OFFICIAL: New NetRep!

Greetings to you all. In case you've been living under a rock, I haven't been around lately. I'm sorry, and I am glad to hear that my message from a couple of days ago got filtered to the newsgroup. I've been swamped with many things, and the emphasis of watching the list changed to finding someone who could do so. I'd like to announce that this wait is over. Please welcome Jon Wilkie, one of WotC's Customer Service folk to the position of official WotC NetRep for this list and for VTES-L, though in many ways it (VTES-L) is redundant. He has been in customer service for... hell... as long as I can remember, and I've been here a while. I'm sure he'll introduce himself in his own unique way. Thanks for being gentle with me, and thanks for telling it to me straight. I still want to hear from you, and my mailbox is always open if you gotta suggestion or beef. I am pretty sporadic with my mail (as I get a bunch), so please don't hate me if I don't get to you right away. I will also be on the group once in a while, mainly when I get a chance to breathe. Regardless, keep supporting the best damn TCG out there; I know we will try to do the same. -- >>> Shawn F. Carnes Game Designer and Developer, Wizards of the Coast, Inc ************************************************************* "Which one of you claims to be the craziest? Which one the biggest loony? Who runs these card games? Who's the bull goose loony here?" --McMurphy, "One Flew Over the Cuckoo's Nest"

> I'd like to announce that this wait is over. Please welcome Jon Wilkie, > one of WotC's Customer Service folk to the position of official WotC > NetRep for this list Yeah, well, Hi. I'm Jon. Nice to meet you. I'll get right down to business: First, I've broken one the first rules of the Internet right away. I haven't lurked at all, so forgive me if I act like a complete newbie dink for a little while. Second: yep, that's an AOL address you see. I do some work over on AOL, and it seemed easier to just use the same address. Third, I'm sure there are probably people on this list that knwo a hell of a lot more about VTES than I do. Cool; I hope that you'll be easy on me. If not, try not to hammer the nails through the bony part of the wrist... There are gonna be times when I just have no clue about the answer. That's when I write it down and take it to the rules meetings on Wednesday. I'd rather give you the right answer Wednesday than the wrong answer today. Sometimes, though, I may get it wrong. Such is the nature of the beast. However, if I do get it wrong, call me on it, and I'll admit to it. I'm not gonna pull the "I work at WotC, so I'm right, even when I'm wrong" attitude. Man, I sound like and incompetent idiot from the stuff above. Well, here's some background and qualifications on me, so you don't feel like Shawn was replaced by Howdy Doody: -WotC Customer Service for a year and some -VTM fan from day one -VTES fan from day one -Games I play and/or run: Kult, Kult CCG, SLA Industries, Amber, VTES, VTM, Masquerade, Cyberpunk, Hong Kong Action Theatre, Lunch Money, XXXenophile, and games I write for my gaming group. -Music I listen to: NIN, Marilyn Manson, the Breeders, Lords of Acid, Beethoven, Laibach, Throbbing Gristle, LA Style, Hole, and lots of soundtracks -Movies I like: Reservoir Dogs, Suspiria, Seven, Natural Born Killers, Swordsman, Good of Gamblers, Clockwork Orange, La Femme Nikita, etc. -TV I watch: 3rd Rock From the Sun (my guilty pleasure), the Discovery Channel, etc. I really don't wtach much TV. No, you don't get to known my measurements... Well, that's all I can think of. Give me some time to get used to things, and I'll try to do the best I can. ------------------------------------------------------------- Jon Wilkie Wot...@aol.com a.k.a."Scalpel" Customer Service, Wizards of the Coast "This isn't going to have a happy ending" -Detective Somerset, Se7en -------------------------------------------------------------

Jon Wilkie wrote: > > > I'd like to announce that this wait is over. Please welcome Jon Wilkie, > > one of WotC's Customer Service folk to the position of official WotC > > NetRep for this list > > Yeah, well, Hi. > > I'm Jon. Nice to meet you. I'll get right down to business: > > First, I've broken one the first rules of the Internet right away. I > haven't lurked at all, so forgive me if I act like a complete newbie dink > for a little while. S'okay, we've all been there at some point. Some of us(namely me) have been there more than once... > Third, I'm sure there are probably people on this list that knwo a hell of > a lot more about VTES than I do. Cool; I hope that you'll be easy on me. > If not, try not to hammer the nails through the bony part of the wrist... We'll try. Just try not to take it personally if you make a ruling or convey a rules team ruling and get contradicted by people. Some of us(I'm not naming anyone) have a better grasp on what rulings have been handed down than Shawn did when he was actually here. > There are gonna be times when I just have no clue about the answer. > That's when I write it down and take it to the rules meetings on > Wednesday. I'd rather give you the right answer Wednesday than the wrong > answer today. A great idea. I can see that we'll be friends already... ;) But really, even if we are impatient, persevere and get an answer. If you can, check for consistency. L. Scott Johnson can help you there. > Sometimes, though, I may get it wrong. Such is the nature of the beast. > However, if I do get it wrong, call me on it, and I'll admit to it. I'm > not gonna pull the "I work at WotC, so I'm right, even when I'm wrong" > attitude. > > Man, I sound like and incompetent idiot from the stuff above. Nah. Only Semi-incompetent, and that's easily cured. ;) I, for one, promise to be nice while you get adjusted. That should take you about a week or two. Then you get treated like everyone else who's been on the newsgroup for a while. I hope you like debating... We do a lot of it. > Well, > here's some background and qualifications on me, so you don't feel like > Shawn was replaced by Howdy Doody: No offense to Shawn, but how can you replace someone who isn't there? > Well, that's all I can think of. Give me some time to get used to things, > and I'll try to do the best I can. > That's all that we can really ask of anyone, isn't it? Good luck, and I hope that we don't turn into a burden for you... Alec Chang

