Re: Greg's Deflation

From: Jane Williams <jane_at_...>
Date: Thu, 07 Sep 2000 21:59:15 -0000

> >Arbitrarily choosing lower numbers, and then claiming the original
is
> >inflated seems a bit of a self fulfilling prophecy.
>
> What then do you call it when Greg arbitrarily chooses higher
numbers
> and then claims the original is deflated (or words to that effect)?

No good. I've read this, re-read it, thought about it, and still don't
understand.

As far as I can see, what Greg said was that journeyman competency ("you can do this as a pro") is 1W. That's exactly what the rules say,
he just explained it in more depth. So he isn't choosing higher numbers, he's choosing the same ones.

Unless, of course, you've found a bit of rules I've missed, that says something else. So what is this "original" that's been deflated? And how does it compare with the numbers on pp119-120? And does it help me
assigning numbers to my bunch of new adults?