Re: PBEM websites

From: lindahl@pbm.com (Greg Lindahl)

Date: Thu, 13 Apr 2006 23:51:28 +0000

In article <4a83vlFs9ui0U1@individual.net>,
Brandon Blackmoor  <bblackmoor@spamcop.net> wrote:

>I can't coment on play by (snail) mail, because I have never played that
>kind of game and know nothing about it.

There was a Flagship survey a while back which figured out that most
postal gamers played only one game and didn't know about any others.
That's pretty much the definition of "horribly fragmented".

> But for play by email role-playing games, fragmenting is a
> non-issue,

That depends on your definition of fragmenting. Having to go to 4
places to see all the games is fragmented by my definition, but not
horribly so.

> This is not a zero sum
> game: more resources are better, and the resources that meet people's
> needs the best will have the most people using them.

You seem to think that repeating yourself will make me agree with
you. There are aspects of email role-playing which are a zero-sum
game.

>And it doesn't bother that the feeling isn't always reciprocated: you
>can't please everyone. Enough people appreciate it to make it worth doing.

The lurkers support you in email?

-- greg

References

Re: PBEM websites
lindahl@pbm.com (Greg Lindahl)
Thu, 13 Apr 2006 18:31:52 +0000
Re: PBEM websites
Brandon Blackmoor <bblackmoor@spamcop.net>
Thu, 13 Apr 2006 23:08:34 +0000
Re: PBEM websites
Paul Walker <usenet@blacksun.org.uk>
Sun, 09 Apr 2006 00:19:12 +0000

Referenced By

Re: PBEM websites
lindahl@pbm.com (Greg Lindahl)
Thu, 13 Apr 2006 18:31:52 +0000
Re: PBEM websites
Brandon Blackmoor <bblackmoor@spamcop.net>
Thu, 13 Apr 2006 23:08:34 +0000
Re: PBEM websites
Paul Walker <usenet@blacksun.org.uk>
Sun, 09 Apr 2006 00:19:12 +0000