From owner-traveller@Phaser.ShowCase.MPGN.COM  Tue Dec 17 23:01:10 1996
Return-Path: owner-traveller@Phaser.ShowCase.MPGN.COM
Received: from phaser.Showcase.MPGN.COM (Phaser.Showcase.MPGN.COM [206.66.87.5]) by emin04.mail.aol.com (8.6.12/8.6.12) with ESMTP id XAA05352; Tue, 17 Dec 1996 23:00:54 -0500
Received: from localhost (daemon@localhost) by phaser.Showcase.MPGN.COM (8.7.3/8.6.9) with SMTP id XAA03132; Tue, 17 Dec 1996 23:01:40 -0500
Received: by phaser.Showcase.MPGN.COM (bulk_mailer v1.5); Tue, 17 Dec 1996 23:01:12 -0500
Received: (from majordom@localhost) by phaser.Showcase.MPGN.COM (8.7.3/8.6.9) id XAA03062 for traveller-digest-outgoing; Tue, 17 Dec 1996 23:01:11 -0500
Date: Tue, 17 Dec 1996 23:01:11 -0500
Message-Id: <199612180401.XAA03062@phaser.Showcase.MPGN.COM>
From: owner-traveller-digest@mpgn.com (Traveller-digest)
To: traveller-digest@Phaser.ShowCase.MPGN.COM
Subject: Traveller-digest V1996 #767
Reply-To: traveller@mpgn.com
Sender: owner-traveller-digest@mpgn.com


Traveller-digest     Tuesday, December 17 1996     Volume 1996 : Number 767



(R)1996. Traveller is a registered trademark of FarFuture Enterprises.
All rights reserved.

The following topics are covered in this digest:

Re: Fleet Repair Ship
RE: Is T4 Innovative? 
[Fwd: FW: "Roger Young" conversion modules]
Re: But It Doesn't Look The Way _I_ Want It...
Re: But It Doesn't Look The Way _I_ Want It...
Re: T4 the Best?
Re: Starships
Re: But It Doesn't Look The Way _I_ Want It...
RE: Is T4 Innovative? 
RE: But It Doesn't Look The Way _I_ Want It...
Re: But It Doesn't Look The Way _I_ Want It...
Re: Is T4 innovative?
RE: Is T4 Innovative? 
Re: Traveller-digest V1996 #763
RE: But It Doesn't Look The Way _I_ Want It...

----------------------------------------------------------------------

Date: Wed, 18 Dec 1996 00:27:35 -0800
From: Neil Simpson <catwalk@ibm.net>
Subject: Re: Fleet Repair Ship

Douglas E. Berry wrote:
> 
> At 01:53 PM 12/16/96 -0600, Pete wrote:
> >
> >On Sun, 15 Dec 1996, Dave Strebe wrote:
> >
> >> Submitted for your perusal and comments.
> >>
> >> "Roger Young" Class Fleet Maintanence Ship
> 
> >Don't you think the name"Roger Young" should be reserved for a troop
> >transport with assault landing capabilities?  Drop tubes perhaps?
> >Carrying a Company with a captain named Rico maybe?
> 
> Actually, I'm designing a battalion sized drop ship to be named the "Matthew
> Ridgeway".  Following soon after will be the "Kenneth McCoy" Marine patrol
> ship, and the "Richard Marcinko" Special Operations Lander.
> 
> A cookie to anyone who can ID all three names.. hint: one is fictional.
> 
> +----------------------------------------------+
> | Douglas E. Berry          dberry@hooked.net  |
> |     Professional Driver - Traveller Guru     |
> |        http://www.hooked.net/~dberry/        |
> |**********************************************|
> | "Life's a journey, not a destination."       |
> |                                   -Aerosmith |
> +----------------------------------------------+Richard Marchinko founded SEAL Team Six,the other two I`m not sure about.    
                                       Neil

------------------------------

Date: Tue, 17 Dec 1996 17:45:31 -0700
From: "David J. Golden" <goldendj@usa.net>
Subject: RE: Is T4 Innovative? 

