So the bottom line is that you're not happy with the current situation, and no matter anyone says, until it changes you won't be happy. The current fix, as WK is getting back up to speed, isn't enough?

Norm just gave you too much with that post.

Norm has a posse now. Will they take a bullet for him cause I'm thinking that munchoboy is going off the deep end now that he is right for once

Let's just hope that no one has such a sinister plot afoot. Without Norm I'd have no jerky at WWE.

Jerky and peanuts - the food that makes going 12 hours a day at a con (or more, I miss GenCon) all worthwhile.

Just make sure to hide the bag from certain (now former) WK employees. Despite all labels and good manners, they just TAKE your jerky from you.

The big ole bully.

I'm missing cons and the jerky already but what I really want is a pretzel

When I read this, I had a Bob Marley song running through my head. Rep to whoever gives the correct answer.

I Shot the Sheriff -- Marley, also covered by Clapton (And I think there's a punk/ska version kicking around out there, too)

Just wanted to chime in and say that I love the idea and think that three very deserving and appropriate deputies were selected.

Huh? Waiting for an official response on something not covered yet by official errata is wrong? So, the correct response is to always listen to the loudest voice in the room? Not to necessarily discuss the rule at hand, just take some (albeit experienced) layman's opinion?

I understand and agree with the rules deputy idea, but I disagree with your generalization of how rules discussions should be. I don't necessarily "wait for your input", especially before you were reinstated. I'd rather se a true discussion of WHY the rule works as it does, and not take the "loudest" opinion as the correct one.

Since you have re-become official RA, it often now does come down to "wait for nbperp". But I still feel a true discussion of any rule is important to fully understanding exactly how it works and is to be ruled.

My opposition is not in "stubbornness" or "insistence to be right", but to get full disclosure.

Regardless, congrats HARPUA, NORMALVIEW and QUEBBSTER. I'll look forward to your views as much as I do Norm's. I may not agree with you, nor take your first explanation, but eventually, I'm sure I'll get it...

but the problem in most of the post were that they Showed where in the Rules that these things are clear and how they are ruled.
Like Ulik, Cap with Stealth, People wanting figures that do not have Silver rings on them to be unique. There were tons of stuff that we have rules for but people just did not want to hear it (even now after the errata/FAQ)

Good luck, guys.

Oh, hey, I agree with that, that's all simple stuff.

Outwittable traits and other new wrinkles though?

All uncharted territory before we began a discussion. And many times, I was told I was already wrong before anybody would tell me WHY. Gold Mjolnir/Character Card thread is a great example.

Don't just tell me I'm wrong, tell me WHY I'm wrong.

Will do. Just send me a PM anytime you wanna know about a specific situation.

You are absolutely correct. When it comes to "new territory" the deputies should not take it on themselves to make a decision and try to have everyone play it their way.

But it's not like Harpua, normalview and Quebbster were names drawn out of a hat. They didn't win a Heorclix Deputy lottery and were notified that suddenly their opinions were now tantamount to law.

Instead, there was an observation of their postings over time. Those observations demonstrated that they (a) had a huge understanding of the rules and (b) recognized many times when the rules didn't necessarily directly cover a situation. In the first case, they would explain the rule, often quoting sources from the rulebook and guide. In the latter case, they would state their opinions, demonstrate again with quotes why they thought that was the case, in some cases even quoting support for the opposite perspective to show why they may not be right, and opine accordingly.

Why do some people think that these 3 guys are suddenly going to run amok making changes? The whole POINT is that they've demonstrated responsibility in the past and I for one wanted to recognize that and let people know that these three guys ARE RESPONSIBLE. That if they tell you something and they're quoting something, then you can go ahead and count on it. Will they sometimes be wrong? Yeah, probably. Me, too. I've made a few calls that I've had to back pedal and correct myself. I'm human and will never pretend otherwise.

But I *am* tired of posters (not naming names since I don't remember any) saying that their answer isn't going to be considered "right" until/unless I say so. That's disrespectful and by deputizing them, they can now carry some "clout" that will maybe dial that back a little. They deserve that and the fact that it makes my life easier, well, I won't complain.