4,336
edits
Changes
Jump to navigation
Jump to search
Line 34:
Line 34: + + + +
no edit summary
::: Therefore, I think of this as a great opportunity to craft a unified message. My desire is to convey cordiality, and my respect for you. Understand that I get my outlook from working as a classical musician in the past (no longer physically able). When two good musicians join to perform a work of art, they must agree and unify on interpretation enough so as to present a coherent performance, or else all fails. I've known disagreements that became quite heated but were resolved well, and all with the same object in mind. If they couldn't be resolved, the players resolved to perform a different work. What else is there? So I speak my mind, without reservation, and with a bluntness that I hope conveys the inmost thought. I really don't know a more effective way to work together. I see others fail when they can't be honest, and I don't want to go there. So, my best to you. I hope you can meet me in that spirit, and feel free to respond accordingly. I'll back away otherwise. I'm not committed to editing here if it means contentiousness. I don't think any work is worth that. And I hope you now understand better where I'm coming from. Cheers! [[User:Giles|Giles]] ([[User talk:Giles|talk]]) 18:33, 8 April 2024 (UTC)
::: Therefore, I think of this as a great opportunity to craft a unified message. My desire is to convey cordiality, and my respect for you. Understand that I get my outlook from working as a classical musician in the past (no longer physically able). When two good musicians join to perform a work of art, they must agree and unify on interpretation enough so as to present a coherent performance, or else all fails. I've known disagreements that became quite heated but were resolved well, and all with the same object in mind. If they couldn't be resolved, the players resolved to perform a different work. What else is there? So I speak my mind, without reservation, and with a bluntness that I hope conveys the inmost thought. I really don't know a more effective way to work together. I see others fail when they can't be honest, and I don't want to go there. So, my best to you. I hope you can meet me in that spirit, and feel free to respond accordingly. I'll back away otherwise. I'm not committed to editing here if it means contentiousness. I don't think any work is worth that. And I hope you now understand better where I'm coming from. Cheers! [[User:Giles|Giles]] ([[User talk:Giles|talk]]) 18:33, 8 April 2024 (UTC)
:::: I apologize if my reply was harsh. My intent with replying was to simply clarify the fact that the edit indeed removed false information (such as the fact that re-reading skill books actually still gives 250 XP rather than 100 XP as mentioned before) and removed vague wording (such as "power books can give special powers").
::::I do agree that there were (and probably still are) places where the page, especially wording, can be further improved. Feel free to improve any wording as you see fit. It's very very unlikely I will disagree with the wording change. Again, apologies if my reply seemed harsh. [[User:User314159|User314159]] ([[User talk:User314159|talk]]) 18:57, 8 April 2024 (UTC)
== Article lead ==
== Article lead ==