At 02:40 am 12/17/96 +0000, Kenneth Bearden wrote:
>On 16 Dec 96 at 23:36, K.C. Komosky wrote:

        /* snippage */

>> begin 600 WINMAIL.DAT
>> M>)\^(B0&`0:0" `$```````!``$``0>0!@`(````Y 0```````#H``$(@ <`

        Folks, I've become resigned to these WINMAIL.DAT files filling up my
mail folder. But could we PLEASE not quote them?
- --________________________________________________________________
   Dave Golden                           PGP Public Key available 
   goldendj@usa.net     http://www.usa.net/~goldendj/default.html

 "He that would make his own liberty secure must guard even his
  enemy from oppression; for if he violates this duty, he establishes
  a precedent that will reach to himself" -- Thomas Paine

------------------------------

Date: Tue, 17 Dec 1996 17:08:23 -0800
From: Dave Strebe <strebe@intergate.bc.ca>
Subject: [Fwd: FW: "Roger Young" conversion modules]

Received: from gagarin.electric.net (gagarin.electric.net [199.175.137.252]) by diablo.intergate.bc.ca (8.8.3/8.6.9) with SMTP id QAA03890 for <strebe@intergate.bc.ca>; Tue, 17 Dec 1996 16:30:33 -0800 (PST)
Received: (qmail 7429 invoked from network); 17 Dec 1996 23:30:10 -0000
Received: from mail1.electric.net (root@199.175.137.253)
  by gagarin.electric.net with SMTP; 17 Dec 1996 23:30:10 -0000
Received: from armstrong.electric.net (armstrong.electric.net [199.175.137.11]) by mail1.electric.net (8.7.6/8.7.6) with SMTP id PAA30977 for <strebe@intergate.bc.ca>; Tue, 17 Dec 1996 15:32:33 -0800
Received: by armstrong.electric.net with SMTP (Microsoft Exchange Server Internet Mail Connector Version 4.0.994.63)
	id <01BBEC2F.0E428880@armstrong.electric.net>; Tue, 17 Dec 1996 15:29:12 -0800
Message-ID: <c=CA%a=ELECTRIC%p=EMC%l=ELECTRIC/EXCH/0001ED20@armstrong.electric.net>
From: DAVE STREBE <ENYADS@enmanyrd.city.vancouver.bc.ca>
To: "'Dave,home'" <strebe@intergate.bc.ca>
Subject: FW: "Roger Young" conversion modules
Date: Tue, 17 Dec 1996 13:50:00 -0800
X-Mailer:  Microsoft Exchange Server Internet Mail Connector Version 4.0.994.63
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit


 --------

All the ships in the "Roger Young" class are capable of been converted
to troop/assault carriers by using 100 ton modules which can be carried
in the cargo bay. The ship's surplus power can be transferred to the
modules
for heating,lighting and life support. The ship's weaponry can be used
from orbit
for Bombardment or as "on call" close support fire as required.

100 ton troop module(carries 36 infantry) consists of
15 bunks
3 small staterooms(2 Officer's or 2 N.C.O.'s each)
1 Armory
1 common area
1 Gym

100 ton cutter module holding
3-30 ton cutter modules(passenger modules or ATV. modules for use by the
ship's
50 ton cutters. These have to be loaded onto the cutters from outside)

When the modules are secured in the cargo hold they all interrconnect
with each other
for easy access by either the infantry teams or the ATV. crews.

Dave

------------------------------

Date: Tue, 17 Dec 1996 19:12:33 -0600
From: "J.D. Burdick" <twolf@tfs.net>
Subject: Re: But It Doesn't Look The Way _I_ Want It...

At 06:32 PM 12/17/96 +0000, you wrote:

>Some people say that we on the TML are the customers and thus should be the
>final arbiters in any such case. BUT THERE ARE ONLY 500-ODD TML members,
>while IG say they have SOLD 10,000-ODD COPIES OF THE RULES. Anyone notice a
>discrepancy here? We're not the sole 'keepers' of Traveller, we're just the
>lucky few who (mostly) have been playing since the Black Book days and
>happen to be able to afford a computer, modem and Internet connection.
>
>So, sure we can _help_ guide IG, but people shouldn't take such a
>self-righteous attitude about the whole subject.
>
Good show, Andy.  Get back up on the box anytime.  I agree 100%.

