After wasting sufficient time muddling through the pontifications of "the
janitor" and the many well founded replies...I feel that it is my moral
obligation to tell whizs of the coast to "piss off."
I don't have the history with MTG or any card game other than Jyhad. I was a
member of the "new market" and Jyhad got my attention and my money.
My modest $600 investment in cards purchased at full retail is of no apparent
concern to the newly self-styled "mature company that is sensitive to the
political, religious, gender, and ethnic issues that are facing society today."
To hell with the political correctness involved with the semantics of the word
"Jyhad." The game contains...
mythical settings,
mythical themes,
mythical characters,
mythical plots,
etc.
The frivilous nature of this argument is so base as to drive me from the
market. I do not desire to be a piper to be followed and encourage no one to
follow...Each must do what is personally correct.
If you are so damn politically correct, consider the eyes of...
...the women, who are portrayed as monsterous and powerful or subservient to
male dominated influences.
...the gay family member, to whom you are perpetuating the western cultures
anti-gay tones.
...the Christians, to whom the concept of undeath to be immoral, evil, and
contemptuous.
...the Celts, whos gothic designs surround the Jyhad cardbacks.
...the children of the future, whose trees you are slaughtering to produce
your cards.
Come on, obviously a socially/morally conscious company such as yours is
taking all these into consideration...Plastic cards, genderless, sexless,
religionless, cultureless, and a game available to the general masses on a
sliding scale to account for the poverty level and monetary exchange rates.
I have learned a lesson from the wotc snafu, and I will now return my
attention and money to RPG's and archive these cards for my grandchildren.
#ifdef SIG
#include <witty_sig.h>
#endif
/* Guess not...there is no wit in my tone */
Richard A. Wermske
zor...@neosoft.com
Zortek (zor...@neosoft.com) wrote:
: ...the gay family member, to whom you are perpetuating the western cultures
: anti-gay tones.
Not to sound clueless here, but what anti-gay messages are there
portrayed in the cards?
: Come on, obviously a socially/morally conscious company such as yours is: taking all these into consideration...Plastic cards, genderless, sexless,
^^^^^^^
Sorry - afraid this won't cut it either. Plastic uses up non-renewable
resources (petroleum products) whereas at least WotC could start (in
theory) a massive tree-planting campaign to replenish all the trees they
have used up in creating their stock. :-) Wouldn't _that_ be a powerful
statement....
Shane H.W. Travis | Be not forgetful to entertain strangers, for
tra...@duke.usask.ca | thereby some have entertained angels unawares.
Saskatoon, Saskatchewan | -- Hebrews 13:2
Shane Travis (tra...@duke.usask.ca) wrote:
: Zortek (zor...@neosoft.com) wrote:
[ quoted text not captured ]
Why is it that so many people in the Internet feel compelled to
respond venomously to a little SARCASM?
--
****"I'll stop talking about Kennedy when you stop talking about Jesus."****
**** the late, great Bill Hicks."Goat Boy is here to please you!"***********
**** from Lou Doench, comedian and village idiot. wee...@iglou.com**********
wee...@iglou.iglou.com (Louis Doench) writes:
>Shane Travis (tra...@duke.usask.ca) wrote:
>: Zortek (zor...@neosoft.com) wrote:>: : Come on, obviously a socially/morally conscious company such as yours is
>: : taking all these into consideration...Plastic cards, genderless, sexless,
>: ^^^^^^^
>: Sorry - afraid this won't cut it either. Plastic uses up non-renewable
>: resources (petroleum products) whereas at least WotC could start (in
>: theory) a massive tree-planting campaign to replenish all the trees they
>: have used up in creating their stock. :-) Wouldn't _that_ be a powerful>: statement.... ^
|
smiley -----------------------------------+
> Why is it that so many people in the Internet feel compelled to
>respond venomously to a little SARCASM?
Why is it so many people *on* the internet feel compelled to ignore
smilies (e.g., ':-)' ) when they want to see venom in a sacarstic
reply to a sacastic post?
Just because the sarcasm reflects higher machinations than Beavis and
Butt-head could muster, doesn't make it any less sarcastic. (no offense,
Beavis :-).
--
L. Scott Johnson (sjoh...@math.scarolina.edu) | These opinions are mine and
Graphics Specialist and Jyhad Rulemonger. | are subject to card text.