"Repique Rules Publishes Zouave!" Topic

Ok, just joined, thanks. Do you have conversions to other figure scales in your rules? I have an extensive 28mm Maximilian Intervention collection (never did get around to painting up the Belgian and Austrian legions, though!) and have always enjoyed the period. I'm always open to rules that are playable, fun and at least somewhat historically realistic -- might even stir me to finally finish that Mexican town that's been in the "half completed" stage for the last couple of years!

"…I think it would also be helpful to people if you provided a battle/scenario"

I think is a great idea. If it is a period not typically covered by existing rules, or a battle not typically played, or one that is played but at a different level of granularity, I think, to follow Bob's idea:

"… I thought advertising announcements were to tweak interest in a product…"

it would make sense for him to follow his own advice – which he can easily do without providing the actual scenario in detail – such as:

(paraphrasing what he might have provided)
"One of my favorites is the third scenario, the 2nd Battle of Durango Flats from 1867 matching the wits of Gen. Henry Plumbagger vs the assaulting force of Generalissimo Mataxa. It is a classic with the one side having a smaller number of well trained units dug in defensively and with artillery support against the other with a far greater number of troops, greater mobility, but who do not have the luxury of a long battle – they must break the opposition within 10 turns to match what their historic counterparts tried and barely failed to do. Can you do better?"

or

The 5th scenario is a "matched pairs" affair – uncommon in warfare where the skills, positions, and make up of each force is nearly identical. Feint and counter feint, the key to victory is knowing when and where to commit the reserves.

Seems like that sort of info is just the sort of thing to get folks digging into their history references to get pumped up for when the rules actually do hit the streets.

JJ

Oh um I'll pass on them….I still use Sword and The Flame.

Hey kyoteblue -- have you ever tried the Mexico variant?? How does it play?

It plays just fine!! I did a Major Dundee take off!!

I see that Bob Jones lacks the sand to address my posts here, but does so on his web page. Please allow me to respond:

"But there is a darker side to the hobby, too, and no published designer can escape it-the lonely people seeking some sort of approval who offer exaggerated complaints, demands for attention, and almost stalker-like behavior on the boards."

I don't see that I've made any of those.

"as one character on the "Repique publishes Zoauave" thread, who took it upon himself to offer advice on advertising, PR, game publication, customer relations, expert playtesting skills and interpersonal relations, which is fine-until you ask the question-who are you to be offering advice????"

Let me ask you and everyone here – what of the advice I've offered is bad advice? As for who I am, most folks here know of me and if you'd bother to read your own thread, you'll see that I indicated my willingness to respond to anyone regarding my "street cred" regarding advice, and gave them my email address in case they can't PM me. Not as though I'm hiding anything from them by welcoming the inquiry.

However, good advice, regardless of who I am and what I do is still good advice, no? What bad advice have I given?

"Interpersonal skills? Well, if obsessing about other people's character and approaches to the wargame biz( such as it is) is an interpersonal skill, rather than what some people might call it, I guess you might give him that."

Offering advice is hardly obsessing. As for interpersonal skills, your hiding behind your website rather than addressing the issue here would seem to indicate a lack of same on your part. If you really want to get into interpersonal skills I'll be happy on the Fez to introduce folks to just how "interpersonal" you are. Again, I have nothing to hide and more than welcome their inquiry. Can you say the same?

" Or have we come to a point in the age of the internet where people are not only entitled to their own facts, but to have their untested opinions called expertise?"

I'd be curious what "own facts" and "untested opinions" you refer.

I stand behind the recommendations and suggestions I've made – again – what is wrong with any of them?

I stand behind my discussion about customer care and development of a customer base. If you think insulting prospective customers is a better road to success than the examples I've laid out, I'd be curious as to why you think that way.

I'm here if you have the sand to discuss – always have been.

Or you can continue to show what a stand-up guy you are and just hide on your blog and post you comments in a forum where I cannot respond.

JJ

JJ, give it a rest. You're an , and . My friends know quite well the sort of nonsense you have been posting on the Fez and sending in private notes to people I know. Even some people on the Fez are puzzled by your behavior.

I sincerely believe . I have not posted on the Fez but once in 3 1/2 months. I have ignored your strange behaviors and chosen not to reply, and now you send me personal emails, and post the last crap, just to get me to respond.

