[Icehouse] IGDC Winter 2008 is ready for announcement tomorrow!

[Jorge Arroyo]

Wow, not even an apology for your BIG mistake and accusations...

On 11/9/07, David Artman <david at davidartman.com> wrote:
>
> > From: "Jorge Arroyo" <trozo at makasoft.net>
> > Let me apologize: my example is not the best one because in your game
> the
> > stacking properties are used. It could be played with one set but would
> be
> > unconfortable...
>
> Really? I can't see how... it takes 23 pyramids, 8 more than are in a
> set.


Do I have to say this again? By using some other token for the public. It'd
be VERY unconfortable but it could be done... Furthermore, If I had only one
set, be sure that I'd do that to try the game if it was at all possible,
before buying a second set.

That's my main point about this argument, which you fail to counter. You
decide where the line is and when a game is "artificially" requiring a
second set. I say it's an arbitrary distinction, because almost any game
could be played with less pyramids.

> is what I posted: "Id vote for a XHOUSE type of restriction, specifically
> I
> > think 1HOUSE would be best, but I'd go with the 3HOUSE limit. Also, I
> think
> > more games that make creative use of the Martian Coasters are needed, so
> > those two restrictions are what I'd vote for...
> > --Maka<http://www.icehousegames.org/wiki/index.php?title=User:Maka
> >19:39,
> > 27 October 2007 (EDT)"
>
> Ah, OK, sorry. Didn't know you are "Maka". But... uh, you voted for
> (some form of) xHOUSE restriction, so...?


Yes, because that was the debate back then. This was before the 2HOUSE
restriction was specified. And with my vote, I supported a limit, which
implies "up to" a number of sets. So, with my vote I was supporting the same
views as I'm supporting now.


> > I'm sorry you have so very little patience, but that is not a reason to
> stop
> > discussing something...
>
> I think "discussion" ended about the third or fourth repetition of the
> reasons for the restriction.


A discussion ends when both parties agree it ends. If someone shuts their
ears and shouts "la la la I can't hear you" it doesn't mean it ended...


Further, I think I have shown a lot of patience, given how much time
> I've expended explaining this to one person (I wonder how much patience
> the list, in general, has for this continuing). *I'm* sorry you find my
> effort and the patience it required (and used up) to be "so very
> little."


My comment was just referring to your own sentence: "OK... I think I've
exhausted my arguments. (I know I've exhausted my patience.)"

It has nothing to do with what I think.

-Jorge
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: http://lists.looneylabs.com/pipermail/icehouse/attachments/20071109/f18372d4/attachment-0001.htm