Jon, I don't think I can welcome you as eloquently (or as often) as Alec did but please allow me to be among the first to offer a laurel and hearty handshake to our new net-rep. You may find us to be a bit passionate about things that seem trivial. Just remember that we love this game or else we wouldn't be here. Some of us also love Ashlyn Gere, but that's another news-group. ;-)= I hope you will be able to get to know us and see how we work. We really are pretty reasonable folks. If we try to get errata for a card or influence a ruling it is because we think it is in the best interest of the game. We realize that our game will never be as big as M:t$ but that's OK as long as it gets supported. The new DCI rules were a big help. Once again, welcome to the group. We look forward to your presence and support. Doug Dunaway

On Fri, 18 Oct 1996, Jon Wilkie wrote: [SFC wrote:] > > I'd like to announce that this wait is over. Please welcome Jon Wilkie, > > one of WotC's Customer Service folk to the position of official WotC > > NetRep for this list > I'm Jon. Nice to meet you. I'll get right down to business: Welcome aboard. I think you'll find this group to be full of people who care about the game. As such, don't take personally the massive amount of game-related stuff that will likely hit you once you settle in. Tom and Shawn left alot unresolved. I, too, am pretty vocal about this game. If anything I ever say gets to you, let me know. I'll either back down a bit, or tell you to ***k off. ;) [snip] > Third, I'm sure there are probably people on this list that knwo a hell of > a lot more about VTES than I do. Cool; I hope that you'll be easy on me. > If not, try not to hammer the nails through the bony part of the wrist... Don't worry about it. Consistency and sensibility are what's important. While we might hammer nails into you if you start saying things like, "Gee, Return to Innocence is too expensive, let's lower it", we're not likely to hammer in nails right away. First, we'll argue, then come the nails. :) > There are gonna be times when I just have no clue about the answer. > That's when I write it down and take it to the rules meetings on > Wednesday. I'd rather give you the right answer Wednesday than the wrong > answer today. That's _VERY_ good to hear. I'd rather wait a few days and have a thought-out decision than see hastiness. > Sometimes, though, I may get it wrong. Such is the nature of the beast. > However, if I do get it wrong, call me on it, and I'll admit to it. I'm > not gonna pull the "I work at WotC, so I'm right, even when I'm wrong" > attitude. Excellent. > Man, I sound like and incompetent idiot from the stuff above. Well, > here's some background and qualifications on me, so you don't feel like > Shawn was replaced by Howdy Doody: Don't worry. You just sound sincere. [snip] > Well, that's all I can think of. Give me some time to get used to things, > and I'll try to do the best I can. Well, take your time to get used to it all. Don't let us push you around with our opinions, but don't just zone them out either. Wishing you luck, [Reply-to:sull...@cslab.uwlax.edu] @ The Corrupter - Adrian Lee Sullivan @ GAT/CS/WS R+++* r(+)>++ # Gamer Coffee-Addict Scripter Author # P++ C(+++) USX+ N++ !w @#$ Comments ? sull...@cslab.uwlax.edu $#@ X++ b++(+++) tv(+)> @#$ <http://cslab.uwlax.edu/~sulli_al/jyhad> $#@ e+* PS++@ PE@ z*++?

doug...@aol.com (DOUGDWISE) writes: >Jon, >I don't think I can welcome you as eloquently (or as often) as Alec did >but please allow me to be among the first to offer a laurel and hearty >handshake to our new net-rep. Hi as well from me. Welcome aboard. So, did the UnAnswered Questions list (UAQ) get passed along to you, or shall I post it a fifth time? -- L. Scott Johnson (sjoh...@math.sc.edu) | Hard work has a future payoff. http://www.math.sc.edu/cgi-bin/sjohnson/home | Laziness pays off now. Graphics Specialist and V:tES Rulemonger. |

Wot...@aol.com (Jon Wilkie) wrote: >Yeah, well, Hi. > >I'm Jon. Nice to meet you. I'll get right down to business: Welcome. It's nice to have you. >First, I've broken one the first rules of the Internet right away. I >haven't lurked at all, so forgive me if I act like a complete newbie dink >for a little while. > >Second: yep, that's an AOL address you see. I do some work over on AOL, >and it seemed easier to just use the same address. > >Third, I'm sure there are probably people on this list that knwo a hell of >a lot more about VTES than I do. Cool; I hope that you'll be easy on me. >If not, try not to hammer the nails through the bony part of the wrist... Never... >There are gonna be times when I just have no clue about the answer. >That's when I write it down and take it to the rules meetings on >Wednesday. I'd rather give you the right answer Wednesday than the wrong >answer today. Very good Idea. You will get along fine that way. >Sometimes, though, I may get it wrong. Such is the nature of the beast. >However, if I do get it wrong, call me on it, and I'll admit to it. I'm >not gonna pull the "I work at WotC, so I'm right, even when I'm wrong" >attitude. Excellent. That type would get the nails... >Man, I sound like and incompetent idiot from the stuff above. Well, >here's some background and qualifications on me, so you don't feel like >Shawn was replaced by Howdy Doody: > >-WotC Customer Service for a year and some >-VTM fan from day one >-VTES fan from day one >-Games I play and/or run: Kult, Kult CCG, SLA Industries, Amber, VTES, >VTM, Masquerade, Cyberpunk, Hong Kong Action Theatre, Lunch Money, >XXXenophile, and games I write for my gaming group. >-Music I listen to: NIN, Marilyn Manson, the Breeders, Lords of Acid, >Beethoven, Laibach, Throbbing Gristle, LA Style, Hole, and lots of >soundtracks >-Movies I like: Reservoir Dogs, Suspiria, Seven, Natural Born Killers, >Swordsman, Good of Gamblers, Clockwork Orange, La Femme Nikita, etc. >-TV I watch: 3rd Rock From the Sun (my guilty pleasure), the Discovery >Channel, etc. I really don't wtach much TV. > >No, you don't get to known my measurements... Thanks. >Well, that's all I can think of. Give me some time to get used to things, >and I'll try to do the best I can. Good luck. I hope things go well. Steve Bucy