So, I will. I have never hit the Alarm button – not once in 10 years, but I am going to do it immediately after I finish this note. My complaint to Bill is a simple one – does a member of this forum have the right not to be pestered with private emails, slandered with all sorts of exaggerated accusations, and continually followed about the internet by someone with "issues"?

I'm not talking about the nonsense on the FEZ where wider latitudes are shown, but here on the general forums and in our private emails, and to friends that are aghast with this man's behavior.

The reason he has kept up this ongoing charade of advice – is a simple one, he wants to be responded to because he feels "slighted" that for some reason I tire of his obsessive behavior and ignore him.

Bill, you can do what you want – but no one will post here – and no one will advertise here – if such odd and unbalanced behaviors are ignored. I believe JJ is a special case – no one else – even those that have disagreed strongly with me on the Fez – have chosen to act like this.

It's ultimately as much your problem as mine. Does writing on this forum open you up to people with no sense of judgment or common sense following you like some sort of e-stalker – to your private emails, emails to friends, and making all sorts of excessive accusations – and now looking for a fight under the guise of "helping" or will you enforce some level of acceptable behavior.

I believe you are familiar with this case, and I think you know it is important to your business, more than mine – that it be dealt with.

Nuff' said.

In typical fashion, you'll notice he has nothing to say about his attack piece posted on his blog, or my objections thereto. "Stalking" you onto a website to which we had all been invited seems a curious description. I went there because I know what kind of a stand-up guy you are. You blog post proved it better than I ever could.

"My complaint to Bill is a simple one-does a member of this forum have the right not to be pestered with private emails, slandered with all sorts of exaggerated accusations, and continually followed about the internet by someone with "issues"? "

The pestering to which you refer is a single email bringing your attention to this thread after what you posted about me on your blog. Nothing more.

Please show where I've "…slandered with all sorts of exaggerated accusations,…" as it seems that is just what you are doing here.

"The reason he has kept up this ongoing charade of advice-is a simple one, he wants to be responded to because he feels "slighted" that for some reason I tire of his obsessive behavior and ignore him."

Ignore him? By posting a derogatory tirade on your website? Hardly "ignoring" me is it?

Feel slighted? Not slighted, just still ed off.

As for this thread, what level of unacceptable behavior have I done? Posting good advice? Responding to a friend of yours who told me how kind you were about your Klan thread? How about your unacceptable behavior with your post on the blog?

As for your ridiculous nonsense on your blog, and since I've received some inquiries since you've stirred that pot with your post about "who is he?" to say these things, I offer the following:

Bob Jones seems pretty sure, at least from his post on his blog, that I lack "something" that qualifies me to offer advice, and questions my background.

I stand by my claim that good advice is good advice – he has yet to show otherwise – regardless of the background of the individual.

I still await an explanation of why his "learned" and "experienced" approach of insulting prospective customers is a better path than the one I recommended. Somehow his background in publishing games hasn't provided him with the ability to do that.

As for my background, it includes but is not limited to:

Active wargamer since the ‘60s

Member of the naval wargaming club at USNA

Active participation in naval wargames at the US Naval War College and US Naval Postgraduate School

Active participation in naval wargames throughout my 24 years active duty as a US Navy Surface Warfare Officer

Written articles that were published in MWAN when Hal Thinglum published it, Alarums and Excursions when Lee Gold published it, and both the US and UK version of The Lone Warrior – a magazine for solo gamers

Veteran Playtester / rule reviewer / continuity checker whose involvement includes (some credited, some not) participation in, but again, not limited to the following:

Gladiators – FGU
Ancient Warfare – SAGA
Medieval Warfare – SAGA
The Rules With No Name – Bryan Ansell
Babylons Burning – Hetzerdog

Various sets of rules with Howard Whitehouse, who has said of my contributions that he didn't think he'd want to play a game designed by an engineer, but that he'd probably never publish one again without having an engineer look at them first.

Beta tester for Slitherine Software

Active participant in a number of Yahoo Groups where the use of different rules sets are used, including Two Hour Wargames, MYTHIC RPG, TRWNN, and many others.

So as you can see, Bob is absolutely correct in his assessment – made without any inquiry on his part – that I clearly have no basis whatsoever upon which to make recommendations.

I won't bother talking about the marketing involvement I have had for a local Quilt Shop, my wife's internet business, or the promotional work I've done for various non-profit groups with whom I have been associated or of whom I am now a member.

When a guy like Bob Jones decides you lack the background, and can't even bother to ask before he conducted "ambush journalism" on his website, the facts don't really matter, do they?

