Newsgroups: rec.games.int-fiction
Path: news.duke.edu!newsgate.duke.edu!nntp-out.monmouth.com!newspeer.monmouth.com!cpk-news-hub1.bbnplanet.com!news.gtei.net!newsfeed1.cidera.com!Cidera!portc03.blue.aol.com!uunet!dca.uu.net!ash.uu.net!world!not-for-mail
From: buzzard@TheWorld.com (Sean T Barrett)
Subject: Re: Begegnung Am Fluss (was Adam's reviews)
Sender: news@world.std.com (Mr Usenet Himself)
Message-ID: <Gn0rqt.F1s@world.std.com>
Date: Sun, 18 Nov 2001 23:25:38 GMT
References: <9t26oa$hqg$1@drizzle.com> <9t4uhp$d8r$1@news.panix.com> <GMxMuu.2nC@world.std.com> <9t92i5$3gb$1@news.panix.com>
Nntp-Posting-Host: sgi01-g.std.com
Organization: The World Public Access UNIX, Brookline, MA
X-Newsreader: trn 4.0-test72 (19 April 1999)
Lines: 28
Xref: news.duke.edu rec.games.int-fiction:66659

Andrew Plotkin  <erkyrath@eblong.com> wrote:
>In real life, when I see a new game announced, my reaction to it
>begins as soon as I see the title. Or author's name, or tag line,
>whichever comes first.

So? Reacting to it seems totally unrelated to playing it.
If you hear about a new book being released by some author,
you read a blurb on the back written by the marketing
department, you study the front cover picture, you may
well have formed an opinion, but you haven't done anything
resembling reading the book. All of these things are
accidental properties of it (save the title); the book
could just as easily be released with a different blurb
and a different cover picture, but it would still be
the same book.

You could even know nothing about it other than what you read
in a review, and you would still have an opinion, a reaction.

So I do not see the connection.

Yes, you can debate whether the comp rules are saying
"you must play to vote", and it may be true that there's
a grey area in defining what "to play" means, but I think
that grey area lies clearly on one side of both of the
above scenarios.

SeanB