JD
Twolf

------------------------------

Date: Tue, 17 Dec 1996 20:20:24 +0000
From: "Kenneth Bearden" <dreamer@brokersys.com>
Subject: Re: But It Doesn't Look The Way _I_ Want It...

On 17 Dec 96 at 19:12, J.D. Burdick wrote:


>So, sure we can _help_ guide IG, but people shouldn't take such a
>self-righteous attitude about the whole subject.
>
Good show, Andy.  Get back up on the box anytime.  I agree 100%.

I disagree 100%.  My vote (and all of yours count).  I don't think 
the people should be disuaded from stating their opinions in this 
manner.

If I like something, I'll post it.  If I don't like something, then 
I'll post that too.  Any comments that I make, as a final consumer of 
the T4 products, is important.

I always disregard those posts that say, "Well, IG could have done it 
that way but it would cost too much."  

I think that is crap.  If there is a market for it, and the product 
meets the needs of the market, people will buy it.

All of our opinions count.

Kenneth.

------------------------------

Date: Tue, 17 Dec 1996 20:20:23 +0000
From: "Kenneth Bearden" <dreamer@brokersys.com>
Subject: Re: T4 the Best?

On 17 Dec 96 at 10:38, William F. Hostman wrote:

> Once again, Kenneth and I are on opposite ends of the spectrum.

Ahh, it can't be that bad, can it?

I really liked MT, but I think T4 is a tincy wincy bit better.  Heck, 
it's going back to its roots!


> The more I see of T4, the more I think Marc Miller hath made a HUGE mistake
> by not going with DGP for T4, or at least someone who was familiar with
> traveller. (No offense to the guys at IG, but y'all just ain't got
> traveller in your SOULS.)

LOL

Probably.  DGP is by far the best producer of Traveller products that 
I've ever seen.

And, to produce quality Traveller material, it should be more than a 
job.  

I'd love it if I did that for a living.


> What's more, I think that T4 has been Totally integrety-challenged by IG's
> production schedule, editing, and such.

Yes, I'm getting worried.

See ya, William.

Kenneth.

------------------------------

Date: Tue, 17 Dec 1996 20:20:24 +0000
From: "Kenneth Bearden" <dreamer@brokersys.com>
Subject: Re: Starships

David sent me this in private e-mail, and he said he didn't mind if I 
posted it.

...just another opinion on the Starships ship pictures.

(say that three times real fast)

Kenneth.


On 15 Dec 96 at 15:48, David J. Golden wrote:

At 12:45 pm 12/14/96 +0000, you wrote:
>Let's do a little comparison here.
>
>Here is a list of the pictures of ships in Starships.  Answer yes or 
>no if you think the pic is Travelleresque.
>
>Let's get an idea of (A) what people think is Travelleresque, and (B) 
>which of Foss' art people think fits Traveller.
>
>I'll start.
>
>1) Cover pic:  Yes.  Acceptible for Traveller, but that ship, or 
>whatever it is sure is long and borders on the non-Travelleresque.

        Disagree. Garbage.

>2)  Rescue Ball:  Yes.  Yeah, I can accept that one.

        Blech.

>3)  Launch:  No.  But, I could be persuaded on this one.

        Yuck.

>4)  Ship's Boat:  Yes.  I actually like this one.

        Naah.

>5)  Slow Boat:  Yes.  It's OK.  I consider it on the border.

        Agree--barely acceptable.

>6)  Pinnace:  No.  Dumb looking.

        Ptui!

>7)  Slow Pinnace:  No.  Again, dumb looking.

        Barf.

>8)  Modular Cutter:  Yes.  I can accept that one.

        Not bad.

>9)  Shuttle:  No.  Dumb, again.

        Agree.

>10)  Gig:  No.  Absolutely not.  Crappy drawing.

        Marginal.