In article <54fope$1...@redwood.cs.sc.edu>, sjoh...@math.scarolina.edu (L. Scott Johnson) wrote: > So, did the UnAnswered Questions list (UAQ) get passed along to you, > or shall I post it a fifth time? Nope. Can you post it, and I'll see if I can wring some answers out of R&D? I was thinking about how to help the most, while still having time for sleep and food. :) Here's my suggestion: If there is a question that is in dispute, and needs the "official" seal of approval, just title a post "Hey Scalpel!". That way I can answer the questions you need answered without interfering in ongoing debates. Also, I can keep up on my other job stuff too. Any objections? It would certainly help me... In other news: The reason I haven't posted a lot yet is that I am using some of the informative URLs that you guys have sent me, and reading over all that I find there to bring myself up to speed on the philosphy and mind-set of the group. Speaking of, L Scott, last time I tried to load your page, my browser couldn't find it. Is it there anymore? Also, I'll be at UCon in Ann Arbor, MI starting tomorrow, and going through Sunday, so I won't be back until Monday. However, I'm taking a whole bunch of Sabbat cards, and hope to addict some individuals to Sabbat before the end of the weekend! So, that's the update. Any objections to the "Hey Scalpel!" idea? [ quoted text not captured ]

Could somebody E-Mail me a copy of the latest tournament rules? I'm running a V:TES tournament at U-CON in Ann Arbor this weekend and would like to ensure that I have the most current information. Thanks Ya'll -- Bernie

Jon Wilkie (Wot...@aol.com) wrote: : Yeah, well, Hi. Greetings. : : I'm Jon. Nice to meet you. I'll get right down to business: : : First, I've broken one the first rules of the Internet right away. I : haven't lurked at all, so forgive me if I act like a complete newbie dink : for a little while. Never mind. : : Second: yep, that's an AOL address you see. I do some work over on AOL, : and it seemed easier to just use the same address. : : Third, I'm sure there are probably people on this list that knwo a hell of : a lot more about VTES than I do. Cool; I hope that you'll be easy on me. : If not, try not to hammer the nails through the bony part of the wrist... Who, us? : : There are gonna be times when I just have no clue about the answer. : That's when I write it down and take it to the rules meetings on : Wednesday. I'd rather give you the right answer Wednesday than the wrong : answer today. Good. : : Sometimes, though, I may get it wrong. Such is the nature of the beast. : However, if I do get it wrong, call me on it, and I'll admit to it. I'm : not gonna pull the "I work at WotC, so I'm right, even when I'm wrong" : attitude. Also good. : : Man, I sound like and incompetent idiot from the stuff above. Well, : here's some background and qualifications on me, so you don't feel like : Shawn was replaced by Howdy Doody: : : -WotC Customer Service for a year and some : -VTM fan from day one : -VTES fan from day one : -Games I play and/or run: Kult, Kult CCG, SLA Industries, Amber, VTES, : VTM, Masquerade, Cyberpunk, Hong Kong Action Theatre, Lunch Money, : XXXenophile, and games I write for my gaming group. : -Music I listen to: NIN, Marilyn Manson, the Breeders, Lords of Acid, : Beethoven, Laibach, Throbbing Gristle, LA Style, Hole, and lots of ^^^^^ Are you kidding? Courtney Love killed cobain. She bad. : soundtracks : -Movies I like: Reservoir Dogs, Suspiria, Seven, Natural Born Killers, : Swordsman, Good of Gamblers, Clockwork Orange, La Femme Nikita, etc. : -TV I watch: 3rd Rock From the Sun (my guilty pleasure), the Discovery : Channel, etc. I really don't wtach much TV. Shame on you. : : No, you don't get to known my measurements... Awww...shame. :) : : Well, that's all I can think of. Give me some time to get used to things, : and I'll try to do the best I can. : : ------------------------------------------------------------- [ quoted text not captured ]

Wot...@aol.com (Jon Wilkie) writes: >In article <54fope$1...@redwood.cs.sc.edu>, sjoh...@math.scarolina.edu (L. >Scott Johnson) wrote: >> So, did the UnAnswered Questions list (UAQ) get passed along to you, >> or shall I post it a fifth time? >Nope. Can you post it, and I'll see if I can wring some answers out of R&D? OK. I will post it after I post this message. Look for "Subject: UAQ" >I was thinking about how to help the most, while still having time for >sleep and food. :) Here's my suggestion: If there is a question that is According to some, the Net.Rep is supposed to have 10 hours a week devoted to being the Net.Rep. If this cuts into sleep and food time, maybe someone with more time can help you out. >in dispute, and needs the "official" seal of approval, just title a post >"Hey Scalpel!". That way I can answer the questions you need answered >without interfering in ongoing debates. Also, I can keep up on my other >job stuff too. >Any objections? It would certainly help me... First, we need *all* questions answered. If a question is posed, it should be answered. If some non-official source posts an answer that is correct (without citing official references), then you should back that answer up with a "correct" post. And if it is answered incorrectly, you should correct the error. The usual method for denoting a question that seeks an official answer is to have a Subject beginning with "Q: <question subject>" or (in your case) "JON: Q: <question subject>". If you wish to be called scalpel even though you aren't using that address (sca...@wizards.com) on this group, then also look for: "Scalpel: Q: <question subject>". (Some posts use "Question:" instead of "Q:", so you may want to have your newsreader flag both). This way, the subject serves as a flag for official attention, while still retaining its normal function of identifying the post's thread. But all questions are, by nature, seeking official answers unless it is obvious from the rest of the post that the question is a what-if question. And you *should* follow the on-going debates, correcting us if we state falsehoods and passing our thoughts on to the appropriate people if we make sense. That is the essence of net.rep'ing. We had a Net.Rep whose other duties prevented him from spending the required amount of time on the newsgroup. He found a replacement for just that reason. If the replacement has the same problem, I fail to see what has been accomplished. >In other news: The reason I haven't posted a lot yet is that I am using >some of the informative URLs that you guys have sent me, and reading over >all that I find there to bring myself up to speed on the philosphy and >mind-set of the group. Speaking of, L Scott, last time I tried to load >your page, my browser couldn't find it. Is it there anymore? 1) The URLs are not a good measure of the philosphy nor mind-set of the group. Very few of the people on this group have pages. And most pages are not prone to discussion, but rather just simple references and occasional op-ed selections. 2) Yes, I've moved. The pages at HomeFree are no longer free. The new URL is http://Rulemonger.Home.ML.Org >Also, I'll be at UCon in Ann Arbor, MI starting tomorrow, and going >through Sunday, so I won't be back until Monday. However, I'm taking a >whole bunch of Sabbat cards, and hope to addict some individuals to Sabbat >before the end of the weekend! So, it's still another week before we can even hope to start getting any questions answered? >So, that's the update. Any objections to the "Hey Scalpel!" idea? Any objections to the "JON: Q: ..." paradigm already in place? -- L. Scott Johnson (sjoh...@math.sc.edu) | Cats teach us that not http://www.math.sc.edu/cgi-bin/sjohnson/home | everything in nature has Graphics Specialist and V:tES Rulemonger. | a function.

