Re: Flagship UK 68 (ADVERT?)

From: lindahl@pbm.com (Greg Lindahl)

Date: Thu, 17 Jul 1997 00:00:00 +0000

soliiigm@aol.com (Sol III GM) writes:
> Greg Lindahl said:
> >soliiigm@aol.com (Sol III GM) writes:
> >
> >>   The intent has been to level the playing field.
> >
> >If that's the intent, then why did some people say that most games
> >should be denied advertising here?
>
>   That's a misrepresentation that I won't even bother responding to.  No
> one has said that.

Sure they did. They said that only GM's who personally post their own
adverts should be allowed to do so, which is very different from
the current situation, where I volunteer to post adverts for gm's
who don't want to post, and many of them accept.

>   We are speaking of the FAQ here, not Usenet Tradition.  Usenet Tradition
> also says that a FAQ or Charter can contridict tradition.

This group has no charter, so the FAQ reflects tradition.

I have no intention of filling the FAQ with legalistic bullshit.

>   I can almost understand his reluctance.  Quite frankly, I am not sure
> but what my entry does my game more harm than good.  Any well developed
> genre breaking game will not fit in the format you use.

He doesn't have a genre-breaking game.

> If you
> allowed all games on the list the same freedom (since the list is now
> mostly HTML) I would jump at the chance.

I have no idea what you're getting at, but yes, you can put whatever
you want on your webpage, including "This game is so cool that it
can't be described in a few words, so please see our webpage."
You can do it without posting a dozen complaints to r.g.p, too.

-- g

References

Re: Flagship UK 68 (ADVERT?)
soliiigm@aol.com (Sol III GM)
Thu, 17 Jul 1997 00:00:00 +0000