When a guy like Bob Jones decides you have "issues" and that "you need help" I guess that's the last word on the subject as well.

Isn't it?

JJ

P.S. I had already alerted the editor, Bill, prior to my previous post about your blog attack and as to both of our actions and the likely fallout. I stand by everything I've posted but will gladly comply with whatever Bill decides is appropriate.

Triple Wow!!!

My complaint to Bill is a simple one – does a member of this forum have the right not to be pestered with private emails…

I think it would have to be a severe case before I'd punish a TMP member for sending emails (outside of TMP) to another TMP member.

…slandered with all sorts of exaggerated accusations…

Hit the Complaint button on each post you consider a problem, and I will look at it.

…and continually followed about the internet by someone with "issues"?

Again, I don't think TMP can protect you from what someone does elsewhere on the internet.

As a professional economist, I can only think of that too-often-neglected but powerful concept that is the "opportunity cost of time." For some people, time is plentiful, and they are more than willing to spend it, and a lot of it, on issues that, to many of us, appear, shall we say, marginal. But lucky them: because to many of us, time is the scarcest of the resources, and unfortunately we have a very little of it left for the hobby once our profession, our professional associations, our family, our family's profession, and our friends have taken their share.

Personally, I'd rather paint miniatures and play (miniature war-) games than teach Bob Jones how to write his rules and run his business. Considering that he excels at both.

Adolfo

When a rules publisher gets DHed on TMP for his personal attack on another member, I wonder what it says about him and his rules publishing business?

"Dang, I hope Mike Snorbens isn't interested in any rules I write. Geez."

When a rules publisher gets DHed on TMP for his personal attack on another member, I wonder what it says about him and his rules publishing business?

It seems that Mike Snorbens(and a few others) have a serious axe to grind with the author. While I was not a big fan of Piquet, I am interested in Zoauve. It covers a period I am interested in at a scale I am interested in playing. I hope that Bob will continue to post information about Zoauve once he gets out of the dawghouse and in the future just ignore the haters rather than allow himself to be baited by them.

Dave

"It seems that Mike Snorbens(and a few others) have a serious axe to grind with the author."

No, I don't have a serious axe to grind with the author. However, I do object to an announcement that basically says "our new rules are the best thing since sliced bread" and then when asked a few simple questions, the author goes all defensive and says "it's all on the Yahoo group". Then I feel – as do others – that he is not doing himself any favours. As it stands, the grudgingly offered partial answers do nothing to encourage me to find out more.

IMHO, his DHing merely demonstrates his poor (potential) customer relations.

"in the future just ignore the haters rather than allow himself to be baited by them."

I am not a "hater". Apart from the fact that he has something to do with the "Picquet" rules system, I know nothing about the man. Although apparently "Zouave" is nothing like "Picquet". I am interested in the period also and by asking a few simple questions was trying to ascertain whether these rules were worth my consideration, i.e. did they meet my fairly straightforward requirements – that is, to be able to play the large battles of the FPW, for example, in a reasonable sized playing area. Given his answer that the ground scale is 1" to 50yds and that the game is designed for "up to two corps a side", I suspect the answer is maybe not. It would have been much nicer not to have been treated as a retard for just asking simple questions.

No, I don't have a serious axe to grind with the author.

And thanks goodness…If you simply object to an announcement, say so and move on. After posting 14 times in the thread for a grand total of 1400+ words, managing to annoy people along the way with your snarky remarks, it's self-delusional to deny you have a serious axe to grind. Bottom line: yes, "Zouave" is very likely not what you are looking for. I think everyone will be better off, yourself included, if we all move on to spend time on games that fit us.

I think we need a 'Train Wreck' board to host all these train wreck threads lately. Wow. At least it gave me something to do at work other than read students' research papers. :-/

A guy who boasts about not buying games, and about how his home-brewed rules are always infinitely superior, and yet who seems to think that he can then make demands upon people for how they ought to explain their products to him… is not exactly going to be at the top of my "Must Take Seriously" list.

Adolfo is exactly right. What publisher in his right mind would try to cater to a guy whose greatest pleasure seems to be in criticizing but never buying anything? I'm astonished that Bob deigned to respond at all, and given the way things turned out, I'm sure he now regards it as a mistake that he won't repeat.

Certain parties are best ignored completely, and there are unfortunately two of them on this thread.