In article <54bgns$k...@newsbf02.news.aol.com>, doug...@aol.com (DOUGDWISE) wrote: De-lurking warning!!! > Jon, > I don't think I can welcome you as eloquently (or as often) as Alec did > but please allow me to be among the first to offer a laurel and hearty > handshake to our new net-rep. > > You may find us to be a bit passionate about things that seem trivial. > Just remember that we love this game or else we wouldn't be here. Some of > us also love Ashlyn Gere, but that's another news-group. ;-)= > > I hope you will be able to get to know us and see how we work. We really > are pretty reasonable folks. If we try to get errata for a card or > influence a ruling it is because we think it is in the best interest of > the game. We realize that our game will never be as big as M:t$ but > that's OK as long as it gets supported. The new DCI rules were a big > help. > > Once again, welcome to the group. We look forward to your presence and > support. > > Doug Dunaway I second Doug, and all of the others. This is from one newbie to another! :-) I am a newbie to V:TES as well, have just put my first deck together and, if nothing happens to change it, next week I will be playing one on one with a friend who has agreed to teach me the game. I will be certainly listening to this ng a lot more than posting, at least for a period of time, just wanted ya'll to know about this lurker in the bushes! :) Beep...beep..beep Back in lurk mode ********************************************************************* Peace et bonum Lisa K. Bri...@ix.netcom.com *********************************************************************

Jon Wilkie wrote: > > In article <54nnnu$1...@redwood.cs.sc.edu>, sjoh...@math.scarolina.edu (L. > Scott Johnson) wrote: > > > First, we need *all* questions answered. If a question is posed, it > > should be answered. If some non-official source posts an answer > > that is correct (without citing official references), then you should > > back that answer up with a "correct" post. And if it is answered > > incorrectly, you should correct the error. > > How about this: if I see a question in the middle of a debate, or one > that doesn't fall under the "SCALPEL Q:" subject, and someone (most likely > you) answer it correctly, why waste bandwidth by replying myself? I'll > keep an eye on all the questions, but the idea is that I stay out of the > way unless needed. Even if L. Scott Johnson answers a question correctly we still need your rubber stamp. I can't exactly go to a convention and show the guy running the tournament a piece of paper from the newsgroup that shows L. Scott's _ruling_ on a particular matter. I'd certainly get a "Who the F*** is L. Scott Johnson?". L. Scott Johnson may be more in touch with Richard Garfield's original vision than the entire design team, but until WotC gets him some business cards with his name on 'em he can't speak in an official capacity. Tournaments and public playing of the game is very important to me and these require a FINAL AUTHORITY for rulings. If someone asks a simple question and one of us chimes in with something like "Tom Wylie answered this on 5/15/96. His ruling read: [Insert quoted text of the exact ruling]" then you don't need to do a "me too". > > But all questions are, by nature, seeking official answers unless > > it is obvious from the rest of the post that the question is a > > what-if question. > > I understand, and will try to correct any wrong perceptions. As I stated above, just chiming in to correct mis-statements won't be enough. An official WotC ruling is an absolute necessity. I understand that you don't wan't to spend hours answering questions that are routine and that 90% of the people in this group can answer. Maybe you can keep on us a little to provide better answers to posted questions, particularly, reminding us to quote the prior official ruling. Most of us do have access to the rulings. Robert ...................................................................... :The opinions expressed here are strictly my own delusional ramblings: :and do not reflect the opinions of The Walt Disney Company. : : : :Robert Goudie robert...@studio.disney.com: :....................................................................: :cigars * v:tes * car rallies * scotch * sega rally champion * spoon : :....................................................................:

