Keith the Thief wrote:Sorry if I am at fault here for causing the digression.
improvstone wrote:I said that very tounge in cheek. We tend to digress alot here.
improvstone wrote:Keith, No worries. I said that very tounge in cheek. We tend to digress alot here.
Blackmoor wrote:I am bidder #1
improvstone wrote:Given David's went for more and mine was around the same value as your prediction I tend to agree. Will be interesting to see how hungry people are just after Christmas. That credit card must be looking pretty full ...
Sea-to-sky-games wrote:I wouldn't care if that was the only copy in existence.. that's a bundle of money for what is effectively some looseleaf pieces of paper.
Blackmoor wrote:I used to say that as well, things and circumstance change. Buying the super rares is cool and in some strange sense satisfying
bombadil wrote:Man, you can say that again. It's an addiction, of sorts.
Sea-to-sky-games wrote:I wouldn't care if that was the only copy in existence.. that's a bundle of money for what is effectively some looseleaf pieces of paper. Slap on some fancy Erol Otus artwork and now we're talking
Kamelion wrote:Well, there had better be some more red-hot bidding before the auction ends. I bought popcorn and everything. Never let it be said that I don't know how to spend an exciting Saturday evening...
bombadil wrote:Anybody want to cop to being bidder 7 or 9?
grubbiv wrote:Dudes. If you want a new Encyclopedia Britannica, its going to cost you more than I just forked over for the Lost Tamo. Its article on the Louisiana Purchase will be shorter than the one on Wikipedia, and I doubt it will have anything on Pokemon. Or D&D. Wikipedia is 40 times the size of the EB and growing exponentially.How can you knock a free online resource which lists every guest star who ever appeared on the Muppet Show? Excessive detail? If you're not interested in the Muppets, don't read the article. This is the web, it isn't wasting shelf space. I've always been depressed by how poorly encyclopedias covered popular culture and how out-of-date they seemed.Although Wikipedia falls short of an ideal information source, it compares well to traditional media. As a child, I recall reading a book which explained how the Rothschilds started every war in modern history. I remember watching a TV program (narrated by Leonard Nimoy, who I regarded as authoritative for some reason) which suggested that it was certain death to fly an airplane into a triangle with Bermuda at one corner. If we could just return to the days when only people with money could spread disinformation.Admittedly, the articles on D&D related topics tend to lack the encyclopedic style which Wikipedia strive for. But really, this is more a property of the D&D community than of Wikipedia. In other disciplines, such as mathematics, Wikipedia has superb articles.
