Knowledge of cards

Xaddam wrote:

KevinM wrote:

non-combative,

You don't get to choose how you're interpreted. You might be fine with your tone, but you can't change the fact that I find it hostile.

If I can't change the fact that you find it hostile by *telling* you that no hostility is meant then you are quite closed-minded, not to mention unfriendly. And since I don't think that of you, based on previous encounters that we've had, I think this is a bone that you don't want to give up. But that's on you, not me. All I can do is to say that it wasn't hostile and then it's on you to proceed from there. Me personally, I'd say to myself, "OK, he wasn't being hostile" and continue on without believing in the hostility.

KevinM wrote:

Completely on-topic, relevant [...] and yes, conjecture, because, as I stated, I have no idea where these questions of his are coming from, so I need to ask more questions to be able to answer properly.

I'm sorry that you were confused by my method of obtaining more information.

I want the same answer to my question as anyone else asking the exact same question. Even if they have a different intent, background or desire than me motivating that same question. So, if you find an answer to the original question that you could not find without me telling you of my personal intentions and desires that answer would not be what I asked for. This is why your question is off-topic.

The rules forum should for 99% part be logic, evidence and gamemaker's intent. Desires and anecdotes should not be part of rule-making. If you wish to discuss possible ways to cheat I would point you to the general forum, or at least create a new thread.[/quote]We agree! Desires and anecdotes should not be part of rule-making. That is why I am questioning him about his reasons for the questions.

As I and others have famously said many, many -- way too many times -- if you don't like the posts then you don't have to read and respond to them.

Telling someone how to discuss things or criticizing their method of discussion isn't usually relevant or useful, and is mostly a waste of time. Just think of how much time both you and I have spent discussing this when you -- not me, but you -- could have just gone past it.

Joscha wrote:

And even if there isn't much they can get out of it. I mean okay, they could look up a deck in the TWDA. But nothing guarantees that the deck at the table is the deck from the net. Does that really help that much to have to prohibit reasonably helping devices?

I agree. I think the real issue would be the player who is busy looking things up instead of playing.

In a single judge or multi judge event this could really help the judges.

Of course, if a person is standing behind a player and sending texts to a player about the oppositions hand this would be bad. Hmmm!

TorranceCircle wrote:

Of course, if a person is standing behind a player and sending texts to a player about the oppositions hand this would be bad. Hmmm!

Whoa, that really would be mean and a disgustin behaviour. Don't give them ideas...

Please don't ban electronic devices: how will we play Pacman while the Una deck takes his turn?

Just given my reading of the judges guideline, it does not seem to be advocating the prohibition of electronic devices, but rather giving judges the option to.

Personally, I see no reason to forbid electronic devices unless they're being disruptive. Especially for card text lookup, I think it's a great time saver. Since current card text is a right, why should the player have to delay the game to call over an overworked judge, who's just going to use the same source?

As for players searching through the TWDA, I really don't find it that a credible threat. Frankly, even if they do, SO WHAT?
1. Are you playing a deck archetype that is easily identifiable?
2. Is your deck exactly identical to one of the ones in the TWDA?
3. Does your opponent know for a fact that your exact deck is in the TWDA?
4. Is there only ONE deck in the TWDA that matches the general description of your deck?
5. Does knowledge of what cards are in your deck give them some play advantage in the current situation?

If the answer to any of the above questions was "No" or "Maybe", then the method can be worse than useless to your opponent. I say worse than useless because thinking you know your opponent's decklist and being wrong can be more harmful than having a general idea of what's in his deck.

Even if the answers to all those questions is yes, the time it would take to sift through the TWDA would easily incur a delay of game penalty.

So yah. I see no harm, and a lot of good that can come from using electronics, in most cases.