Wot...@aol.com (Jon Wilkie) writes: >In article <54nnnu$1...@redwood.cs.sc.edu>, sjoh...@math.scarolina.edu (L. >Scott Johnson) wrote: >How about this: if I see a question in the middle of a debate, or one >that doesn't fall under the "SCALPEL Q:" subject, and someone (most likely >you) answer it correctly, why waste bandwidth by replying myself? I'll >keep an eye on all the questions, but the idea is that I stay out of the >way unless needed. Well, If someone answers correctly and someone else answers it incorrectly, how about "wasting" the bandwidth to tell us who's right? I may be quick, but I'm not infallible. And many may not know that I'm to be taken as the official speaker on answers around here. >> And you *should* follow the on-going debates, correcting us if we >> state falsehoods and passing our thoughts on to the appropriate >> people if we make sense. That is the essence of net.rep'ing. >I *do* follow the ongoing debates. I just see no need to post a "me too!" >to all of them. However, I do read them all. I don't suggest that you say "me too!". I suggest that you correct us if we state things incorrectly. >> We had a Net.Rep whose other duties prevented him from spending the >> required amount of time on the newsgroup. He found a replacement >> for just that reason. If the replacement has the same problem, I fail >> to see what has been accomplished. >If everyone is dissatified this quickly with my Net.Rep.ing, I'm not sure >anyone will live up to expectations. I'm not everyone. Victimology-speak won't help matters. No one said anything about being dissatified. I said "if you have the same prolem" (which you intimated that you did have - a lack of time to both read the group and eat) "then I fail to see what is accomplished". So, if you believe that you really don't have time to perform your assigned task, and find that my statement then leads to the idea that I would be dissatified with that, you are correct. I was actually hoping, however, that you'd find the time to make sure that we on the group wouldn't have to become dissatified. Assigning a job to someone who (through lack of time or whatnot) cannot perform the job will invariably lead to dissappointment on someone's part. I hope that we won't have to prove this theory. The expectations are only that the net.rep perform the duties of the position. Surely someone can handle the post here as well as Tom handles his post on that other newsgroup. >> So, it's still another week before we can even hope to start getting any >> questions answered? >It'll be longer than that. I'll take all the questions to the VTES rules >meeting on Wednesday, at which point R&D will start debating them. When >they finally make a decision, they'll give them to me, and I'll post the >answer. Someone intimately involved with the game (as most of you should be, having just produced and "extensively play-tested" a new expansion) should be able to hammer out the proper answers in a matter of hours. >I know that doesn't sound efficient, but most of the questions you guys >are asking involve the "deep rules" of the game, which requires R&D >input. And they aren't fast... Some of the questions have been asked since the end of June. "Not fast" is an understatement. -- L. Scott Johnson (sjoh...@math.sc.edu) | I don't suffer from insanity. http://www.math.sc.edu/cgi-bin/sjohnson/home | I enjoy every minute of it. [ quoted text not captured ]

In article <54nnnu$1...@redwood.cs.sc.edu>, sjoh...@math.scarolina.edu (L. Scott Johnson) wrote: > First, we need *all* questions answered. If a question is posed, it > should be answered. If some non-official source posts an answer > that is correct (without citing official references), then you should > back that answer up with a "correct" post. And if it is answered > incorrectly, you should correct the error. How about this: if I see a question in the middle of a debate, or one that doesn't fall under the "SCALPEL Q:" subject, and someone (most likely you) answer it correctly, why waste bandwidth by replying myself? I'll keep an eye on all the questions, but the idea is that I stay out of the way unless needed. > But all questions are, by nature, seeking official answers unless > it is obvious from the rest of the post that the question is a > what-if question. I understand, and will try to correct any wrong perceptions. > And you *should* follow the on-going debates, correcting us if we > state falsehoods and passing our thoughts on to the appropriate > people if we make sense. That is the essence of net.rep'ing. I *do* follow the ongoing debates. I just see no need to post a "me too!" to all of them. However, I do read them all. > We had a Net.Rep whose other duties prevented him from spending the > required amount of time on the newsgroup. He found a replacement > for just that reason. If the replacement has the same problem, I fail > to see what has been accomplished. If everyone is dissatified this quickly with my Net.Rep.ing, I'm not sure anyone will live up to expectations. > So, it's still another week before we can even hope to start getting any > questions answered? It'll be longer than that. I'll take all the questions to the VTES rules meeting on Wednesday, at which point R&D will start debating them. When they finally make a decision, they'll give them to me, and I'll post the answer. I know that doesn't sound efficient, but most of the questions you guys are asking involve the "deep rules" of the game, which requires R&D input. And they aren't fast... ------------------------------------------------------------- [ quoted text not captured ]

Jon Wilkie (Wot...@aol.com) wrote: : In article <54nnnu$1...@redwood.cs.sc.edu>, sjoh...@math.scarolina.edu (L. : Scott Johnson) wrote: Alright, first, sorry if it seems like i'm picking on you: : : > First, we need *all* questions answered. If a question is posed, it : > should be answered. If some non-official source posts an answer : > that is correct (without citing official references), then you should : > back that answer up with a "correct" post. And if it is answered : > incorrectly, you should correct the error. : : How about this: if I see a question in the middle of a debate, or one : that doesn't fall under the "SCALPEL Q:" subject, and someone (most likely : you) answer it correctly, why waste bandwidth by replying myself? I'll : keep an eye on all the questions, but the idea is that I stay out of the : way unless needed. No good. This sounds like a cop-out to me (sorry to be so blunt :). I'm sure we can all spare the bandwidth for an assurance of the official opinion. : : > But all questions are, by nature, seeking official answers unless : > it is obvious from the rest of the post that the question is a : > what-if question. : : I understand, and will try to correct any wrong perceptions. : : > And you *should* follow the on-going debates, correcting us if we : > state falsehoods and passing our thoughts on to the appropriate : > people if we make sense. That is the essence of net.rep'ing. : : I *do* follow the ongoing debates. I just see no need to post a "me too!" : to all of them. However, I do read them all. : It's not a "me, too!" post. It's a "WotC says that you are right/wrong" post. It's not just someone's opinion, remember, it's what was originally intended for the cards. And if not, it's better. It is important. : > We had a Net.Rep whose other duties prevented him from spending the : > required amount of time on the newsgroup. He found a replacement : > for just that reason. If the replacement has the same problem, I fail : > to see what has been accomplished. : : If everyone is dissatified this quickly with my Net.Rep.ing, I'm not sure : anyone will live up to expectations. : You are hardly improving your position. You have to at least appear to be doing your job. If you're going to give us a "fantastic new era" speech, you shouldn't in the next breath announce that you're gonna be gone for a week. : > So, it's still another week before we can even hope to start getting any : > questions answered? : : It'll be longer than that. I'll take all the questions to the VTES rules : meeting on Wednesday, at which point R&D will start debating them. When : they finally make a decision, they'll give them to me, and I'll post the : answer. : : I know that doesn't sound efficient, but most of the questions you guys : are asking involve the "deep rules" of the game, which requires R&D : input. And they aren't fast... : As long as the answers DO come, fine by me.

