Conquer Club

detlef wrote:

jiminski wrote:

detlef wrote:I don't have a problems with corks, per se. I don't produce wine and don't have to shoulder the cost of wine returned because it was bad. That is their problem. If they think that the tradition behind corks is worth both the cost of the corks and the cost of lost product, that's fine with me. My problem is with people who resist other closures and specifically those who claim, without much evidence, that they're superior to crew caps, glass, or synthetic closures.

I also don't agree with pretty much everything else you said about wine, but what do I know. I only buy and sell it for a living. Oh wait, I write about it as well. None the less, I'm sure you've got it all figured out. Well, at least you've convinced yourself you have (life's much easier that way I suppose).

Back to the topic at hand. I'm going to have to take your word on the definition of "many". However, I've learned over time not to confuse the vocal minority with "many". It seems as if "many" have voted for a version of the map that is different than the one you guys are so staunchly supporting and not very "many" have voted for the original one.

None the less, I have faith in you. I have faith that somehow you can manage to spin this.

you write about wine, good man! (Chapter 6: 'The Pallets Search for Ripening Berries, With a Hint of Vanilla Pathos')
i would like your thoughts on what you disagree with ...if your tasting critiques only reach as far as "ewww it's icky" i will search elsewhere for esoteric reading on the nuances of fine wine.

as you say, back to subject: you appear to imply that the vote indicates the majority were happy with the previous change. have i read you correctly?

(also remember that not one of the choices were the original.. the colours were changed, which has happily slipped into history)

LOL, I wrote an answer to your post but it's pretty damned long. I can either pm it to you or subject the masses to a 1750 word reply. Your choice. Funny thing, I could have gone on.

jiminski wrote:
send her over mate!..just take out the abusive language and if you have used the words or phrases: "frisson", "Summer meadow" or any shape to describe a flavour, i will hunt you down and make you drink a 2 litre bottle of Blue Nun!

detlef wrote:

jiminski wrote:
send her over mate!..just take out the abusive language and if you have used the words or phrases: "frisson", "Summer meadow" or any shape to describe a flavour, i will hunt you down and make you drink a 2 litre bottle of Blue Nun!

Done. As I said in the message, it is not so much that you said untruths, rather that you left out some major elements and fixated on a few bits that are convenient to your argument.

Oh, and it's flame free. Tell you what, I'll make you a deal. I'll stop the abusive language if you stop the less than subtle if more politely phrased attacks on my character or intellect. I'm sure you'd agree that neither is more appropriate than the other.

jiminski wrote:

detlef wrote:

jiminski wrote:
send her over mate!..just take out the abusive language and if you have used the words or phrases: "frisson", "Summer meadow" or any shape to describe a flavour, i will hunt you down and make you drink a 2 litre bottle of Blue Nun!

Done. As I said in the message, it is not so much that you said untruths, rather that you left out some major elements and fixated on a few bits that are convenient to your argument.

Oh, and it's flame free. Tell you what, I'll make you a deal. I'll stop the abusive language if you stop the less than subtle if more politely phrased attacks on my character or intellect. I'm sure you'd agree that neither is more appropriate than the other.

you must know i was joking about taking out abusive language there Det (thought the Blue Nun gave it away!) as i personally love a little fruity verbiage!?
As to your character, we have both tried to use tricks of the trade to gain an advantage in this enjoyable intellectual exercise, I bear no ill-will, i hope you do not either.

And my lord i shall read your mail when i can give it the attention it needs!

firstholliday wrote:i,m in a game with dekloren and he says lack banned him from the site...

oVo wrote:Factoring in a current events, like a petition that didn't break the 100 sigs barrier and the Classic
balloting in the Map Foundry... I sincerely doubt another vote would achieve anything other than
altering your account status Dekloran.

Speaking of the results of change...
I do believe this site is a huge improvement over the board game.

owenshooter wrote:

oVo wrote:Factoring in a current events, like a petition that didn't break the 100 sigs barrier and the Classic
balloting in the Map Foundry... I sincerely doubt another vote would achieve anything other than
altering your account status Dekloran.

Speaking of the results of change...
I do believe this site is a huge improvement over the board game.

STOP MAKING SENSE!!! NO! NO! NO! NO!!! WE ALL WANT THE CLASSIC BACK NO MATTER WHAT FACTUAL EVIDENCE YOU PRESENT US WITH PROVING THAT WE ARE NOT THE MAJORITY WE SO VOCALLY CLAIM TO BE!! sound familiar? *snicker*-0

firstholliday wrote:i,m in a game with dekloren and he says lack banned him from the site...

Is this true? Is that because of this?

I have seen much worse ...... + i still don't like classic. It's not so bad as the first change but it's not good either.

Anyone?