Curse

cebalrai · Apr 09, 2008, 07:19 AM // 07:19

Quote:

Originally Posted by tmakinen

From the premises:

(1) cats are mammals
(2) dogs are mammals

does not follow that cats are dogs. Since your position is so fundamentally flawed, there's no point in discussing it. There's overall no point in discussing with people who are unable to grasp the basic mechanisms of rational thought, other than for git and shiggles, and I've already gotten my laughs for today

My position is that a couple of communism's most basic concepts (ie no social mobility, lack of classes) counter your comparison in such basic ways that you're just polluting cyberspace.

You: A person and crayon are the same thing.
Me: In this context they're unlike in virtually every applicable way.
You: No I saw a peach crayon one time that was kind of flesh-colored so describing a person as a crayon is a helpful analogy. And since you didn't describe something correctly about the chemical composition of wax, the comparison doesn't require justification.

Fril Estelin · Apr 09, 2008, 07:19 AM // 07:19

Quote:

Originally Posted by Creeping Carl

I don't expect everyone to have a clear cut position but when your arguments lean to one side more than the other then you have to ask yourself, which side of the issue am I really arguing for?

Sorry to repeat myself, but this is a GeorgeBush-esque statement where opinions are black&white. Start thinking with a few more options than "pro" or "against" LS removal, like "I don't know", "I'm trying to find out", "I've got information I want to share", "I don't want to take a side" (I personally like the poll option "I have a slightly different view that I have expressed below in an elaborate manner.") And did he say the word "communist" or is that you or someone else putting the word in his hand (rather than mouth)?

Ok ok, enough of this non-sense, feel free to reply to that reply of mine and we'll stop here, I'll let you have the final say. Stopping attacking tmakinen rather than discussing the argument of course would be a good idea now (I believe everything has been said in 70 pages, now people are just saying it again in a different way and shape).

Creeping Carl · Apr 09, 2008, 07:20 AM // 07:20

Quote:

Originally Posted by tmakinen

From the premises:

(1) cats are mammals
(2) dogs are mammals

does not follow that cats are dogs. Since your position is so fundamentally flawed, there's no point in discussing it. There's overall no point in discussing with people who are unable to grasp the basic mechanisms of rational thought, other than for git and shiggles, and I've already gotten my laughs for today

Translation: "We don't know how to counter your argument, so we're just going to act like you're stupid and we're smart and emphasize this by pretending how much we laughed at your expense."

Quote:

Originally Posted by Fril Estelin

Sorry to repeat myself, but this is a GeorgeBush-esque statement where opinions are black&white. Start thinking with a few more options than "pro" or "against" LS removal, like "I don't know", "I'm trying to find out", "I've got information I want to share", "I don't want to take a side" (I personally like the poll option "I have a slightly different view that I have expressed below in an elaborate manner.") And did he say the word "communist" or is that you or someone else putting the word in his hand (rather than mouth)?

Ok ok, enough of this non-sense, feel free to reply to that reply of mine and we'll stop here, I'll let you have the final say. Stopping attacking tmakinen rather than discussing the argument of course would be a good idea now (I believe everything has been said in 70 pages, now people are just saying it again in a different way and shape).

That's the second time you've used the GeorgeBush reference. Talk about thinking in such black and white narrow terms that you can't even think of any other "insults."

Hey, I have no problem with "I dont know","Im trying to find out", "I dont want to take a side" etc etc. And this has dragged on far longer than I wanted, but my whole point was that it didnt matter what side he's on, I disgree with his arguments but his defense always included the disclaimer that he was "pro LS" as if that meant it validates his opinion.

manitoba1073 · Apr 09, 2008, 07:21 AM // 07:21

[QUOTE=cebalrai][QUOTE=manitoba1073]I simple stated Anet suggested people play the way they wanted to not how you precieve people should play the game. If you cant handle that I'm sure JR has some hankies and tissues for you. SInce its obvious not a game for you that people should be allowed to play how they want just cause you seem to think its not fair. I bet Witte's guide to full Tyria solo really pisses you off then since its a full campaign that gets soloed.

