Future of Finecast Article

[wittdooley]

Shamless plug for an article I just wrote for my blog.

Can be found here: [URL="http://imperialathenaeum.blogspot.com/2011/06/hobby-future-of-finecast.html"]The Future of Finecast[/URL]

Comment away. I have the following articles in the works: regarding the direction I'd like to see Privateer take, a GenCon Miniature Preview and a look at playing 'dead' miniatures games. I'd love input on which you'd like to see first.

[Melissia]

Oh look, another person attacking everyone who disagrees with them about finecast.

[wittdooley]

My goodness, Melissia. Did you even read past the opening paragraph? That's the ONLY place I make any reference to other people, and quite frankly, I think it's fairly justified.

EDIT: And seriously, after re-reading the article, my slight comments are hardly inflammatory. I make a concerted effort in every article I write to be fair and offer up an objecting viewpoint. I do that here. Perhaps you should also troll the ESPN forums, where people there also have trouble discerning between an editorial (OPINION PIECE) and a news story.

You really need to get over yourself.

[oggs]

I enjoyed your article. Thought it was well written, and in no way attacking anyone. Keep it up my man.

[Melissia]

My goodness, Melissia. Did you even read past the opening paragraph? That's the ONLY place I make any reference to other people, and quite frankly, I think it's fairly justified.

No, because the first paragraph put it as another blog of one group bashing another.

First impressions etc etc. Dislike me for not bothering to read the rest if you want, but you still put that there, right in front, establishing the tone for the rest of the article, and making me roll my eyes and skip over the rest because the tone was very obnoxious and frankly flame-bait.

[wittdooley]

No, because the first paragraph put it as another blog of one group bashing another.

First impressions etc etc. Dislike me for not bothering to read the rest if you want, but you still put that there, right in front, establishing the tone for the rest of the article, and making me roll my eyes and skip over the rest because the tone was very obnoxious and frankly flame-bait.

Except it isn't. The opening line allows that it's a polarizing subject. It doesn't establish the tone as such either.

Not reading the rest makes you lazy and completly ignorant in any comment thereafter.

[JxKxR]

I actually just got done converting up one of my friends Finecast Incubi into Drazhar because most of the other ones had the bubbles. So he called up GW and they are sending more so I got to play with it!

Now what did I find about the finecast? It's ok once you really get down to cleaning it up and that took me about an hour, but I didn't use the fins that go on the incubi's back because they were way too britle. Now with the bubbles the hour long clean up and not using the cool fins because they are to brittle I have to say that I actually liked the new finecast. Drazhar turned out awesome and he is by far the conversion I am most proud of and I could never have done it with metal.

Oh and decent article fella.

[miteyheroes]

Good article.

[Lane]

Oh look, another post (blog) with severely biased opinions.

Yes I did read it and you all but said anybody that dislikes F...cast is an idiot.

[wittdooley]

No, I didn't.

I discussed:

The ease of conversion
The cleanliness of it
The fact that is IS NOT HAZARDOUS, despite how much people want to say it is. It. Simply. Is. Not.
The fact that GW still has problems to fix with it, but that they've fixed production problems in the past.

Again, IT IS AN EDITORIAL. Editorials are based on opinions, and inherently carry some sort of bias. There is no difference here. Good editorials address both sides. I address both sides.

I don't feel bad about about calling people trolls that continue to espouse the false fact that Finecast is dangerous. They are ignorant, or simply unwilling to accept that fact.

@ Mitey, Oggs, JX. Thanks.