It took me a long time to read your first comment as conversationally as I now think you meant it; I hadn't yet done so at the time I composed my reply, so I ended up injecting into it a great deal of bemusement as to what, exactly, were you trying to accomplish. It looked a lot like you were saying, "How dare you have written this? You and your morally stunted brethren disgust me!"
Even so, though, I ended up saying about what I think I would have said anyway, at the core of it, which was: "Sorry you didn't like it; hope the next post's better for you; I had fun, though."
But I resent having you pull the "this is my LJ" line at me (with the implication that I have no right to get angry because of that)
That wasn't the intended implication at all; sorry. I was just saying that, because this is my weblog, it's quite possible I am going to write about things that interest me, even this one; and of course you have a right to get angry and complain, and I regret that this post provoked that, but I don't regret the post itself - I like it.
I also like you, and I certainly don't want you to stop reading and commenting in my weblog! But if you don't want to read about AD&D, you may want to skip the occasional entry where I'll focus on it; and I'm sorry about that, but if you do read them, and make a grumpy comment about it, then I'm afraid I won't have much to say in response except that I'm sorry about that (and my reasons for not sharing your aversion, if you want to hear them).
...people are constantly applying gaming terms to complex, worldly situations in an effort to explain them.
For what it's worth, this wasn't, nor am I usually engaged in, an effort to explain the theories or phenomena considered; quite the opposite. It was mostly an attempt to stretch the game mechanics.
And, to reply to your whole comment out of order,
Note that I did say that you up there was general.
Hai, I understood that. But as a member of that generality, I felt it reasonable to respond regarding my specific individual manifestation. ^^;
![[personal profile]](https://www.dreamwidth.org/img/silk/identity/user.png)
timeasmymeasure
no subject
Date: 2005-04-01 11:32 pm (UTC)Even so, though, I ended up saying about what I think I would have said anyway, at the core of it, which was: "Sorry you didn't like it; hope the next post's better for you; I had fun, though."
But I resent having you pull the "this is my LJ" line at me (with the implication that I have no right to get angry because of that)
That wasn't the intended implication at all; sorry. I was just saying that, because this is my weblog, it's quite possible I am going to write about things that interest me, even this one; and of course you have a right to get angry and complain, and I regret that this post provoked that, but I don't regret the post itself - I like it.
I also like you, and I certainly don't want you to stop reading and commenting in my weblog! But if you don't want to read about AD&D, you may want to skip the occasional entry where I'll focus on it; and I'm sorry about that, but if you do read them, and make a grumpy comment about it, then I'm afraid I won't have much to say in response except that I'm sorry about that (and my reasons for not sharing your aversion, if you want to hear them).
...people are constantly applying gaming terms to complex, worldly situations in an effort to explain them.
For what it's worth, this wasn't, nor am I usually engaged in, an effort to explain the theories or phenomena considered; quite the opposite. It was mostly an attempt to stretch the game mechanics.
And, to reply to your whole comment out of order,
Note that I did say that you up there was general.
Hai, I understood that. But as a member of that generality, I felt it reasonable to respond regarding my specific individual manifestation. ^^;
-Garran