b3tCST: Kelson/RamsestRokDaZonethpf2s1c08Keep the Ball Low.

f1c09This letter I have received a few days
before  finishing this extra issue and
I  see  the  need  to comment it as we
here  -  besides the personal entry by
Kelson - find a quite common problem.

f4c08 "Hello RokDaZone,

I  saw in c09Generation 25c08:  c09Capsule c08have
won  the  c09Euskal  c08party  with c09Trailway
c08(1st place)?

Sorry,  but  this  demo  won  the  2nd
place.   The  winner  group was c09Ramses
c08with c09"The Engine"c08.
Why did you make this mistake ?
You don't like Ramses?
Or Ramses have no chance...

Friendly

Kelson/Ramses"


f1c09First   of   all:    When  I  received
c10"Trailway"   c09by  c10Capsulec09,  I  got  the
information  with  it that it won that
party.    As   I   got   no   opposing
information  lateron  I didn't see the
need  to  investigate if this actually
really  was  the  first place and just
wrote it down in best faith.  As I did
neither  find  the time nor the source
of   information   to   check  your  -
c10Kelson's  c09- information, I do now have
two     statements     of    different
information,  thus  I can't verify nor
falsify the facts in that review.

If,  however,  my  initial  source was
incorrect,  I  hereby apologize dearly
for this wrong information provided in
c10Generation#25c09.

I would have loved to review your demo
c10"The  Engine" c09- which I gratefully got
from  you  -  in  this issue, but I am
afraid  that the archives were corrupt
apart  from  c10"No  Entiendo"c09;  your 64k
intro, which I really enjoyed.  A nice
piece  of  demonstration and seeing it
really  makes  me wanting to watch the
big  demo.  Too bad, I have gotten out
of  time  and can't do a decent review
for   this  issue  (today:   02.12.97;
releasedate:   03.12.97).  But be sure
I will do one for the c10Demo.Guide c09which
will  be  released around Christmas'97
and which you can find online under:
f4c10 http://generation.www.de/.


f2c08      Conspiration and Warfares

f1c09Yet  now  over  to  my common problem:
Whenever   I   feature   not  entirely
correct information about a release or
when  I criticise or not exactly write
like the other side would like to have
had  it,  people automatically smell a
f2conspiracy  f1against them.  This is not
the  case.   For  how rotten do people
think  my  character  to  be that they
dare   accusing   me   to   leave  out
information - yes, even change facts -
just because of personal preferences?

In  case  of Kelson, who is just taken
as  one  example out of many:  How did
you  get  the  idea  that I try to ban
c10Ramses    c09from   c10Generationc09?    Simply
because  of  one  line with (it seems)
incorrect data? Weak incidents.

There   are   still  quite  a  lot  of
releases, groups and Sceners out there
and even though certain people tend to
believe that editors have to spend all
their  life concentrating on the Scene
to  be the f2perfect databanksf1, we all -
despite  for  one  or  two  exceptions
maybe  -  keep human beings.  Sceners,
who   can   find   other  things  more
enjoyable   than  running  after  each
little  line  of information available
and verifying every dot.

It   is   my   right  to  do  mistakes
unvoluntarily  as  much  as it is your
right  to  correct  me  whenever it is
needed.   It  has  f2nothing  f1to do with
global  personal sympathy or antipathy
for  a  group  or a person when single
facts  are not entirely correct.  If I
would dislike your or any other group,
then I would write it clearly, so that
everyone  would  be able to understand
without   needing   wicked  conspiracy
theories.