>11)  Scout/Courier:  No.  Hmm.  It's not so much that I don't like 
>       the design, because I think it would be good for some type of science 
>        or industrial use, but it is just not a scout looking ship.  If it's 
>       function were more appropriate, then I may change my opinion to yes.

        Puke. Anybody want to explain why the drawing bears no relation to
the deckplans (which appear to be the original Traders & Gunboats plans,
screwed up)?

>12)  Luxury Liner:  No.  If I were Lewis Roberts, I'd be upset that 
>        they drew my ship like that.

        Puh-lease. Let's ditch the retro-50's garbage already, please?

>13)  Free Trader:  No.  Again, what a crappy design.

        Hurl.

>14)  Far Trader:  No.  Poor Joe Walsh.  I bet he cried when he saw 
>        that his ship looked like a shoe.

        ROTFL! I agree, give this one the boot...

>15)  Secure Trader:  No.  If this was a Buck Rodgers game, then 
>       maybe.

        Vomit.

>16)  Subdized Merchant:  No.  I expect to see 1930s sparks flying out 
>        of the back of this one.  Flash Gordon all the way.

        Doesn't gag me as much as some of the others.

>17)  Subdized Liner:  Yes.  It's OK.  I can accept it.

        OK.

>18)  Yacht:  No.  It's a 1955 T-Bird!

        (sounds of hairball being hacked up.)

>19)  Patrol Cruiser:  No.  This reminds me of third grade, when the 
>        art teacher drew a line on a piece of paper, and you were supposed to 
>        draw something from it.

        This one's decent.

>20)  Mercenary Cruiser:  No.  I hope the mercs in that ship are real 
>        bad asses, because as soon as they land, they're going to be laughed 
>        off the planet.

        Hjork.

>21)  Laboratory Ship:  No.  What's the deal with the circular fins?

        Eew.

>22)  Safari Ship:  No.  Looks like my radar detector.

        Crash it, quick.

>23)  Corsair:  No.  Ever see The Spy Who Loved Me?

        Can't tell from this angle; possibly decent.

>24)  Large Armed Freighter:  No.  If it wasn't so curvey, I'd count 
>       it as a yes.

        I'd like to see the front angle--this one also has potential.

>25)  Military Landing Ship Infantry:  No.  I want to like it, but I 
>        just can't.

        I don't even WANT to like it.

>26)  Military Frontier Cruiser:  No.  Just don't like it.

        Yawn.

>27)  Military Destroyer:  No.  Just don't like this one either.

        Junk.

>28)  Light Fighter:  Yes.  Hey!  One I really like!

        Two thumbs up on this ONE ship! But ditch the deckplan.

>29)  Medium Fighter:  No.  Looks like the close up of the head of a 
>        bug.

        Quick! Get the Raid out!

>30)  Heavy Fighter:  No.  What's the deal with the smiley face 
>         sticking its tongue out in the rear of the craft?

        Another candidate for the bugswatter.

>31)  Missile Bomber:  No.  This is the epitome of the 50's retro 
>        style that Foss is being accused of by members of the TML.  Looks 
>        like a soap box racer.

        Please! Let's not insult the honorable art of soap box racing!

>32)  Pg. 81 Foss Plate:  No.  What the heck is that?

        Wasted ink, paper and money.

>33)  Pg. 82 Foss Plate:  No.  Is this D&D or Traveller?

        More waste.

>34)  Pg.  83 Foss Plate:  Yes.  Yeah, cool!  It looks like one of my 
>         campaigns.  I DO like this one!

        Reminds me of a stupid movie called "Dark Star" that had the hero
surfing into the atmosphere on a piece of debris. OK as a generic filler.

>35)  Pg. 84 Foss Plate:  No.  Get rid of it.

        Marginal.

>36)  Pg. 85 Foss Plate:  Yes.  Almost a no, but I can accept it.

        What the dickens is it? Sink it fast.

>37)  Pg. 86 Foss Plate:  No.  It looks more like a giant robot rather 
>        than a mech.

        If I'da wanted to play robotech I'da bought robotech.

>38)  Pg. 87 Foss Plate:  No.  Reminds me of futuristic Jules Verne.