Quote:

Originally Posted by Creeping Carl

I don't care anything about how people like to play. I'm saying that Anet is justified in putting some limits on things in the game when something starts happening that's not their intent.

Anet has said that you can still solo farm. They just don't want there to be such a huge gap (up to 8X wealth production) between it in other playing styles.

Makes sense to me.

And what about those who sit in towns doing nothing but chatting in alliance chats and other forms its still a form of playstyle. And clearly the rest of everyone else not doing that is vastly out pacing them so maybe now anet needs to eliminate all income to match them huh.

Different playstyles with matching income makes no sense to me on that subject unless you are for whats already been said in this thread about a certain type of government. Like saying Donald Trump should make what his bus boys in his hotels make.

That hugh gap you say they dont want still exists and it will only get wider.

strcpy · Apr 09, 2008, 07:26 AM // 07:26

Quote:

Originally Posted by tmakinen

Yes, as pointed out in my analysis a couple of pages ago, it is a rational choice for the middle class to oppose LS. However, it is just as rational a choice for the casual portion of the population to support LS. There may not be much strength of feeling or even awareness of the issue in that part of the player base but strong feelings should not be the main driving force of political decisions.

Pfft, I went through many years of statistical analysis courses and they taught us that the most vehement people that voted the most in any opt-in poll were the best to listen too (even better if they used automated tools and told all their friends too!). Really, if they cared that much then it *must* be true and all it takes is 5-10 people and after that the number *never* changed at all. I'll point you to some website that says so! Once you get that then a 95% confidence interval means you pretty much throw out anything that disagrees with those numbers and all is good (to note, this will also prove that drops are degraded by my three runs that I recorded).

Are you going to tell me that my world famous statistics teacher and all the textbooks are fooling me? Well, either that or I didn't pay attention in my statistics class very much

*sigh* The world would be much better off if people even had a basic understanding of statistics. I like the phrase that 95% of statistics lie, however if you understand them much at all you can easily see the bias and go from there. There is ample room for argument even in political stuff, but the vast majority of it would be trashed by a first year mathematics student that had statistics 101 and only gets worse the more you understand.

tmakinen · Apr 09, 2008, 07:29 AM // 07:29

Quote:

Originally Posted by Creeping Carl

Proving that you continually sidestep and backpedal and distract with inane responses?

So, you're saying that you don't see anything wrong with your categorization of people in this thread into those who support LS and those who are against the removal of LS? You really don't?

I feel pity for you now, and won't bother you any more.

cebalrai · Apr 09, 2008, 07:31 AM // 07:31

Quote:

Originally Posted by manitoba1073

And what about those who sit in towns doing nothing but chatting in alliance chats and other forms its still a form of playstyle. And clearly the rest of everyone else not doing that is vastly out pacing them so maybe now anet needs to eliminate all income to match them huh.

Different playstyles with matching income makes no sense to me on that subject unless you are for whats already been said in this thread about a certain type of government. Like saying Donald Trump should make what his bus boys in his hotels make.

That hugh gap you say they dont want still exists and it will only get wider.

Now you're making a straw man out of my point. You're exaggerating my point to be so extreme that no logical person would agree to it.

Stop with your distortions please.

1) Nobody is saying they should get gold for posting on forums and chatting.

2) Nobody is saying that different play styles should have matching incomes. Stop making things up - I never said that. Nobody else did either.

Anet said that solo farming will still be more profitable than playing normally. Which it is. Sounds good to me.

So please stop making things up that I never said. Stop intentionally distorting my point. I never said "Anet should keep LS in place and take it a step further to equalize everyone's income".

cebalrai · Apr 09, 2008, 07:33 AM // 07:33

Quote:

Originally Posted by tmakinen

So, you're saying that you don't see anything wrong with your categorization of people in this thread into those who support LS and those who are against the removal of LS? You really don't?

