[<a href='21836.html'>Next Message in Time</a>] | 
[<a href='21834.html'>Previous Message in Time</a>] | 
[<a href='21836.html'>Next Message in Topic</a>] | 
[<a href='21834.html'>Previous Message in Topic</a>] <br/><br/>
<b>Message ID:</b> 21835 <br/>
<b>Date:</b> Wed Oct 11 23:03:06 BST 2000 <br/>
<b>Author:</b> jhenders@bogon.com <br/>
<b>Subject:</b> Re: [eqbards] Abashi finally responds... sort of <br/>
<br/><br/>
<div id="ygrps-yiv-1747138576">On Wed, Oct 11/00, &quot;Kimes, Dean W.&quot; &lt;<a rel="nofollow" target="_blank" href="mailto:dean_kimes@...">dean_kimes@...</a>&gt; wrote:<br/>
<blockquote><span title="ireply"> &gt; Working as Intended is a valid response.  My problem is that with Verant it<br/>
&gt; has been the only response for bards. (Ok a generalization, but still true<br/>
&gt; on all important issues)<br/>
<br/>
 </span></blockquote>Working as Intended would be a valid responce if some explanation was<br/>
given that showed some actual thought had been put into that intent.<br/>
When used by Abashi, who&#39;s only responce to bards requests for<br/>
definitions of how the bard fit&#39;s into EQ is to say &quot;I think they are<br/>
just fine&quot; is insulting. His thinking that is merely an opinion, and<br/>
previously, he&#39;s admitted he just doesn&#39;t &quot;get&quot; bards, so it&#39;s an<br/>
admittedly uninformed opinion at best. Of the 5 or 6 L50+ bards that<br/>
were in our guild(s) (we have an alliance with another guild for doing<br/>
high level raids like (formerly planes and dragons) Trakanon, and<br/>
Veeshan&#39;s Peak), 3 are now playing other classes and one other has quit<br/>
the game. The fact that the concerns of the least played class in the<br/>
game at high levels are brushed off with this explanation is pretty sad.<br/>
<br/>
<br/>
-- <br/>
  Artificial Intelligence stands no chance against Natural Stupidity.<br/>
            GAT d- -p+(--) c++++ l++ u++ t- m--- W--- !v<br/>
                 b+++ e* s-/+ n-(?) h++ f+g+ w+++ y*</div>