"After posting 14 times in the thread for a grand total of 1400+ words, managing to annoy people along the way with your snarky remarks,"

Please explain where my remarks were snarky.

"A guy who boasts about not buying games, and about how his home-brewed rules are always infinitely superior, and yet who seems to think that he can then make demands upon people for how they ought to explain their products to him… is not exactly going to be at the top of my "Must Take Seriously" list."

I do not boast about not buying games. I am planning to buy quite a bit at Salute this year.
My home-brewed rules are not "infinitely superior". I happen to think they give me a good game, but I have lost count of the enjoyable games I have played over the years with other peoples rules, both published and non-published.
The only demands I make on any rules publisher is that of providing certain basic information whereby the buying public can rapidly identify whether their product is of interest to them. That is all. Nothing more.
Any publisher who doesn't take potential customers seriously needs to think carefully about his marketing strategy.
Bob's not responding at all would have been even worse than his half hearted attempts at answering what are really very simple questions that we are ALL entitled to know about any set of rules if we are going to make an intelligent buying decision.

@ DontFearDareaper
The way things turned out have nothing to do with Mike Snorbens or his posts. They have to do directly and specifically with Bob's behavior. What's more, it isn't the only mistake that he should be careful to not repeat.

For those who may be including me in with "the haters" who just "has an axe to grind", I'd offer the comments below and simply ask the following. Please read the post. Follow up on what I've said. Examine the facts. Then if you want to think I have an axe to grind, I'd ask one more question – if you were in my shoes, and had experienced the same – would you have an axe to grind? Read on…

Bob is in the Dawghouse because of violation of the Editor's rules on what can be said on TMP. I continue to try to stay within bounds while defending myself. I personally think that perhaps the charge by Bob of me slandering him – a crime if true – is more serious than that for which he was banned. But I'll get to the slander issue later.

There are two sides to every story. Bob's is that I'm an unqualified attention seeker who offers pointless advice trying to provoke a remark, while he is just an innocent bystander, minding his own business, and who left the Fez (because of my behavior?) posting only once in 3 1/2 months. And that my behavior there is somehow troubling. He's just someone asking me to "Give it a rest" and seek professional help, as amplified in terms that were so egregious the Editor has to snip them from his post.

I personally have faith in my fellow gamers, most of them anyway, and believe that in an objective examination of the facts here they can draw their own conclusions. And I'm fine with that.

On one side you have a guy whose personality is such that in the time here on TMP, he has earned 42 stifles. I've been here 2 years longer and have 10. What that says about interpersonal communication and people skills is your call.

On one side you have a guy who claims that his is ignoring me, while at the same time going into attack mode with a disingenuous straw man attack against me in a forum he controls, and on the other hand you have me posting here. You might ask him why he pulled it off his blog after being called on having done so. Guess he doesn't stand by what he says. Unlike me.

My posts here, by Bob's account, are to provoke him into a response. See, he can see inside peoples minds and hearts and know what they really, Really, REALLY mean with what they say and why they are doing it. Re read my posts above from the beginning of the thread. Now, picture Bob in front of his computer doing the same. I can envision him, beating his fists on the desk top and yelling: "Stop it! Stop it!! Can anyone get him to stop? For God sakes, JJ, please, please, stop offering me good advice!! I can't take it much longer!!!"

Is what I offered NOT good advice? I've asked repeatedly for someone to point out what I've suggested that is not good advice. No one has. The request still stands.

Yet that offering of advice as well as the person who offered it is the basis for his "ambush journalism" on his website. I'd ask that to make a fair evaluation, go to the blog at his Repiquerules website and read what he wrote, but again, he's pulled it. You can't read it in its entirety, and the attack doesn't "go away" just because he hit the delete button, but quotes from it remain above in my 13 Apr 2010 2:24 p.m. PST post. It will give you a feel for the quality and tone of his prose. Now re-read the suggestions I made in this thread. What do you think?

My posts were somehow to provoke him. Yes, yes, Bob found me out! I KNEW (somehow) that he'd be posting this new rules announcement thread and doing a mash up of the information when he did so I intentionally scoured the hobby news and found a different rules set and made the point about incomplete information nearly six hours before his post – and did so just to give myself cover so I could "provoke" him with the same advice. Yeah, Bob, you are just too clever for me!

