VGAplanets and MOO

From: cg@primenet.com (cg)

Date: Wed, 29 May 1996 00:00:00 +0000

VGA-planets fits right in any PBEM group but its home naturally
is alt.games.vga-planets. The whole idea of some of these postings
was to inform ppl who are looking for PBEM games of this genre and
who needed some guidance on how VGAP stacks up against great
commercial games like Master Of Orion...the comparison was
certainly warranted considering the nature popularity of both
games.

In article <4oc8bq$j60@linda.teleport.com>,
   jwood@teleport.com (Bret and Jill Wood) wrote:
>In article <4oancl$17q@samba.rahul.net>, Mythar  <fist@rahul.net>
wrote:
>>In article <4o9j1o$ah5@julie.teleport.com>,
>>Bret and Jill Wood <jwood@teleport.com> wrote:
>>>
>>>Are you claiming that a VGAP post to rec.sport.college.football
would be
>>>on-topic because VGAP is a recreational activity?  Please learn
to think
>>>before you type
>>
>>wow. this is really good bait. i'm thinking that i never made any
such
>>claim even resembling the above, and that you just pulled it out
of a
>>hat, like you did with that rights crap.
>
>This is the original post I was responding to.......
>
>*In article <31A79A3E.3FAB@ix.netcom.com>,
>*Chad Siek  <siekster@ix.netcom.com> wrote:
>*>
>*>       VGA Planets belongs in a recreational group, it is a form
of
>*>recreation.  If you resort to posting your little complaints on
our
>*>Newsgroup then who are you to talk?
>
>>do you have ANY CLEAR ARGUMENTS as to why VGAP, a pbm game, can
not be
>>discussed in the ___pbm___ rec group?
>
>No.  In fact, I have said that some VGAP posts are on topic for
r.g.pbm.
>
>I guess the main problem is that I'm disagreeing with some
comments which
>were made which actually have little bearing to the posts which
started
>this whole problem....  How about if I just say that I agree that
r.g.pbm
>is an appropriate place from some VGAP stuff, yet I don't believe
that
>ANY of the actual VGAP related posts on that group lately have
been
>appropriate.
>
>Since the vast majority of VGAP posts made to r.g.pbm and c.g.c.s
have
>been trolls and flames, it shows that a.g.vgap is sufficient for
the real
>discussion of VGAP.  And, since these cgcs and rgpbm posts have
merely
>severed as annoyances, rather than as real attempts to discuss the
game,
>it would probably be prudent for all VGAP posts to stick to
a.g.vgap
>until such time as someone has a good reason to post to another
one of
>these groups.
>
>Considering that I'm just a loudmouthed person who has no more
authority
>on the net than any other loudmouthed person, if anyone still
thinks
>that my position is unreasonable, it would probably be better to
discuss
>it in email.
>
>>>Is that PC enough?
>>
>>heh. you're trying to be anti-PC against a person, against an
argmuent,
>>that isn't even PC. i'm just trying to make a little sense. are
you?
>
>It's called sarcasm....
>
>-Bret Wood
>-jwood@teleport.com
>

References

Re: Screw VGAplanets AND MoO
Mythar <fist@rahul.net>
Sun, 26 May 1996 00:00:00 +0000
Re: Screw VGAplanets AND MoO
jwood@teleport.com (Bret and Jill Wood)
Mon, 27 May 1996 00:00:00 +0000
Re: Screw VGAplanets AND MoO
Mythar <fist@rahul.net>
Sun, 26 May 1996 00:00:00 +0000
Re: Screw VGAplanets AND MoO
jwood@teleport.com (Bret and Jill Wood)
Sun, 26 May 1996 00:00:00 +0000

Referenced By

Re: Screw VGAplanets AND MoO
Mythar <fist@rahul.net>
Sun, 26 May 1996 00:00:00 +0000
Re: Screw VGAplanets AND MoO
jwood@teleport.com (Bret and Jill Wood)
Mon, 27 May 1996 00:00:00 +0000
Re: Screw VGAplanets AND MoO
Mythar <fist@rahul.net>
Sun, 26 May 1996 00:00:00 +0000
Re: Screw VGAplanets AND MoO
jwood@teleport.com (Bret and Jill Wood)
Sun, 26 May 1996 00:00:00 +0000