I feel pity for you now, and won't bother you any more.

I don't see how you're making a million gold per week. Unless you get paid for all this trolling.

Creeping Carl · Apr 09, 2008, 07:34 AM // 07:34

Quote:

Originally Posted by tmakinen

So, you're saying that you don't see anything wrong with your categorization of people in this thread into those who support LS and those who are against the removal of LS? You really don't?

I feel pity for you now, and won't bother you any more.

Ha. You're not going to succeed into painting me as a narrow black and white kind of mind.

I can appreciate there are varying degrees of support for each side of an issue for each individual but for simplicity's sake and to save typing speed, people are going to speak in general terms, pro LS and anti LS. At this point you're just massively nitpicking. Or playing wishy washy Devil's advocate to troll.

Besides, this wasnt the point. The point was you hiding behind the "I'm not arguing to remove LS" argument whenever people picked your arguments apart.

tmakinen · Apr 09, 2008, 07:36 AM // 07:36

Quote:

Originally Posted by strcpy

I went through many years of statistical analysis courses and they taught us that the most vehement people that voted the most in any opt-in poll were the best to listen too (even better if they used automated tools and told all their friends too!). Really, if they cared that much then it *must* be true

Make a poll about papal infallibility on a catholic forum? On a protestant forum? Egads, since both outcomes *must* be true, it logically follows that pope lives in a state of quantum entanglement

tmakinen · Apr 09, 2008, 07:40 AM // 07:40

Quote:

Originally Posted by cebalrai

I don't see how you're making a million gold per week. Unless you get paid for all this trolling.

Eh, another dyslexic? The joke that everybody is having at your and CC's expense is naturally that supporting LS and being against the removal of LS are the exactly same thing!

Fril Estelin · Apr 09, 2008, 07:44 AM // 07:44

Quote:

Originally Posted by cebalrai

Unless you get paid for all this trolling.

I don't know if this is narrowmindedness, trolling, sarcasm or utter misunderstanding, but you clearly fail to read tmakinen's posts. You should start from the beginning and read him again, and then hopefully you'll realise that putting the word "troll" next to him is at best a big mistake, at worst dishonest.

Regarding narrowmindedness and binary thinking, I know it's wrong because in this thread I moved from the "against LS" to a middle position where I didn't know what to think of all the information and was wondering what was right and wrong, then got convinced that LS was good. If you can't imagine that there are a lot of people that are "in the middle", you fail at interpreting what they're saying.

Oh, and strcpy, sorry to tell your statistics prof that his results do not really apply online, where it's so easy to fool people. As mentioned before, Slashdot is the perfect example. I remember people posting links to online polls who got flooded with tens of thousands of non-sense votes (e.g. people not from the US voting on US dosmetic issues), would you imagine the effect on this little poll? There's no "trend" once a certain technological level is achieved unless you exert a certain level of control on the poll regarding the ID of the voters.

cebalrai · Apr 09, 2008, 07:45 AM // 07:45

Quote:

Originally Posted by tmakinen

Eh, another dyslexic? The joke that everybody is having at your and CC's expense is naturally that supporting LS and being against the removal of LS are the exactly same thing!

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Image:Troll.jpg

MoriaOrc · Apr 09, 2008, 07:47 AM // 07:47

Quote:

Originally Posted by strcpy

Pfft, I went through many years of statistical analysis courses and they taught us that the most vehement people that voted the most in any opt-in poll were the best to listen too (even better if they used automated tools and told all their friends too!). Really, if they cared that much then it *must* be true and all it takes is 5-10 people and after that the number *never* changed at all.

Just out of curiosity, what happens when a complex issue has strong believers on multiple sides?