He also makes the straw man argument that since he doesn't know and can't find out "Who is he", I'd offer the following:
1. Good advice is source neutral. Did you look at the advice given in the thread? Is it good? Is it smarter to build a customer base by answering questions or proving that you can verbally spar with the folks asking? Is it better to provide requested information or to insult the people who requested it? I maintain the advice offered is, in fact, good advice, it is so regardless of the source, and it is a better course of action for a business than the one Bob is using. But wait a moment, you say. Isn't Bob Jones already a successful businessman? My reply? I don't know. He may well be. But consider this – how much MORE successful would he be if he were less the way he demonstrated in this thread and elsewhere and more "customer supportive?"
2. His straw man attack on his webpage relies on his ability to discredit my background, claiming that he couldn't find any information. But wait a minute! Isn't he the guy with the ability to see into peoples minds and know what they really mean? Couldn't he have used that super power to read the thread to which he was responding and see that not only did I encourage people to contact me, I gave them my email in case they couldn't PM me? So why was he "unable" to discern "who is he?" Was it because his attack DEPENDED on being able to make that claim rather than making any sort of honest effort to determine my background?
You tell me.

No, Bob is just an put upon individual who left the Fez because he couldn't deal with unbalanced, unstable people like me who scare any rational people away by my performance. I'm sure you can see by my wild eyed postings on this and other threads just how worrisome and scary a guy I am. I'll bet folks in Denver scare their little children into good behavior by telling them that Terrement will get them if they don't behave and he'll torment them with good advice! The little kiddies must be aghast at that thought!

So perhaps you might ask Bob when you see him, or if he posts again to explain why his "drive by" on the Fez on 25 March where he came, was not looking for conversation or discussion, but specifically to insult and provoke comments. He insults six folks with whom he disagrees. Want to guess who is mentioned first, and last, and gets the most venom? Yet I'm supposedly the guy who needs to get attention by provoking someone to comment?
Doubt me? Ask Bill if you can join the Fez. I'll be happy to back up my claim just like all the others I've made.

Now, on to the slander accusation. It is one thing to take issue with someone. It is another to post unsupportable accusations and accuse someone of a crime, slander, without proof to back it up. He stated:

"…does a member of this forum have the right not to be pestered with private emails, slandered with all sorts of exaggerated accusations, and continually followed about the internet by someone with "issues"? I'm not talking about the nonsense on the FEZ where wider latitudes are shown, but here on the general forums "

I don't know about you, but I take getting accused of a crime fairly seriously. Bob Jones has done that of me, in writing, on a public forum. If he can back it up, then he has every right to be outraged. If he can't you might ask whether he has just done that of which he's accused others. I'll remind y'all that the "pestered with emails" (plural) which implies a pattern of ongoing behavior with a specific intent in fact consisted of a single email, as a courtesy, informing Bob of my rebuttal to his web page attack. it contained the From:, To:, and as the subject line, it contained nothing other than the link to this page. I sent a copy to the Editor for proof. Harassing emails? Don't think so.

So, what's the bottom line?

I'll make it very easy for everyone here. Bob can go via the Editor, or he can post directly here. Please provide were and when on the open forum you've been "…slandered with all sorts of exaggerated accusations,…"

When you do, I will acknowledge them if I have said them, because unlike Bob, I own what I say. I will openly and publicly apologize here as well as in a letter to him on his web page acknowledging any slander I've committed and admit that I was wrong to do so. I would remind everyone that the truth is an absolute defense against the charge of slander. So although Bob may not LIKE what I've said, as long as it is true, it isn't slander. And Bob, if your friends are aghast, you might determine whether it is what I said to them about you, all of which I can back up with your own posts, or if they are aghast at seeing a side of you they hadn't seen before.

Those of you who want to believe Bob's characterization of my behavior on the Fez are certainly welcome to do so, but better yet, ask the Editor if you can join, and come and see first hand his performances and mine and decide for yourself. I have nothing to hide, and have identified paths of communication for anyone who wants to discuss this via PM or email

Show us the links to your claims, Bob.
The good folks here can decide for themselves.

Or, you can, as before, resort to unfounded backstabbing attacks on forums you control and where I have no voice. You've already demonstrated what a stand up guy you are by already having done that and then on top of it claiming you were ignoring me. You've also kicked me off your Yahoo group for committing the very disturbing act of joining. How outrageous!! Why did I join? Could it be that I'm worried about similar attacks to the one you made while you were "ignoring me?" You can keep me out of there and post as you undoubtedly will in the same stand-up and forthright manner you have shown yourself capable of doing. But then please don't act surprised when you are again openly challenged with the facts if and when I learn of it.