        He really needs to see a professional about this fixation with
grappling appendages.

>39)  Pg. 88 Foss Plate:  No.  If the ship looked like it would fly, I 
>        would have said yes.

        Ho, hum.

>40)  Pg.  89 Foss Plate:  No.  If the ship were worth a damn, I would 
>        have said that this is a cool picture of a ship coming out of jump 
>        space.

        Good summation

>41)  Pg.  90 Foss Plate:  No.  Is this a virtural reality test for 
>        Imperial Marines?

        Looks like a B5 shadow vessel engaged in certain ... indiscretions
... with a pair of giant hand vacuums. Now where's that Mimbari warfleet
when you need it?

>42)  Pg.  91 Foss Plate:  No.  Like the idea, hate the ship.

        Both ok.

>43)  Pg.  92 Foss Plate:  No.  More crap.

        So THAT'S what I've been smelling ...

>45)  Back Cover:  Yes.  I like this one.

        Ehhh ... no.

>So, what are all of your opinions?

        There you have them.
- --________________________________________________________________
   Dave Golden                           PGP Public Key available 
   goldendj@usa.net     http://www.usa.net/~goldendj/default.html

 "He that would make his own liberty secure must guard even his
  enemy from oppression; for if he violates this duty, he establishes
  a precedent that will reach to himself" -- Thomas Paine

------------------------------

Date: Tue, 17 Dec 1996 20:20:25 +0000
From: "Kenneth Bearden" <dreamer@brokersys.com>
Subject: Re: But It Doesn't Look The Way _I_ Want It...

On 17 Dec 96 at 18:32, Andy Lilly wrote:

 CAN ANYONE RAISE A _SENSIBLE_ ARGUMENT AS TO WHY
> THIS SHOULDN'T BE THE CASE?

I don't have a problem with the ships in M0 looking different than 
M1100.  I do have a problem with two things though.  

1)  I think that the Foss ships are not what I want the M0 ships to 
look like.  

2)  I think that the ships in M0 should be somewhat different from 
the M1100 ships--not just the picture.  Slapping a new picture with 
the same old ship stats bothers me.


Kenneth.

------------------------------

Date: Tue, 17 Dec 1996 21:13:14 -0600
From: "K.C. Komosky" <kc@mb.sympatico.ca>
Subject: RE: Is T4 Innovative? 

>On 16 Dec 96 at 23:36, K.C. Komosky wrote:

        /* snippage */

>> begin 600 WINMAIL.DAT
>> M>)\^(B0&`0:0" `$```````!``$``0>0!@`(````Y 0```````#H``$(@ <`

        Folks, I've become resigned to these WINMAIL.DAT files filling up my
mail folder. But could we PLEASE not quote them?

Hey, I've almost completely solved the problem. Give me some credit. Some of my posts do sneak the winmail.dat through, though.

K.C. Komosky
kc@mb.sympatico.ca

------------------------------

Date: Tue, 17 Dec 1996 21:18:40 -0600
From: "K.C. Komosky" <kc@mb.sympatico.ca>
Subject: RE: But It Doesn't Look The Way _I_ Want It...

>>>So, sure we can _help_ guide IG, but people shouldn't take such a
>>>self-righteous attitude about the whole subject.
>>>
>>Good show, Andy.  Get back up on the box anytime.  I agree 100%.

>I disagree 100%.  My vote (and all of yours count).  I don't think
>the people should be disuaded from stating their opinions in this
>manner.
>
>If I like something, I'll post it.  If I don't like something, then
>I'll post that too.  Any comments that I make, as a final consumer of
>the T4 products, is important.

	Absolutely. I hope that IG et al does consider any and all advice that may 
be garnered from the TML. T4 isn't going to sell very well if the die-hards 
(namely all of us) don't even like some aspect of it, since we all almost 
by definition will buy anything with the Traveller logo on it.

>I always disregard those posts that say, "Well, IG could have done it
>that way but it would cost too much."
>
>I think that is crap.  If there is a market for it, and the product
>meets the needs of the market, people will buy it.

