Checking all the details before migrating off my ISY99, it appears MobiLinc Portal isn't supported on the Polisy. Is that true? I have a lot of 3rd party integration via the MobiLinc API and this may be a dealbreaker for migration. Hopefully, I heard wrong.

Is it supported, and if not, when will it be? 

I'm not sure I agree with moving this topic to MobiLinc- seems a bit like burying it. There haven't been any meaningful updates in this forum in a while.

The problem is that Polisy and IoP is supposed to be the next iteration of UD. Mobilinc is not a new feature- in fact it's the original integration portal- delivered years before the UD Portal. Its absence in Polisy is a feature regression, especially for me. I have several integrations including a demo kiosk that goes to enterprise IT shows where visitors can trigger automation actions based on machine learning. 

So is the answer to my original question, "we're choosing this migration to EOL Mobilinc in favor of our own competing portal?" I'd hate to think that.

15 minutes ago, FerventGeek said:

Polisy and IoP is supposed to be the next iteration of UD

Not exactly..... ZMatter and eisy are the next iteration of UD,

Sounds like you should be speaking with the developer of Mobilinc about adding support for UD's new products and their lack of updates.

16 minutes ago, DennisC said:

Sounds like you should be speaking with the developer of Mobilinc about adding support for UD's new products and their lack of updates.

I did, before posting this. They are waiting on UD, thus my question here.

16 minutes ago, DennisC said:

Sounds like you should be speaking with the developer of Mobilinc about adding support for UD's new products and their lack of updates.

I dropped Mobilinc long ago when Mobilinc Pro was replaced by X (or was it vice versa). I found the new version a degradation. Furthermore now there is UD Mobile which is way more powerful and easy to use.

I also use Home Assistant, mostly as a front UI for ISY and using a few HA integrations.

Now that UD Mobile exists I doubt that Mobilinc will ever be updated.

31 minutes ago, asbril said:

Not exactly..... ZMatter and eisy are the next iteration of UD,

Ah. I just followed the emails. "Hey we have Polisy now for node integration" - bought one. "Hey we have an updated Z-wave+ module for the ISY" - bought one. "Hey we have a new card that lets you migrate ISY to your Polsy and get Matter and Zigbee" + pre-ordered on announcement day.

To find out this late after all the announcements, documentation review, and purchases that my primary interface to my home automation may have been been cut.. is more than a bit of a surprise. And disappointing. This isn't a rant- I'm invested pretty far in.

@FerventGeek In 2017 / 2018 I evaluated Mobilinc for clients and myself. I even bought a couple of licenses for version X and installed it. It was at the time more feature rich via integrations with partners than what UDI offered so I understand how you invested into Mobilinc.

Unfortunately there has been little to no support for Mobilinc in quit some time and as been already mentioned UD Mobile is feature rich and fully integrates with any of the UDI products, (ISY, Polisy, and the soon to be released Eisy) for $12.00 a year. The $12.00 a year cost is for portal access and not necessarily required (but highly recommended) if you care to configure your home / business network to allow outside access.

As all things tech, there is a time and a place for everything and tech never stands still. You may want to take another look at some of the newer UDI offerings in both HW as well as SW and consider migrating from Mobilinc to UD mobile and if you want a pretty front end, Home Assistant integrates with the UDI HW easily.

10 hours ago, FerventGeek said:

I'm not sure I agree with moving this topic to MobiLinc- seems a bit like burying it. There haven't been any meaningful updates in this forum in a while.

The problem is that Polisy and IoP is supposed to be the next iteration of UD. Mobilinc is not a new feature- in fact it's the original integration portal- delivered years before the UD Portal. Its absence in Polisy is a feature regression, especially for me. I have several integrations including a demo kiosk that goes to enterprise IT shows where visitors can trigger automation actions based on machine learning. 

So is the answer to my original question, "we're choosing this migration to EOL Mobilinc in favor of our own competing portal?" I'd hate to think that.

It was moved because mobilinc is a 3rd party product outside of UDI's control and that's where it belongs. If you want an answer from the developer (which is the best resource) he needs to see it. Wes may or may not peruse all forums which means there's a 100% chance your question would  go unanswered.

UDI finally offering their own app allows them full control over what's supported or not. They don't have to worry about questions/comments about whether a system or firmware is supported because they're building it vs waiting on someone else to do so. 

With that said, once mobilinc x was released, development of mobilinc was disco'd. Only the developer @InsteonNutcan answer that.