Hello! I am running a demo game of VTES at the Complete Strategist, at Mass Ave, in Boston, across from the Christian Science Building, on November 16th, 11am, -2pm, or longer if many show up. If you need more info, please e-mail me, at ct...@gis.net. Also, Jon Wilkie, can I get promos from WOTC as giiveaways for attendies? Whay do I have to do to get 'em? I run games like this, about every other month. Thanks! Look forward to seeing ya! Craig

In article <32778...@eden.adam.com.au>, rob...@adam.com.au (robert donoghue) wrote: > : How about this: if I see a question in the middle of a debate, or one > : that doesn't fall under the "SCALPEL Q:" subject, and someone (most likely > : you) answer it correctly, why waste bandwidth by replying myself? I'll > : keep an eye on all the questions, but the idea is that I stay out of the > : way unless needed. > No good. This sounds like a cop-out to me (sorry to be so blunt :). I'm > sure we can all spare the bandwidth for an assurance of the official opinion. Sorry it sounds like a cop-out. However, the "Hey Scalpel!" posting system seems to be working nicely, so I'll continue to use that for official questions. Most of the simpler questions are quite adequately handled by the rules acumen of Mr. L Scott. > : I *do* follow the ongoing debates. I just see no need to post a "me too!" > : to all of them. However, I do read them all. > It's not a "me, too!" post. It's a "WotC says that you are right/wrong" > post. It's not just someone's opinion, remember, it's what was originally > intended for the cards. And if not, it's better. It is important. Thanks for finding it important. That's why I'm here to answer rules questions. Just use "Hey Scalpel!" in your subject line, and I'll grab the question for review by the rules team. > : If everyone is dissatified this quickly with my Net.Rep.ing, I'm not sure > : anyone will live up to expectations. > You are hardly improving your position. You have to at least appear to be > doing your job. If you're going to give us a "fantastic new era" speech, > you shouldn't in the next breath announce that you're gonna be gone for a > week. You'll have to take that up with Events, as they were the ones who sent me to UCon. However, I'm hoping the weekly Rulings document will reassure some of you that we are listening and answering. > As long as the answers DO come, fine by me. Check out my latest post, with this week's answers to the questions so far. [ quoted text not captured ]

Jon Wilkie (Wot...@aol.com) wrote: <snippage> : .... the "Hey Scalpel!" posting system seems to be working nicely, : so I'll continue to use that for official questions. Most of the : simpler questions are quite adequately handled by the rules acumen : of Mr. L Scott. Have you ever tried to take a ruling by LSJ to a tournament official? Do you understand that LSJ is _not_ an employee of WotC and _will not_ be viewed as an official source for rules interpretation? Do you understand why many of us feel that you aren't doing a good enough job as net. rep. when you pass off the answering of all but the tricky questions to LSJ? : Thanks for finding it important. That's why I'm here to answer rules : questions. Just use "Hey Scalpel!" in your subject line, and I'll grab : the question for review by the rules team. And I still (personally) find it annoying to use "Hey Scalpel!" when a simple "[Jon]" should suffice. : You'll have to take that up with Events, as they were the ones who sent me : to UCon. However, I'm hoping the weekly Rulings document will reassure : some of you that we are listening and answering. In all honesty, it would be _more_ reassurring if you were more vocal as to 1. when you wouldn't be posting for a while, 2. when a question was going to be "escalated" and brought before the rules team, 3. IF THOSE RULINGS WERE LOOKED OVER BEFORE BEING POSTED! I'm sorry to shout, really I am, but the blatant contradiction in the recent Roetschreck ruling just got to me. -spongy

Wot...@aol.com (Jon Wilkie) writes: >In article <32778...@eden.adam.com.au>, rob...@adam.com.au (robert >donoghue) wrote: >> No good. This sounds like a cop-out to me (sorry to be so blunt :). I'm >> sure we can all spare the bandwidth for an assurance of the official opinion. >Sorry it sounds like a cop-out. However, the "Hey Scalpel!" posting >system seems to be working nicely, so I'll continue to use that for >official questions. Most of the simpler questions are quite adequately >handled by the rules acumen of Mr. L Scott. But I'm not official. It's your job. I'm not volunteering to be your designated driver. I only do what I do because WotC had stopped doing it, and unofficial answers are better than no answers. Also, since I (and the others) stopped answering question from 11/01 to 11/11 (including some *very* easy questions) - we can only assume that you're depending on me (us) to do your job (and not checking the group like you're supposed to). That's no good. >Thanks for finding it important. That's why I'm here to answer rules >questions. Just use "Hey Scalpel!" in your subject line, and I'll grab >the question for review by the rules team. How about if I just use "?" in the body of my post, and let context decide if the question merits an answer? >> You are hardly improving your position. You have to at least appear to be >> doing your job. If you're going to give us a "fantastic new era" speech, >> you shouldn't in the next breath announce that you're gonna be gone for a >> week. >You'll have to take that up with Events, as they were the ones who sent me >to UCon. However, I'm hoping the weekly Rulings document will reassure >some of you that we are listening and answering. UCon explains your absence from 10/24 to 10/27. What exaplains your absence from 10/30 to 11/12 ? -- L. Scott Johnson (sjoh...@math.sc.edu) | Experience is something you http://www.math.sc.edu/cgi-bin/sjohnson/home | get just after you need it. [ quoted text not captured ]