Okay, I was with you up to here Kenneth. If something would cost IG a lot 
of money, that equals higher retail prices, which WILL effect wether there 
is a market for it.

So before we all go spouting off our next 'brilliant idea' (gold-plated 
collectors editions of T4! yah!), considering the cost of it is certainly 
important.

K.C. Komosky
kc@mb.sympatico.ca

------------------------------

Date: Tue, 17 Dec 1996 21:32:29 -0500
From: whitman@pensys.com (Ken Whitman)
Subject: Re: But It Doesn't Look The Way _I_ Want It...

>On 17 Dec 96 at 19:12, J.D. Burdick wrote:
>
>
>>So, sure we can _help_ guide IG, but people shouldn't take such a
>>self-righteous attitude about the whole subject.
>>
>Good show, Andy.  Get back up on the box anytime.  I agree 100%.
>
>I disagree 100%.  My vote (and all of yours count).  I don't think
>the people should be disuaded from stating their opinions in this
>manner.
>
>If I like something, I'll post it.  If I don't like something, then
>I'll post that too.  Any comments that I make, as a final consumer of
>the T4 products, is important.
>
>I always disregard those posts that say, "Well, IG could have done it
>that way but it would cost too much."
>
>I think that is crap.  If there is a market for it, and the product
>meets the needs of the market, people will buy it.
>
>All of our opinions count.
>
>Kenneth.


Well Ken,

I understand your point.  However, few of our fans either choose not to or
do not know how to use... Tact.  It is alright to say you are "disapointed"
in certain aspects, however, T4 is bringing in new customers to this list
everyday, and when they get on this mailing list all they here is everyones
crap.

It is this kind of negative talk that will distroy the thing we all love,
Traveller.  So when you deside to not like something, do Traveller a favor
and use some Tact.  Point out the good qualities as well as the bad.  And
if there we no good qualities then take the advice that was given to
Thumper....

...If you can's say anything nice, dont say anything at all.

How you react may deternine the future of this game, and if you dont care
about this game, then maybe you should find a game that means alot to you
and find that maining list.

Thanx for your time,

Ken Whitman

------------------------------

Date: Tue, 17 Dec 1996 22:37:41 -0500
From: "Harold D. Hale" <hdhale@siscom.net>
Subject: Re: Is T4 innovative?

Kenneth Bearden" <dreamer@brokersys.com>

> Evidence: despite its technical flaws, I like T4 even *better* 
> than the previous three incarnations. 

   No, that would be opinion in a court of law.

>T4 is definitely the best incarnation of Traveller yet.

   The evidence simply does not support this statement.  In fact, the
evidence submitted thus far (some of the most incriminating by IG
itself) supports *just the opposite conclusion*.

   This is not to say that T4 is the worst incarnation of Traveller
ever.  Anyone who suffered through the first printing of MegaTraveller
knows that its record for pain and suffering inflicted upon the masses
will be hard to top.  It is also still possible that five years from now
we will all be here having a discussion about the early days of T4 and
someone will say, "remember all the problems Imperium Games had getting
T4 started? Man, it's a wonder they survived, but look what they've
accomplished since."  

   I'm sure that Imperium Games appreciates your enthusiasm.  I wish I
could share it.

Regards,

Harold

------------------------------

Date: Tue, 17 Dec 1996 20:44:54 -0700
From: "David J. Golden" <goldendj@usa.net>
Subject: RE: Is T4 Innovative? 

At 09:13 pm 12/17/96 -0600, you wrote:
>>On 16 Dec 96 at 23:36, K.C. Komosky wrote:
>
>        /* snippage */
>
>>> begin 600 WINMAIL.DAT
>>> M>)\^(B0&`0:0" `$```````!``$``0>0!@`(````Y 0```````#H``$(@ <`
>
>        Folks, I've become resigned to these WINMAIL.DAT files filling up my
>mail folder. But could we PLEASE not quote them?
>
>Hey, I've almost completely solved the problem. Give me some credit. Some
of my posts do sneak the winmail.dat through, though.

