Re: (TFT) Oh, honestly...

["Charles Gadda" <cgadda@earthlink.net>]

Erol, stop behaving like HT. I have been more than polite and fair and there
is no reason for this sort of response. It is wholly uncalled for.

It is unbelievably absurd (not to mention childish) to state "...I'm sick
enough of the subject to let you declare victory just to make it stop". What
part of "this is not about 'victory' " do you have such trouble
understanding? All I have ***EVER*** asked for out of you was a mere outline
of why you think your viewpoint is correct. Not irrefutable proof, not
forensic evidence, not chapter and verse cites from medical journals. A
simple outline is simply not asking for much - particularly when you are the
one who insists that he possesses such vast scientific knowledge of the
matter - which you may indeed have, but seem curiously coy in revealing. Go
back to the earlier posts on this if you don't believe me. Cows in the field
clearly understand my motivation, why can't you?

I merely wanted to understand - but you get so pissy about it like its some
sort of great secret. Can't fathom why - but it is certainly exasperating!

> If you don't think there's any evidence of a connection, then what makes
> *you* think that a connection "probably" or "possibly" exists?

This isn't complicated, Erol. One can surmise a possible connection between
two events without necessarily having any direct provable evidence. Cave men
couldn't see or prove gravity, but that did not stop them from noticing a
connection between stepping off of high cliffs and ending up splattered on
the ground below. Stop picking on semantics - its tiresome and childish.

> My reason for thinking that there's a connection is that if injury results
in
> significant impairment - impairment worth -1 Dx or more in game terms -
then
> the people reporting continued function *would have noticed* that
impairment.
> They would have reported function in terms of reduced function, rather
than
> things like "acted as if he didn't notice he'd been wounded."

This doesn't follow. There are people who have been shot but not necessarily
realized it. If they can't figure out that they've been shot, then they
might not realise they are impaired. More to the point, many legally
intoxicated individuals get behind the wheel thinking they are perfectly
able to drive, when it is obvious they are not. While I readily admit that
it is unproven, it is not such a leap to suppose that something similar may
pertain to injured individuals. In any event, how does one objectively
measure this? How do you know if you are 10%, 15%, 20% etc. impaired? After
all, one's performance can very from minute to minute based on a whole host
of variables - what 'baseline' are you using to judge impairment? I doubt
its meaningfully possible to measure this.

> It *has* been noticed that getting into a real fight results in a drop in
> ability, relative to what a person is able to do when practicing. So
that's a
> reason to expect that a further drop due to injury would also be noticed,
if one
> exists that's cumulative with the drop due to being in a real, serious
fight.

Reasonable point. But that is based upon comparisons between "ideal" and
"field", with no evidence pertaining to any differences between "field" and
"field and injured". Still agree that it is a good point, but it is not
without pitfalls.

> I'd also like to point out that modern combat isn't target shooting. Like
the
> use of reproduction melee weapons that you have so much practice with, it
> does involve using the whole body, and not just squeezing the trigger. So
> examples from modern combat aren't as inapplicable as you have made out.

I know quite a bit about firearms, too. In fact, had you bothered to read, I
brought up this very point months ago, almost verbatim. Nevertheless, there
is a vast difference between keeping the body under control for a precise
shot, and the dynamic movement involved even in modern sport fencing, let
alone long sword combat. The two are only comprable in the sense that both
require discipline and control - beyond that there is nothing at all
similar.
=====
Post to the entire list by writing to tft@brainiac.com.
Unsubscribe by mailing to majordomo@brainiac.com with the message body
"unsubscribe tft"