Have I scared you all away with my unhinged, irrational behavior yet?

I'll wait for the links to the things the Bob claims I've done on the open forum.

But I won't be holding my breath.

All of the good folks here can make up their own minds about the issues raised and the players involved.

I'm more than fine with what they will decide.

JJ

For those who may be including me in with "the haters" who just "has an axe to grind"…

I think a large portion of this thread has far less to do with a critique of the rules or the announcement itself and much more to do with personal animosities that got carried into the thread. I think the announcement served as an opportunity to express those animosities, sadly.

And yes, I'm afraid it does come across as deeply obsessive, at least to me.

Altius,

PM sent so as not to muddy this water further. But yes, I am deeply obsessive about protecting my reputation.

JJ

How in the hell did Bob's announcement threaten your reputation?????

This just boggles my mind.

"How in the hell did Bob's announcement threaten your reputation?????"

Not the announcement! Read the thread. More the adverse reaction to Terrement's comments.

"How in the hell did Bob's announcement threaten your reputation?????"

His "attack journalism" on his blog where he clearly characterizes me as someone who is an unqualified nobody who has no basis for offering gaming and marketing advice was, before he pulled it, easily matched to who was doing the posting here. Would he have done that if I had not posted the recommendations and critiques, however minor, on this thread? probably not. Does offering what has yet to be shown as anything other than good advice rise to the level of his blog attack (since pulled) and of his accusation here that I've slandered him?

You tell me.

As I get both great enjoyment from and I believe I make a credible if not valuable contribution to the rules I playtest or review, how do you think a prospective game developer would react to an offer from me if he'd seen Bob's attack piece? And NOT seen my credits, which I didn't post from the outset because I believed they didn't matter? Touch me with a 10' pole? Not in a million.

Sorry you are feeling boggled. But regardless, you are entitled to whatever opinion you have and conclusions you make. As I said above:

"All of the good folks here can make up their own minds about the issues raised and the players involved.

I'm more than fine with what they will decide."

JJ

As I get both great enjoyment from and I believe I make a credible if not valuable contribution to the rules I playtest or review, how do you think a prospective game developer would react to an offer from me if he'd seen Bob's attack piece?

Never would have happened if you hadn't started poking. And with the history of personal animosity between you two, how could you expect any other result?

Methinks someone doth protest too much.

"Never would have happened if you hadn't started poking."

Acknowledged above. Don't see his result as either predictable or called for in either the manner or the extent it was done.

"Methinks someone doth protest too much."

All of the good folks here can make up their own minds about the issues raised and the players involved.

I'm more than fine with what they will decide.

JJ

All of the good folks here can make up their own minds about the issues raised and the players involved.

I'm more than fine with what they will decide.

Well, I gave a heads up about this thread to the guys in my game club BEFORE it all went ugly, and our local game store owner says he'll be bringing in a big order when it's available. Judging from the discussion on our Yahoo group, the rules have definitely generated some interest among our little group, and the ugliness has generated some not-so-complimentary discussion. Keep it up.

"Not my period of interest or scale of interest, but for whatever product is being introduced as a new line, the $$$ off discount is a nice gesture and may be the item that brings someone off the fence. I know I've bought lead I didn't really plan on just because the sale at Hasslefree or Brigade, or whoever was on at the time."

is certainly the sort of comment to raise someone's ire.

As for the big order, great, I hope y'all enjoy it. Nowhere in my posts is there anything where I critique or criticize his rules other than acknowledging that Piquet was a system that had some big fans and some who didn't care for the mechanics. I also pointed out amplifying Bob's comments that these rules are different.

"Judging from the discussion on our Yahoo group, the rules have definitely generated some interest among our little group, and the ugliness has generated some not-so-complimentary discussion."

Yes, that pesky little problem of Bob controlling a forum where folks can post all of those not so complimentary discussions without me being able to see them or respond to them. Or is this some other group? Should I have been worried about that? I suggested that I did based on his attack on his blog. Bob's clearly demonstrated the sort of stand-up guy he is. This just re-enforces my contention and makes my case far far better than I ever could.

You've just confirmed exactly what I predicted would happen. Bob's banning me from the site BEFORE I DID ANYTHING would seem to have been done just to enable this to take place. I could fully understand if a Yahoo group kicked someone out of the group for violating the page's rules or for being disruptive, just as the Editor does here.