        Oh, I've gotten used to that. But if somebody's replying to your
message, there's really no need for them to _quote_ the WINMAIL.DAT. That's
what I was getting at.
- --________________________________________________________________
   Dave Golden                           PGP Public Key available 
   goldendj@usa.net     http://www.usa.net/~goldendj/default.html

 "He that would make his own liberty secure must guard even his
  enemy from oppression; for if he violates this duty, he establishes
  a precedent that will reach to himself" -- Thomas Paine

------------------------------

Date: Wed, 18 Dec 1996 03:43:07 GMT
From: John H Bogan Jr <jbogan@pipeline.com>
Subject: Re: Traveller-digest V1996 #763

At 04:37 PM 12/17/96 JST, you wrote:
>Please, tell me,
>How Can I UNSUBSCRIBE from this Mailing List ?
>
Try sending a message to majordomo@mpgn.com

the body of the message should read:

unsubscribe traveller-digest


Jbogan@pipeline.com

------------------------------

Date: Tue, 17 Dec 1996 21:58:21 -0600
From: "K.C. Komosky" <kc@mb.sympatico.ca>
Subject: RE: But It Doesn't Look The Way _I_ Want It...

Okay, before I start this, I have to say I haven't said a single negative 
word about T4 (although there is minor stuff I could say) or Starships 
(since I still haven't seen it).

Ken Whitman wrote:

>It is this kind of negative talk that will distroy the thing we all love,
>Traveller.  So when you deside to not like something, do Traveller a favor
>and use some Tact.  Point out the good qualities as well as the bad.  And
>if there we no good qualities then take the advice that was given to
>Thumper....
>

Hey, this is a game, a product, not a person. We're not going to hurt 
anyones feelings. I really don't think we need to dance around this issue. 
If I fell something is 'crap', then I sure as hell am going to point that 
out! I'll point out the good qualities if and only if its relevent.

>..If you can's say anything nice, dont say anything at all.
>

Give me a break! You don't want to see any negaive comments? Well, while I 
wish I could love every single Traveller product in existance, I don't.

>How you react may deternine the future of this game, and if you dont care
>about this game, then maybe you should find a game that means alot to you
>and find that maining list.

Are we supposed to all be good-little sales-drones for IG? This is not 
rec.games.traveller.advocacy, for petes sake! Its a meeting of minds of 
Traveller fanatics. Unless IG wants to hire me on as a consultant, I'm 
going to say and write whatever I think - damn the consequences (well, 
short of anything liberlous, or whatever). If IG prints a crappy book, is 
it my fault for pointing that out?

As to finding a new game, don't you get it? Anyone who is slagging 
Starships (or whatever) is doing it BECAUSE they love the game of 
Traveller. If someone didn't care about it, they wouldn't be sending in 
long e-mails to TML. They'd just quietly disappear, never to be heard from 
again.

As a hard-core right-wing person (politically speaking), I firmly believe 
in the principle of "tough love".  Doing the nicest, soft-hearted thing is 
quite often not the best in the long run. If IG prints an awful T4 book, 
saying negative comments may well hurt some sales in the short term, but if 
the comments and sentiments are taken to heart by IG, then the end result 
will be improved sales because of a better product.

I will say that as lovers of the Traveller franchise, it may be more 
helpful to point out specific ways for things to improve, or specifics on 
what is missing rather than just "its shit!". But as to scrambling around 
trying to point out the "good qualities" of a product we hate, thats not 
going to achieve anything.

K.C. Komosky
kc@mb.sympatico.ca

p.s. I still haven't said a single negative word about T4 - I'm merely 
defending people's right and obligation to do so.

------------------------------

End of Traveller-digest V1996 #767
**********************************

To unsubscribe to Traveller-Digest, send the command:

unsubscribe traveller-digest

in the body of a message to "traveller-request@MPGN.COM".  If you want
to subscribe something other than the account the mail is coming from,
such as a local redistribution list, then append that address to the
"subscribe" command; for example, to subscribe "local-traveller":

subscribe traveller-digest local-traveller@your.domain.net

A non-digest (direct mail) version of this list is also available; to
subscribe to that instead, replace all instances of "traveller-digest"
in the commands above with "traveller".