10 hours ago, FerventGeek said:

Ah. I just followed the emails. "Hey we have Polisy now for node integration" - bought one. "Hey we have an updated Z-wave+ module for the ISY" - bought one. "Hey we have a new card that lets you migrate ISY to your Polsy and get Matter and Zigbee" + pre-ordered on announcement day.

To find out this late after all the announcements, documentation review, and purchases that my primary interface to my home automation may have been been cut.. is more than a bit of a surprise. And disappointing. This isn't a rant- I'm invested pretty far in.

I feel your pain. It's the unfortunate side of technology. As things progress, the old gets left behind (here's looking at my Sonos upgrades). 

One of the things I've recommended over the years is to have all of your integrations go through your controller. This way, should you decide to change apps for whatever reason, you aren't in a position to have to rebuild your system all over again unless you decide to use someone else's system

 

2 hours ago, lilyoyo1 said:

I feel your pain. It's the unfortunate side of technology. As things progress, the old gets left behind (here's looking at my Sonos upgrades). 

One of the things I've recommended over the years is to have all of your integrations go through your controller. This way, should you decide to change apps for whatever reason, you aren't in a position to have to rebuild your system all over again unless you decide to use someone else's system

 

Thanks. Yes, everything has been centralized on my ISY for a decade. I've watched protocols come and go. That's why losing connectivity (without re-implementing custom integrations via Mobilinc) is painful. I'll effectually lose the center of my automated world. I'll stay on the ISY99 until I have a solution. Maybe an intermediate AWS Lambda function that's UD Portal on the backend, and Mobilionc REST on the frontend. They're both wrapped local ISY REST.

13 hours ago, FerventGeek said:

I did, before posting this. They are waiting on UD, thus my question here.

Something really sounds off here....  at one time @InsteonNut had a great relationship with UD.  The only thing I can figure is mobilinc is asking for a change or update that UD can't accommodate in the current vision.  I choose to move away from mobilinc long ago... but still actually use mobilinc pro for one obscure needs that pops up a few times a year.

24 minutes ago, MrBill said:

Something really sounds off here....  at one time @InsteonNut had a great relationship with UD.  The only thing I can figure is mobilinc is asking for a change or update that UD can't accommodate in the current vision.  I choose to move away from mobilinc long ago... but still actually use mobilinc pro for one obscure needs that pops up a few times a year.

UD has made great efforts in the development of UD Mobile. That business decision may have come at the detriment of 3rd party Apps, which could take useful time away from the UD Mobile development.

1 hour ago, MrBill said:

Something really sounds off here....  at one time @InsteonNut had a great relationship with UD.  The only thing I can figure is mobilinc is asking for a change or update that UD can't accommodate in the current vision.  I choose to move away from mobilinc long ago... but still actually use mobilinc pro for one obscure needs that pops up a few times a year.

Right? Putting my software product manager hat on, I think the logic goes something like this:

• The ISY can't support two portals.
  • Mobilinc was THE portal 
  • ISY "portals" was originally that UD extension working with Wes
  • Later, UD Portal would use the internal ISY C library API first created for Mobilinc
    • The goal would have been near-zero changes for the portal hooks in ISY
       
• The only way now to support both portals would be a decent chunk of new ISY code
  • UD would need to abstract portals into a class, and manage messaging for a list of them
  • That code would need full regression testing and change the UD support process
  • All that adds to costs and risk and UD PM didn't see the value
     
• The future of UD is an all-in one that combines the ISY heart with Polyglot node adapters to deal with the never-ending parade of proprietary home automation protocols
  • UD would love a modern re-write of ISY, including a modern JS UI to replace the Java console, more advanced logic, and abstract node definitions within ISY. However that's waaaay out of scope.
  • Therefore, UD needs to support the device with a SaaS interface based on what they have on the truck. 
  • And Portal needs to be stupid-simple to configure and ready to go
     
• UD PM had to make a choice
  • There aren't resources to extend the internal ISY portals interface  
  • They have to have OOTB portal working to drive adoption (accelerate UD onboarding)
  • So it's UD Portal, sorry Mobilinc

I've stayed with Mobilinc for two reasons

1. The main one-  I don't want to have to reimplement integration code and re-deploy several AWS and Azure interface services. Also, regression testing for human-factors driven long-cycle async code takes weeks to catch edge cases in API quirks.
2. Mobiinc has been rock-solid. Looking at the US Portal forum, that's perhaps not the case just yet.

