I don't think it's unreasonable to call your motivation for playing into question. << Wrong, wrong, wrong. >> I think not. << In sum, what a well-done, classy post! >> Why, thank you. I really do put my all into each post. << But to clarify upon my original intent, since you clearly didn't get it, the (over)emphasis of crap topics as compared to staple topics is a surefire way to shipwreck a packet/tournament. >> I have two questions for you: 1) What is the criteria for distinguishing "crap" topics from "staple" topics? Where is the fun of asking the same questions all the time? 2) Have you ever actually played in a tournament that was shipwrecked in said manner? I would agree that a "stump-the-chump" style tournament would not be fun to play in, but adding something new to the mix once in a while doesn't hurt. Jerry P.S. All right, I lied. That was three questions and a statement. P.P.S. Who are you?
This archive was generated by hypermail 2.4.0: Sat 12 Feb 2022 12:30:45 AM EST EST