In article <56f9fl$c...@gw.dgii.com>, jam...@dgii.com (James Puzzo) wrote: > Have you ever tried to take a ruling by LSJ to a tournament official? > Do you understand that LSJ is _not_ an employee of WotC and _will not_ be > viewed as an official source for rules interpretation? Do you understand > why many of us feel that you aren't doing a good enough job as net. rep. > when you pass off the answering of all but the tricky questions to LSJ? There is no "passing off". I merely sought to suggest that not every question under the sun needs an absolutely "official" answer, and that if you need an official answer, twelve extra characters in the subject line shouldn't be a burden. > And I still (personally) find it annoying to use "Hey Scalpel!" when a > simple "[Jon]" should suffice. I find it annoying to have to use my fingers to type, rather than psychicly transmitting my thoughts directly to the Newsgroup. Life is full of small inconveniences... > In all honesty, it would be _more_ reassurring if you were more vocal as > to 1. when you wouldn't be posting for a while, 2. when a question was going > to be "escalated" and brought before the rules team, 3. IF THOSE RULINGS > WERE LOOKED OVER BEFORE BEING POSTED! > > I'm sorry to shout, really I am, but the blatant contradiction in the > recent Roetschreck ruling just got to me. It's okay; I'm getting used to hostility. I'm personally not convinced that the rulings contradict, but have it on the docket for the next Rules Team Meeting. Questions to me will always be escalated to the Rules Team, to cut down on any doubt as to the validity of answers. [ quoted text not captured ]

In article <56f9du$6...@redwood.cs.sc.edu>, sjoh...@math.scarolina.edu (L. Scott Johnson) wrote: > But I'm not official. It's your job. I'm not volunteering to be your > designated driver. > I only do what I do because WotC had stopped doing it, and unofficial > answers are better than no answers. > Also, since I (and the others) stopped answering question from 11/01 to > 11/11 (including some *very* easy questions) - we can only assume that > you're depending on me (us) to do your job (and not checking the group > like you're supposed to). That's no good. Sorry, L Scott, but I am checking the group, and am taking the questions addressed to me to the Rules Team. > How about if I just use "?" in the body of my post, and let context > decide if the question merits an answer? Why don't you just use "HEY SCALPEL!"? If a question is blindingly important enought to require a gold-plated Tom Wylie ruling, it should be worth someone's time to type the extra twelve characters in the subject line. > UCon explains your absence from 10/24 to 10/27. What exaplains your > absence from 10/30 to 11/12 ? Union break. Actually, I was waiting for the Rules Team meeting. Now that I'm meeting with them weekly, we can get on a consistent schedule. [ quoted text not captured ]

Wot...@aol.com (Jon Wilkie) writes: >It's okay; I'm getting used to hostility. I'm personally not convinced >that the rulings contradict, but have it on the docket for the next Rules >Team Meeting. "Rotschreck can be used in response to Pulled Fangs" doesn't contradict "Rotscreck cannot be used in response to Pulled Fangs" ? ============================================================================= Actual Rulings: QUESTION: 7/01/96: Why can't you play Rotschreck in response to aggaravated damage dealt by non-strike cards (like DBR, Pulled Fangs, etc.)? ANSWER: You can play Rotschreck in response to aggaravated damage dealt by non-strike cards. QUESTION: a) Can the master card Rotschreck be played on a vampire using the card pulled fangs?? If so how does this resolve? (since the effect occurs after strike resolution and damage resolution.) ANSWER: No. [ quoted text not captured ]