So, I'll adapt.

Edited December 7, 20222 yr by FerventGeek

14 hours ago, FerventGeek said:

I'm not sure I agree with moving this topic to MobiLinc- seems a bit like burying it.

Sorry you feel that way, but your post has the most replies for the day so far. So yeah, guess it's buried real good. Your question is more related to how Mobilinc can integrate with UDI offerings so this is where it belongs. 

I think you have a different view than most on how 3rd party applications work. UDI develops hardware and systems to control a multitude of devices. 3rd party developers then need to figure out how to integrate into such a system. 

14 hours ago, FerventGeek said:

I did, before posting this. They are waiting on UD, thus my question here.

Would be interesting to know what @InsteonNut is "waiting" on from UDI. As far as I see it the Moblinc (Pro) that I've used from day one still works just fine for my needs. But I don't get all "fancy" as you so I haven't had any compatibility concerns. 

14 hours ago, FerventGeek said:

I'm invested pretty far in.

I think most ISY users would all consider themselves fairly deeply invested. I mean, we're not the type that just buy a system and the hub that goes for THAT system. We saw the value that Universal Devices brought to the market with a controller that was more advanced than a standard hub. The technology and desire to grow has evolved over time. It's great to see the Polisy (and next eisy) development. But it's still up to those 3rd party developers to work with the products available in the market place or say "we no longer support" something. The Polisy has been out for many years. If Mobilinc isn't supporting something for it then you've got to ask them why. If they don't have an answer then figure there's a reason for lack of support and sadly, probably never will support if they haven't by now. 

1 hour ago, FerventGeek said:

I'll stay on the ISY99 until I have a solution.

And that's a huge benefit of a system that works as you have designed it. UDI developed hardware and systems that work. They have not "dropped" the reliability for their equipment that continues to be used by a wide market. They began developing for the next generation with the Polisy and now the next with the ZMatter and eisy products. 

It just seems like you've really done a lot of individual manipulation that you're coming here to complain that you can't just move your efforts into a new system. Then asking/expecting UDI to make some sort of concession to fit your need. 

Innovation hurts sometimes. But that doesn't mean it's a bad thing. 

Hopefully you get your answers from Mobilinc as to what they can (or cannot) do going forward. 

41 minutes ago, Geddy said:

.. you're coming here to complain ..

No. I'm here to understand.

I also accept that like Linux and Apple forums, members in any community- no matter how otherwise excellent- can become so attached that honest questions seem like attacks. And if you spend time in those more toxic forums, you can appreciate how important it is to welcome newcomers. Especially for complex pro-sumer gear like UD.

That begins by assuming that even stupid questions are exactly what they seem to be. It assumes new members aren't on a mission to badger an old guard. It assumes a poster's frustration is driven by a shared passion for the community and a desire to find answers. It assumes new members are eager to deepen connection with experts.

That's how great communities are built. 

I urge you to review my other posts in these forums and assess my intent. You'll find nothing from me where I'm sarcastic toward other members, much less basing the first sentences in posts that way.

I think mobilinc totally captured the datastream and therefore didn't play well with polyglot and ISY portal. It became one or the other.
I believe that is why it has settled where things current are. ISY software paraphernalia doesn't have a large user base and it just became too much work for a small software writer to keep up the work required for no money.

Sent from my SM-G781W using Tapatalk

2 hours ago, FerventGeek said:

Right? Putting my software product manager hat on, I think the logic goes something like this:

• The ISY can't support two portals.
  • Mobilinc was THE portal 
  • ISY "portals" was originally that UD extension working with Wes
  • Later, UD Portal would use the internal ISY C library API first created for Mobilinc
    • The goal would have been near-zero changes for the portal hooks in ISY
       
• The only way now to support both portals would be a decent chunk of new ISY code
  • UD would need to abstract portals into a class, and manage messaging for a list of them
  • That code would need full regression testing and change the UD support process
  • All that adds to costs and risk and UD PM didn't see the value
     
• The future of UD is an all-in one that combines the ISY heart with Polyglot node adapters to deal with the never-ending parade of proprietary home automation protocols
  • UD would love a modern re-write of ISY, including a modern JS UI to replace the Java console, more advanced logic, and abstract node definitions within ISY. However that's waaaay out of scope.
  • Therefore, UD needs to support the device with a SaaS interface based on what they have on the truck. 
  • And Portal needs to be stupid-simple to configure and ready to go
     