Fril Estelin · Apr 09, 2008, 07:48 AM // 07:48

Quote:

Originally Posted by tmakinen

Make a poll about papal infallibility on a catholic forum? On a protestant forum? Egads, since both outcomes *must* be true, it logically follows that pope lives in a state of quantum entanglement

I can hear Shrodinger's lolcatz meow-ing in his box

We live in a society exquisitely dependent on science and technology, in which hardly anyone knows anything about science and technology.
Carl Sagan

cebalrai · Apr 09, 2008, 07:49 AM // 07:49

Quote:

Originally Posted by tmakinen

Eh, another dyslexic? The joke that everybody is having at your and CC's expense is naturally that supporting LS and being against the removal of LS are the exactly same thing!

So what DO you think should be done, Tmakin? Clearly you call for change.

Creeping Carl · Apr 09, 2008, 07:52 AM // 07:52

Ahahaha. A reference to Shrodinger's cat and a quote from Carl Sagan. Can it possibly get any more pompous in here?

tmakinen · Apr 09, 2008, 08:14 AM // 08:14

Quote:

Originally Posted by cebalrai

So what DO you think should be done, Tmakin? Clearly you call for change.

Implementing a weapon mod/inscription trader NPC would go a long way towards alleviating secondary issues caused by LS, with very few if any downsides. An auction house would be the perfect solution but we can only hope that we get it on day one in GW2.

Starting maybe half a year to year from now, ANet should periodically assess the absolute influx of money and, if necessary, adjust it across the spectrum by raising the monetary value of all drops and rewards by a fixed percentage to compensate for the diminishing player base. This is pretty critical since less players means less opportunities for trading and less options to acquire wealth. Many secondary objectives in the game are currently designed so that only a small fraction of the player base has a realistic chance of completing them, and only with the aid of everybody else. A player who farms tomes to cover his sugar addiction is completely dependent on other players to buy his/her tomes. No buyers, no money. How many of the 'expensive' titles would you be able to achieve if you were forced to play GW as a single player game? If ANet doesn't do anything, the entire economy will eventually collapse as only those people are left who pursue long term goals, and nobody can sell anything because everybody needs gold and nobody needs items.

cebalrai · Apr 09, 2008, 08:18 AM // 08:18

Quote:

Originally Posted by tmakinen

Implementing a weapon mod/inscription trader NPC would go a long way towards alleviating secondary issues caused by LS, with very few if any downsides. An auction house would be the perfect solution but we can only hope that we get it on day one in GW2.

Starting maybe half a year to year from now, ANet should periodically assess the absolute influx of money and, if necessary, adjust it across the spectrum by raising the monetary value of all drops and rewards by a fixed percentage to compensate for the diminishing player base. This is pretty critical since less players means less opportunities for trading and less options to acquire wealth. Many secondary objectives in the game are currently designed so that only a small fraction of the player base has a realistic chance of completing them, and only with the aid of everybody else. A player who farms tomes to cover his sugar addiction is completely dependent on other players to buy his/her tomes. No buyers, no money. How many of the 'expensive' titles would you be able to achieve if you were forced to play GW as a single player game? If ANet doesn't do anything, the entire economy will eventually collapse as only those people are left who pursue long term goals, and nobody can sell anything because everybody needs gold and nobody needs items.

What would an auction house do to prices? Instead of hoping to connect with a seller in Kamadan, folks could access 97 sellers with the exact same sword...

tmakinen · Apr 09, 2008, 08:30 AM // 08:30

Quote:

Originally Posted by cebalrai

What would an auction house do to prices? Instead of hoping to connect with a seller in Kamadan, folks could access 97 sellers with the exact same sword...

It would push prices down and increase the availability of items but wait, it's still a good thing. Let me give an example. In the current system I have a rare r9 weapon with a decent skin that can be sold for, say 3k, provided that I find a prospective buyer. Now, however, if I have to use half an hour of my time to find that buyer it just isn't worth my effort since I could have earned twice as much by doing something else. Hence, I'm forced to merch the weapon. I get 250g, the prospective buyer doesn't get the weapon. With an auction house, I need 15 seconds of my time to get the item sold at 1k. I make profit, the buyer gets the item faster and at a greatly reduced price. Everybody wins.