From: mst@vexpert.dbai.tuwien.ac.at (Markus Stumptner)
Newsgroups: rec.games.board,news.groups
Subject: Re: rec.games.strategic
Date: 26 Aug 92 10:21:32 GMT
Organization: DB and ES Subdivision, TU Vienna

From article <1992Aug26.051625.12344@ists.ists.ca>, by os9ug@gkcl.ists.ca (OS-9 User Group):
> I spend about an hour a day studying, and about 6 hours a week playing
> a board game (Go), and I am most definately NOT a "gamer".

Judging from the vehemence with which you defend yourself against this
designation, obviously this is a derisive term in your view.  Yet you
are applying it to all who don't exactly share your interests.
Since we have now arrived at generic namecalling based on one
individual's way of dividing the world, perhaps we could end this
discussion now.

> "Gamer" is a term which identifies the whole set of people who play
> the sorts of games mostly discussed in this group.  This includes all
> war playing, role playing, fantasy, and simulation games, [...]
> It also seems to be a term that nobody who is a 
> serious game player from the abstract/pure-strategy sphere would 
> ever think to apply to themselves.  So it seems to be a good word
> to differentiate the group on.

I think the word you are looking for is not differentiate, but
discriminate (as in "to discriminate against").  Who are you to decide
which games are good, or bad?  6 hours of Go a week do not make you
any kind of Game Police, I'm afraid.

Since it is now clear that it is not merely the selection of games
that is really relevant, but the degree of seriousness with which they
are pursued, I would urge you again to try and create sci.games.board,
or alternately, rec.games.board.serious, or rec.games.board.non-gamers.  

The traffic still does not warrant a newsgroup split.  Let me
summarize.  We have a group for discussion of BOARD games,

(1) it is easy to select the interesting posts
(2) there are plenty of people who are interested in a wider spectrum
    of games
(3) there are some who are so strongly involved with a particular 
    subcategory that they want everyone else to leave.

Now, you opinion is the (3) is the deciding factor.  Wow.   

> What exactly is 1830 if it isn't a simulation?  My understanding was
> that it simulated a stock market.

Simulation is a term used for games with a high degree of realism, as
opposed to games which exchange complexity for speed of play ("fun",
if you want).

> Either "simulation" or "gamer" would seem to hit the mark about 95% of
> the time.

So you are again proposing to kick 95% of the traffic out of
rec.games.board?  Sort of like the tail wagging with the dog.  I do
think that if you absolutely cannot bear seeing 20 subject lines about
games that you do are not interested in, then creating a mailing list
may indeed be a good idea.  I still don't like it, because it would
take traffic from rec.games.board that is at home there and also
interests me, but it is certainly better than creating an
unwarranted-for newsgroup or a complete upheaval in the
rec.games.hierarchy.

-- 
Markus Stumptner                                mst@vexpert.dbai.tuwien.ac.at
University of Technology Vienna                 vexpert!mst@relay.eu.net
Paniglg. 16, A-1040 Vienna, Austria             ...mcsun!vexpert!mst
Newsgroups: rec.games.board