Shane Travis here, not Nicole. Jon Wilkie (Wot...@aol.com) wrote: : In article <56f9fl$c...@gw.dgii.com>, jam...@dgii.com (James Puzzo) wrote: : > Have you ever tried to take a ruling by LSJ to a tournament official? : > Do you understand that LSJ is _not_ an employee of WotC and _will not_ be : > viewed as an official source for rules interpretation? Do you understand : > why many of us feel that you aren't doing a good enough job as net. rep. : > when you pass off the answering of all but the tricky questions to LSJ? : There is no "passing off". I merely sought to suggest that not every : question under the sun needs an absolutely "official" answer, and that if : you need an official answer, twelve extra characters in the subject line : shouldn't be a burden. I recall when Tom was Netrep that he would do the following; if an answer was given by someone which was complete and accurate, he would follow up the post cutting out all but question and answer and simply write on the bottom 'This is correct'. This is the sort of 'official' stamp that is being asked for. It is not necessary (I wouldn't think) in a case where someone quites chapter, verse, and message-id the original ruling of Tom's (or RTR posting, or whatever); other than that, it is an expedient way to let the readers of this group know that you are reading the articles and maintaining a presence. (As an aside, it was pleasing to see the 'Noted and stored for next RT meeting' posts you made; these sorts of thing provide a similar effect of reassurance for the readers here.) The insistence on the 'Hey Scalpel!' in the subject line (if one wants an official answer) leads me to believe that one of two situations exist; a) You do not read the posts in this group except for those which demand your attention, or b) You read all the posts in the group, but will only respond in any capacity to those posts which contain the 'twelce extra characters'. Situation a) makes me think that an improper and/or incomplete job is being done as Netrep. There are not so many new posts in r.g.t-c.j every day that keeping current would be an arduous chore: I count about 50-60 on average right now, and this is immediately after a major expansion is released. Standard would be about one-third to one-half of that. If you do not have time to read these posts, then I submit that you do not have time to be a proper Netrep (no slight on you - I'm sure that you are busy.) Situation b) indicates to me that a control-struggle is taking place here. If all posts _are_ read but only certain 'correct' ones responded to, this tells me that it is not a matter ot time, but a matter of power. 'Do as I say, or screw off' does not promote good working relations, nor does coming in to an established situation and setting down ground rules under which you will do your job, some of which go against the way things are already done. Personally, I continue to hope that neither of these situations is the case; that you _do_ read all the posts, and that you _do_ respond to all of them as needed. : It's okay; I'm getting used to hostility. If you choose to feel persecuted, there is little we can do about it. Recognize these rationale for disillusionment, however; - You are the second Netrep to show up in the last 6 months, the first having vanished after a very short time. - You are trying to fill the shoes of someone who did the job for a long time who, despite occasional horn-locking with group posters and disagreement with rulings, garnered much personal respect from the readers of this newsgroup. - You are the only link that we have with a company who put out a game that all of love (or else we wouldn't be here), and therefore the only channel through which we can vent any disapproval with how we perceive the game to be changing. (Tom got caught in the crossfire too, occasionally; he, however recognized it for what it was seldom responded publicly to it as though it were a personal attack.) - After appearing on the scene, your first official act was to disappear for over three weeks. (Not placing blame; stating that it does not engender great shows of confidence.) - You have insisted on 'my way or the highway' as opposed to the established order of business. Is it therefore a wonder that people are taking a while to warm up to you, or that you feel a distinct lack of adulation at the current moment? : I'm personally not convinced : that the rulings contradict, but have it on the docket for the next Rules : Team Meeting. See LSJ's response to this for a mirror to my own thoughts. : Questions to me will always be escalated to the Rules Team, to cut down on : any doubt as to the validity of answers. Again, merely to be clear: Your policy is to give _no_ official answers other than those hashed out by the RT? If so, a continuation of your practice of 'Noted for thenext RT meeting' would be appreciated so that people know their concerns are being heard. Shane H.W. Travis | Unquestionably, there is progress. The average ro...@duke.usask.ca | American now pays out twice as much in taxes as Saskatoon, Saskatchewan | he formerly got in wages. -- H. L. Mencken

In article <56kr33$c...@tribune.usask.ca>, ro...@duke.usask.ca (Nicole Roy) wrote: > a) You do not read the posts in this group except for those which demand > your attention, or > b) You read all the posts in the group, but will only respond in any > capacity to those posts which contain the 'twelce extra characters'. b), but not for the reasons stated. There are a LOT of discussions of the list, many of which have no clear "question". This is not a bad thing. I'm learning a lot about VTES from being on the list. However, to avoid overloading Tom, and to avoid trying the "answer" stuff like the CL/NCL debate (which has no definitive answer), I thought a clear way to put questions forth for an "Official" answer. It's definitely not a case of "my way or the highway". However, I only have a certain amount of my job devoted to the VTES list, and I wouldn't be able to provide good service by trying to answer everything (I would fall behind). To answer the responses to that last sentence: I fully believe that WotC should devote more resources and time to VTES. I kind of have a history of rooting for the underdog at WotC. The last time I was netrep, it was for SLA Industries... :P > : It's okay; I'm getting used to hostility. > If you choose to feel persecuted, there is little we can do about it. Sorry, that was meant as dry wit. Sometimes I'm a bit too dry. :) > Again, merely to be clear: Your policy is to give _no_ official > answers other than those hashed out by the RT? If so, a continuation of > your practice of 'Noted for thenext RT meeting' would be appreciated so > that people know their concerns are being heard. I will only answer I question when I am so sure of an answer that I would bet my immortal soul on it. For obvious reasons, I DO NOT want to give out an incorrect ruling (at least on my own). I feel that the "stamp of Tom" will help keep the answers solid and undisputed (except when they're not). [ quoted text not captured ]

Jon Wilkie (Wot...@aol.com) wrote: : In article <56f9fl$c...@gw.dgii.com>, jam...@dgii.com (James Puzzo) wrote: : > And I still (personally) find it annoying to use "Hey Scalpel!" when a : > simple "[Jon]" should suffice. Get a life James. : I find it annoying to have to use my fingers to type, rather than : psychicly transmitting my thoughts directly to the Newsgroup. Life is : full of small inconveniences... : It's okay; I'm getting used to hostility. I'm personally not convinced : that the rulings contradict, but have it on the docket for the next Rules : Team Meeting. : Questions to me will always be escalated to the Rules Team, to cut down on : any doubt as to the validity of answers. I for one am pleased to see a presence on the net at long last. I am perfectly happy to type Hey Scalpel when I have a question. To be quite honest I would be willing to type: ptang, ptang, ptang, ptang, ptang, ptang, wibble cthulu if need be. Welcome to the group and I look forward to hearing more from you. Later, -- Adam Hattrell, Support, Cimio Ltd. ad...@cimio.co.uk

Jon Wilkie writes: >It's okay; I'm getting used to hostility. You'd better get used to it, you scum sucking excrement for brains maggot! It's your duty as a netrep to be assaulted by everybody with an opinion, and several people without opinions! So you'd better get used to it, or it will drive you insane, you festering malformed pus filled slug! PS I mean that in the nicest possible way. ;-) -- ________________ "Howdy, girls and boys ______ ___@^^^^\ / \ and little neuters!" / \ @ \_____/ David Schwartz \__________________________/ > (^^^^^\ _______ ___/ \---\ / \ da...@schwartz.manawatu.gen.nz / \_____________/ \__________________________________/

In article <56sqqk$e...@mimas.brunel.ac.uk>, adam@cliquot (Adam Hattrell) wrote: > To be quite > honest I would be willing to type: > ptang, ptang, ptang, ptang, ptang, ptang, wibble cthulu if need be. I'll answer anything with that in the subject line as well. [ quoted text not captured ]