So, for you and your group, have your little fun, and enjoy yourselves. It must be nice to be able to snipe at someone's reputation while hiding in a forum where you are safe from discovery.

JJ

es, that pesky little problem of Bob controlling a forum where folks can post all of those not so complimentary discussions without me being able to see them or respond to them.

What on Earth are you talking about? Bob's not a member of our club and has no control over what we post on our own group.

This is getting weirder by the hour.

My bad, I assumed you were referring to HIS yahoo group.

If you have your own in which to snipe in private, that now makes two such places.

"This is getting weirder by the hour."

And you are helping to stop that from happening by doing what, exactly?

It's not "sniping". It's just some comments about how unseemly the attacks look. Don't worry, nobody over there knows you so your reputation is safe.

:)

If you think the attacks look unseemly, you should see me in person!

JJ

Don't do it!!! JJ looks like Zardoz !!!!!!!Shudder…

Except hairier and nakeder. *Double Shudder!!!*

Just kidding, never seen him in person.

Whilst I don't normally side with Mike Snorbens in this case he is right. So what if he's grumpy? He's a potential customer and as such is well within his rights to ask questions. Bob is in the business, and on the back of the Greg Pitts business you would have thought he'd be treading very carefully. If nothing else when you are selling a product it comes over rather well if you appear professional, and in any business it's probably bad form to take potshots at the clientele.

Wow, some people have a lot of spare time. If I had that much spare time, I'd paint figures.

omg, Hastati has hit the nail on the head….shut up and paint

Someone get the popcorn and cold drinks. Think this thread can hit 10 pages like that idiot Pitts' post did? Come on y'all, I know you can do it! :)

I think it would have to be a severe case before I'd punish a TMP member for sending emails (outside of TMP) to another TMP member.

I think Bob is referring to PMs here. JJ tends to over do this sort of thing and had prompted me in the past to ask if there was a way to cut off particular individuals from contacting someone via TMP PM.
--
Tim

Tim,

"I think Bob is referring to PMs here."

No, he's referring to emails, or more specifically the ONE email I sent him and described.

PMs?

I didn't send him any.

You are in a poor position to describe my correspondence with anyone other than you.

There is a very effective way to stop PMs. Ask the sender. Bob did this months (years?) ago and I don't think I've PM'ed him since. Nor, if you asked me, do I believe I PM'ed you any further.

If anyone has the problem and contacts the Editor, I believe Bill has the ability to disable PM capability, and failing that, he can see how often PMs are sent From/To and if need be, DH the offending party.

So thanks for stirring the pot and keeping this elevated, although with Bob's latest antics, he apparently wants to do the same. My reply on that follows.

JJ

I see that Bob, in a reflection of his good taste, business expertise, and judgment has REPOSTED his ambush journalism piece about me and my comments on his gaming blog after previously pulling it.

He obviously remains the "stand-up" kind of guy of which I previously posted, and has chosen, despite all possible logic or recommendations to the contrary, to hit the hornet's nest again to see if they will swarm and sting just like last time.

Still waiting for any indication of what bad advice I offered in the thread that led to his being Dawghoused for one of his numerous comments that violated the editor's rules here.

I'm waiting for the actual proof of the accusation of the the crime of slander he previously posted. As I previously stated, he can air them here or via the Editor. To voluntarily go down this road without doing so would seem to me to be a pretty foolish thing to do.

Lacking either of those, and to go back to skating on the same pond as the temperature increases and the ice thins is a perfect illustration of this guy's wisdom and judgment. His advice to me in the post that got him Dawghoused started with the line advice to give it a rest. I believe that once again I'm on solid ground in suggesting that he take his own advice.

You do the math…

JJ

"Think this thread can hit 10 pages like that idiot Pitts' post did? "

I'm not the one working overtime to keep this thread going. I PM'ed Thor and agreed with him, and would have been quite happy do do so and let this drop.

But, as I told another poster:

"But yes, I am deeply obsessive about protecting my reputation."

So, If Bob wants to keep playing this silly game, providing more exposure of his most excellent customer skills, judgment and such and more continued exposure to folks here on TMP of the sort of jolly good fellow he repeatedly and clearly demonstrates himself to be, I'll be more than happy to do my part with my replies to take this to as many pages as he likes. You can take that to the bank.

JJ