• UD PM had to make a choice
  • There aren't resources to extend the internal ISY portals interface  
  • They have to have OOTB portal working to drive adoption (accelerate UD onboarding)
  • So it's UD Portal, sorry Mobilinc

I've stayed with Mobilinc for two reasons

1. The main one-  I don't want to have to reimplement integration code and re-deploy several AWS and Azure interface services. Also, regression testing for human-factors driven long-cycle async code takes weeks to catch edge cases in API quirks.
2. Mobiinc has been rock-solid. Looking at the US Portal forum, that's perhaps not the case just yet.

So, I'll adapt.

UDI makes products for themselves and their needs. If a 3rd party company wants their items to work with it then it's on that 3rd party company to adapt and update their system for it. 

All that you wrote is pretty much irrelevant. It comes down to business. Since you work in software development, what financial gain does UDI have to support multiple 3rd party portals that they do not profit from?! Why rewrite their software for 1 developer? What's the advantage financially, especially considering it's for an eol product?!. What do they do when someone else decides to make an app and develop their own portal? The what ifs keeps going and going....

From a business perspective with Wes; it makes zero sense for him to update Mobilinc when his latest work is mobilinc x. Why update an old unsupported app to work with new products when there is no financial gain from it? Especially considering said company is developing their own FREE app (though mobilinc x interface looks much better)....

Reality is that mobilinc is dead. It's awesome that it still works for you but reality is- it doesn't have a future. No one will work for free to constantly update it when the money has already been made from it.

I'm not sure if you're using the 99 or 994 (you keep saying 99) but both are pretty much disco'd (though the 994 will continue to receive security updates for the time being). While you may need to do a lot of testing, waiting will only add more time and make it worse  if you do plan on changing systems in the future. 

Rock solid is great for historical purposes but being updated matter a great deal as well...time stands still for no one. 

16 minutes ago, lilyoyo1 said:

what financial gain does UDI have to support multiple 3rd party portals that they do not profit from?! Why rewrite their software for 1 developer? What's the advantage financially, especially considering it's for an eol product?!.

So if you buy a GM vehicle, GM can stop making spare parts for past-model vehicles, and you won't ask if there's another option?

UD- like GM- had a significant financial incentive in the past. And if you buy a product like a car, you do so based on many factors, some expectation for ongoing support being one of those.

As you'll notice above, I already said I'd adapt, so urging me to migrate is moot. What I've asked is a normal consumer product question: will my previous investments in a platform carry forward? I'm doing what software customers do in communities- share my user persona and user stories with the product team. They should take that under advisement, as the most valuable source of product feedback and features is not existing super-users.

Existing customers generally don't have the financial benefit to business that new to brand customers do. Unless.. you can cross sell or upsell new products and services into existing users. Cost of acquisition CTA is low, and it's easier to retarget or remarket new adopter content to your existing base. 

So in that example, UD has a lot of financial incentive to engage with me. Sale-after-service for me has been far more than my initial ISY purchase. That means the majority of UD's revenue from me hasn't been for the ISY device platform. It's in follow-on up/cross sales. In the GM example I'm on my 2nd or 3rd car of the make.

It's fair for me to hope that there's a solution that does not require additional work on my end. It's fair for me to ask for it, and fair for UD to backlot it.

But to say I'm not a paying customer, that UI and I don't have an ongoing financial relationship which typically includes support is incorrect. Worse, saying UD should not care about existing customers once the a purchase is made, does them tremendous disservice in 2022.

2 minutes ago, FerventGeek said:

So if you buy a GM vehicle, GM can stop making spare parts for past-model vehicles, and you won't ask if there's another option?

UD- like GM- had a significant financial incentive in the past. And if you buy a product like a car, you do so based on many factors, some expectation for ongoing support being one of those.

As you'll notice above, I already said I'd adapt, so urging me to migrate is moot. What I've asked is a normal consumer product question: will my previous investments in a platform carry forward? I'm doing what software customers do in communities- share my user persona and user stories with the product team. They should take that under advisement, as the most valuable source of product feedback and features is not existing super-users.

Existing customers generally don't have the financial benefit to business that new to brand customers do. Unless.. you can cross sell or upsell new products and services into existing users. Cost of acquisition CTA is low, and it's easier to retarget or remarket new adopter content to your existing base. 

