Back to the main page

Mailing List Logs for ShadowRN

Message no. 1
From: jjvanp@*****.com (Jan Jaap van Poelgeest)
Subject: SR4 FAQ Part 2 [OT]
Date: Sat, 2 Apr 2005 02:14:56 -0800 (PST)
> > Only rarely does logic form
> > the opinion. Usually, a preconceived opinion forms
> the logic used to
> > justify it. You needn't look farther than any
> posting you'll see about
> > Terri Schiavo for countless examples.
>
> IMHO, the worst part about that is that I actually
> know who Terry
> Schiavo was, even though I live a quarter of the
> world away...

I had to look that up. But all that did was put a name
to a case I'd heard about already. Too bad I'm too
late with selling "Free Terry" tees on cafepress,
though I'd need a well-visited website to plug them in
the first place.

cheers,

Jan Jaap




__________________________________
Do you Yahoo!?
Yahoo! Mail - You care about security. So do we.
http://promotions.yahoo.com/new_mail
Message no. 2
From: jjvanp@*****.com (Jan Jaap van Poelgeest)
Subject: SR4 FAQ Part 2 [OT]
Date: Sat, 2 Apr 2005 02:20:25 -0800 (PST)
> the opinion. Usually, a preconceived opinion forms
> the logic used to
> justify it.

The opinion does not form the logic (and perhaps even
vice-versa). Discuss?

cheers,

Jan Jaap



__________________________________
Yahoo! Messenger
Show us what our next emoticon should look like. Join the fun.
http://www.advision.webevents.yahoo.com/emoticontest
Message no. 3
From: gurth@******.nl (Gurth)
Subject: SR4 FAQ Part 2 [OT]
Date: Sat, 02 Apr 2005 12:22:08 +0200
According to Jan Jaap van Poelgeest, on 02-04-2005 12:20 the word on the
street was...

> The opinion does not form the logic (and perhaps even
> vice-versa). Discuss?

Of course it does -- you already know what you think about a subject,
and then set up a logic to rationalize it. It would make more sense the
other way around, but I agree with Wordman here.

--
Gurth@******.nl - Stone Age: http://www.xs4all.nl/~gurth/index.html
Kemen (keemde, h gekeemd): het spelen van computerspelletjes
-> Possibly NAGEE Editor & ShadowRN GridSec * Triangle Virtuoso <-
-> The Plastic Warriors Site: http://plastic.dumpshock.com <-

GC3.12: GAT/! d- s:- !a>? C++(---) UL+ P(+) L++ E W--(++) N o? K w(--)
O V? PS+ PE@ Y PGP- t- 5++ X(+) R+++$ tv+(++) b++@ DI- D+ G+ e h! !r y?
Incubated into the First Church of the Sqooshy Ball, 21-05-1998
Message no. 4
From: jjvanp@*****.com (Jan Jaap van Poelgeest)
Subject: SR4 FAQ Part 2 [ot]
Date: Sat, 2 Apr 2005 05:52:25 -0800 (PST)
--- MC23 <mc23@**********.com> wrote:
> Aren't we being snippy. I passed on becoming a
> freelancer years ago
> because I want to enjoy the game, not have it become
> a job. Just FYI
> smartass.

My backside does not possess intelligence, you are
welcome to come and verify this at your own expense.
Failing that I demand you rescind your statement to
this extent, as you cannot prove that it is clever and
would therefore be trolling me with an
insult/misrepresentation of the truth.
Your passing on an offer to work in the game industry
fails to impress me altogether, for if you hadn't you
might've actually been content and we would not be
having this discussion.

> > Fanpro is out to make money. FASA went bust (for a
> > variety of reasons, I'm sure).
>
> FASA regained solvency and then decided to close its
> doors. Shadowrun
> wasn't one of their properties that was losing them
> money. I do like to
> keep up with how the industry works.

And I generally don't, so I go by what I hear and/or
remember. The fact of the matter is that FASA went
bust (i.e.: FASA corporation is no longer a legal
entity). I could be wrong here, but I'm sure you can
correct me on the matter if I am.

[snip industry insights]

> But you don't want to even address that point. In
> fact you keep going
> off on some different rain of thought just to have
> an argument with me

So do you, apparently. Or in your words: "Why can't
you think exactly like me!" Thoughts don't come in
trains, incidentally, they prefer walking to a bus
stop, talking to those present there, then smoking a
cigarette and getting a cab instead.

> I guess. You never bothered to address my concerns
> and just keep going
> into some bizarre unrelated defense of the new
> addition or just
> attacking my statements. Are You Trolling???