So in that example, UD has a lot of financial incentive to engage with me. Sale-after-service for me has been far more than my initial ISY purchase. That means the majority of UD's revenue from me hasn't been for the ISY device platform. It's in follow-on up/cross sales. In the GM example I'm on my 2nd or 3rd car of the make.

It's fair for me to hope that there's a solution that does not require additional work on my end. It's fair for me to ask for it, and fair for UD to backlot it.

But to say I'm not a paying customer, that UI and I don't have an ongoing financial relationship which typically includes support is incorrect. Worse, saying UD should not care about existing customers once the a purchase is made, does them tremendous disservice in 2022.

Respectfully, you are wrong. Apple stops support for certain Iphones and Ipads after a number of years.

Many of us chose UD because of its technology and support.  If I wanted simple home automation then I would probably stick to Alexa or Google Home.

UD is a business and at some point it has to choose between supporting older products or developing new ones. Financially it may not be able to do both. I bought my ISY in 2014, my Polisy in 2018 or 2019 and hopefully soon eisy in 2023.  That is (give or take) $ 400 every 4 years and a benefit from the latest technology with superb support probably for 6- 8 years for each product cycle.  Not a bad deal in my mind.

@asbril, where am I insisting they continue support?

12 minutes ago, FerventGeek said:

@asbril, where am I insisting they continue support?

 

That is what I understood from your comment :

".............So if you buy a GM vehicle, GM can stop making spare parts for past-model vehicles, and you won't ask if there's another option?......................"

 

 

17 minutes ago, asbril said:

That is what I understood from your comment :

".............So if you buy a GM vehicle, GM can stop making spare parts for past-model vehicles, and you won't ask if there's another option?......................"

I apologize if I'm taking this topic too seriously. I've been very fortunate to help build and manage large communities, so the sprit of what we're doing here matters to me. Both for the community and UD's long-term business goals.

• Do believe that UD's years of support help motivate to our ongoing new purchases? 
• Do you believe that post-sales support is important to draw-in new users?
• As ISY is closed-source without extensibility for portal integration, is there some other forum to ask questions related to UDs 1st-party portal integration framework? 

As previously mentioned, I've already accepted that UD EOLs features as it sees fit and will solve this regression myself. The question is- is this an open forum to ask questions related to our use of UDs products?

I'm not sure that your opinion that UD should be like Apple and do whatever it wants without comment, is good. For the community or UD.

The point of the platform- our platform- is that it is not like Apple. It's not a walled-garden to take or leave. Maybe I'm just old, but in my mind it's always been open, collaborative, encouraged 3rd-party integration, and as a result stood the test of time. I'm just a dude trying to save effort and UD has no obligation to do anything I might request. But I'd like to think UD intends to be open to conversation. And that's not Apple-like at all.

37 minutes ago, FerventGeek said:

So if you buy a GM vehicle, GM can stop making spare parts for past-model vehicles, and you won't ask if there's another option?

UD- like GM- had a significant financial incentive in the past. And if you buy a product like a car, you do so based on many factors, some expectation for ongoing support being one of those

Not a good analogy. You're not even comparing apples to oranges with this. For starters; you're comparing a 5-6 figure purchase to a 30 dollar app. Due to the cost of cars, GM must provide parts for them long term otherwise people wouldnt buy them...Besides that, federal law mandates that they make parts available for at least 10 years so there's that as well (there are a multitude of other reasons as well). In answer to your question though, If I had a 30 year old vehicle, I wouldnt expect much to be available from the mfg themselves. Maybe 3rd party but not them.

 

44 minutes ago, FerventGeek said:

As you'll notice above, I already said I'd adapt, so urging me to migrate is moot. What I've asked is a normal consumer product question: will my previous investments in a platform carry forward? I'm doing what software customers do in communities- share my user persona and user stories with the product team. They should take that under advisement, as the most valuable source of product feedback and features is not existing super-users

I wasn't urging you to migrate. I was simply responding to your statement and pointing out that the longer you wait, the more difficult it becomes. That's why I asked you if you have the 99 (like you said) or the 994. If you have the 99, the upgrade process may not (most likely isn't) as straight forward as would be with the 994. That is something you will want to look into since it may require a complete system rebuild.

 

48 minutes ago, FerventGeek said:

Existing customers generally don't have the financial benefit to business that new to brand customers do. Unless.. you can cross sell or upsell new products and services into existing users. Cost of acquisition CTA is low, and it's easier to retarget or remarket new adopter content to your existing base. 

So in that example, UD has a lot of financial incentive to engage with me. Sale-after-service for me has been far more than my initial ISY purchase. That means the majority of UD's revenue from me hasn't been for the ISY device platform. It's in follow-on up/cross sales. In the GM example I'm on my 2nd or 3rd car of the make.

You are correct in regards to new vs existing customers. However, ROI is still at play which is why I stated what I did in previous replies. UDI is top notch when it comes to engaging with their user base. However, that doesnt necessarily mean they'll give them what they want. It can be listening to concerns and implementing things in future versions. Most companies do not look backwards in that manner. Being in the business of making money, they'll still look at the pros and cons before proceeding. In this particular case, they have no control over Mobilinc as it's someone else's product and it makes no sense from a time and financial sense to redo everything for it.

In addition, UDI is doing exactly what you state. When they released their new products, they offered existing members discounts to help lower the cost so that they would be willing to purchase the new systems. They developed their own app to address complaints and desires from their user base (for free I might add).

 

1 hour ago, FerventGeek said:

But to say I'm not a paying customer, that UI and I don't have an ongoing financial relationship which typically includes support is incorrect. Worse, saying UD should not care about existing customers once the a purchase is made, does them tremendous disservice in 2022.

Where did I say anything like this? Please re-read my statement for context. I was speaking clearly from a business standpoint in regards to backwards to update discontinued products (especially one they have no control over) to provide something for a customer. That doesnt mean they do not care about you. It means the amount of time, money, and energy doesnt make it worthwhile. UDI definitely cares about all of its customers (existing and future). They show this constantly with their actions. Make no mistake about it though- business is still transactional and not buddy buddy. You've only supported UDI over the years because what they offered fit your needs and worked out well for you. So while they do care and will do whatever they can to assist us, there does come a point where it makes sense to say no and move on.

 

53 minutes ago, FerventGeek said:

It's fair for me to hope that there's a solution that does not require additional work on my end. It's fair for me to ask for it, and fair for UD to backlot it.

It is fair for you to hope and ask. But it still isnt on UDI to provide for 3rd party products. Since you used cars we'll stick with that. If I put 3rd party products in my car, can I expect Genesis to support them and provide a fix for me?

18 minutes ago, FerventGeek said:

I apologize if I'm taking this topic too seriously. I've been very fortunate to help build and manage large communities, so the sprit of what we're doing here matters to me. Both for the community and UD's long-term business goals.

• Do believe that UD's years of support help motivate to our ongoing new purchases? 
• Do you believe that post-sales support is important to draw-in new users?
• As ISY is closed-source without extensibility for portal integration, is there some other forum to ask questions related to UDs 1st-party portal integration framework? 

As previously mentioned, I've already accepted that UD EOLs features as it sees fit and will solve this regression myself. The question is- is this an open forum to ask questions related to our use of UDs products?

I'm not sure that your opinion that UD should be like Apple and do whatever it wants without comment, is good. For the community or UD.

The point of the platform- our platform- is that it is not like Apple. It's not a walled-garden to take or leave. Maybe I'm just old, but in my mind it's always been open, collaborative, encouraged 3rd-party integration, and as a result stood the test of time. I'm just a dude trying to save effort and UD has no obligation to do anything I might request. But I'd like to think UD intends to be open to conversation. And that's not Apple-like at all.

It is an open forum to ask questions and to engage with other members. Sometimes/most times, this engagement can lead to debates. Some take things personally when reality is, most changes occur due to the back and forth from that engagement. Since we don't know each other and can only see words on a screen, we don't get to hear the inflection (or lack of) in someones voice to know they aren't trying to beat someone down or chastise them. 

One can receive different responses based on how they approach things. Your original post was a question which you then immediately followed up with additional statements which led to additional responses. If the question was simply can you do something, members couldve easily chimed in and said: "No, it cant be done" and moved on. With the additional statements, members felt compelled to provide additional information to help you understand; which you didn't agree with (and that's ok). This rolling dialogue is good because the exchange of ideas helps broaden our minds and potentially see things differently on both sides.

Even though @asbriluses crapple and zwave (we forgive him) I dont think that is what he meant by his statement.  I think he was responding to your GM statement by saying that everything lose support at some point.

Edited December 7, 20222 yr by lilyoyo1