Were I trolling, I would be far less respectful of you
and your capacity to metabolise. What exactly are your
concerns? I do try to address them, but you don't seem
to consider my address of them to be sufficiently
relevant.

> Hell, right now you are a big enough reason for me
> not to give the new
> addition a chance.

I'm glad I am a reason for you to do anything. Perhaps
one day I will be sufficient reason for you to stop
whinging about past matters and inevitable things in
the future.

cheers,

Jan Jaap



__________________________________
Do you Yahoo!?
Read only the mail you want - Yahoo! Mail SpamGuard.
http://promotions.yahoo.com/new_mail
Message no. 5
From: jjvanp@*****.com (Jan Jaap van Poelgeest)
Subject: SR4 FAQ Part 2 [OT]
Date: Sat, 2 Apr 2005 06:04:18 -0800 (PST)
--- Gurth <gurth@******.nl> wrote:
> According to Jan Jaap van Poelgeest, on 02-04-2005
> 12:20 the word on the
> street was...
>
> > The opinion does not form the logic (and perhaps
> even
> > vice-versa). Discuss?
>
> Of course it does -- you already know what you think
> about a subject,
> and then set up a logic to rationalize it. It would
> make more sense the
> other way around, but I agree with Wordman here.
>

I suggest you (and Wordman, seeing as how he agrees)
elaborate on this point in a private e-mail to me.
Make it as long as you possibly can. I might have some
use for a bit of essay material :-D. To be honest I
don't think you can prove this point, nor can you make
it any more true by being in a majority by claiming to
collude/concur with Wordman.

I'll get your answer published under your name if its
good 8-9.

Many apologies for clogging up this list with such
utterly unrelated matters, but I could not muster the
guts to let this answer go unanswered.

cheers,

Jan Jaap



__________________________________
Do you Yahoo!?
Yahoo! Personals - Better first dates. More second dates.
http://personals.yahoo.com
Message no. 6
From: gurth@******.nl (Gurth)
Subject: SR4 FAQ Part 2 [ot]
Date: Sat, 02 Apr 2005 19:13:45 +0200
According to Jan Jaap van Poelgeest, on 02-04-2005 15:52 the word on the
street was...

>>I do like to keep up with how the industry works.
>
> And I generally don't, so I go by what I hear and/or
> remember. The fact of the matter is that FASA went
> bust (i.e.: FASA corporation is no longer a legal
> entity). I could be wrong here, but I'm sure you can
> correct me on the matter if I am.

"Went bust" implies being forced to cease trading, which FASA did not do
to the best of my knowledge. They certainly still existed several years
after "closing" their doors, which I deduce from the fact that, sometime
early last year IIRC, I received a check for work I did for them about
five years ago.

--
Gurth@******.nl - Stone Age: http://www.xs4all.nl/~gurth/index.html
Kemen (keemde, h gekeemd): het spelen van computerspelletjes
-> Possibly NAGEE Editor & ShadowRN GridSec * Triangle Virtuoso <-
-> The Plastic Warriors Site: http://plastic.dumpshock.com <-

GC3.12: GAT/! d- s:- !a>? C++(---) UL+ P(+) L++ E W--(++) N o? K w(--)
O V? PS+ PE@ Y PGP- t- 5++ X(+) R+++$ tv+(++) b++@ DI- D+ G+ e h! !r y?
Incubated into the First Church of the Sqooshy Ball, 21-05-1998
Message no. 7
From: adamj@*********.com (Adam Jury)
Subject: SR4 FAQ Part 2 [ot]
Date: Sat, 02 Apr 2005 10:15:31 -0700
On 2-Apr-05, at 10:13 AM, Gurth wrote:

> "Went bust" implies being forced to cease trading, which FASA did not
> do to the best of my knowledge. They certainly still existed several
> years after "closing" their doors, which I deduce from the fact that,
> sometime early last year IIRC, I received a check for work I did for
> them about five years ago.

They still exist today, as they own several pieces of IP [such as
Earthdawn, which was sold to WizKids and then sold back to FASA], and,
I assume, other assets and liabilities.

Adam

Further Reading

If you enjoyed reading about SR4 FAQ Part 2 [OT], you may also be interested in:

Disclaimer

These messages were posted a long time ago on a mailing list far, far away. The copyright to their contents probably lies with the original authors of the individual messages, but since they were published in an electronic forum that anyone could subscribe to, and the logs were available to subscribers and most likely non-subscribers as well, it's felt that re-publishing them here is a kind of public service.

Thwap!