Comments on "In other words... I love you"
Pages: (3) [ 1 ] [ 2 ] 3
2010-03-17
I'm sorry if I offended you in anyway.
TBH I guess I got into the argument because I have higher expectations for my favorite author and previous admin.
2010-03-17
I assumed as much.
Just had to be sure, y'know?
2010-03-17
Oh, don't get me wrong guys.
There are no hard feelings, I'm just a little perplexed and mildly frustrated with some of you.
Although I would consider them fairly different. Anyway, southpaw is right, as usual. No hard feelings?
2010-03-17
Right.
So you call me out on it but you ignore Crescor's sarcasm and hostility, and Slappy calling me a dick outright for acting this way in the most hypocritical fashion possible, and people like Gloomp who regularly talk down to others?
As I said, double-standards and blatant hypocrisy are highly amusing.
As I said, double-standards and blatant hypocrisy are highly amusing.
Even if you were not, there is something that you are doing that makes other people think you are being rude. I think it is how you write.
2010-03-17
...
I was insinuating you're not paying attention, which you repeatedly prove, not that you're stupid.
I've not called anyone stupid. Not once.
I've not called anyone stupid. Not once.
2010-03-17
My god.
That was a direct response to Crescor's own sarcasm and hostility. You'll notice that I'm being fair to anyone who isn't being overtly hostile to me.
Crescor "It are things like this that make you look like a dick."
atob "Right, so a simple request for someone to pay attention instead of diving in with personal insults is a bad thing?
Sorry, crescor, I'll try to mend that in future."
Your sarcasm bites like a snake. A big dickish snake. It was no simple, "I think you misunderstood me." No, it was a, "Please learn how to read..." You insinuate my stupidity to a high degree.
atob "Right, so a simple request for someone to pay attention instead of diving in with personal insults is a bad thing?
Sorry, crescor, I'll try to mend that in future."
Your sarcasm bites like a snake. A big dickish snake. It was no simple, "I think you misunderstood me." No, it was a, "Please learn how to read..." You insinuate my stupidity to a high degree.
2010-03-17
It'll be resolved
when I bend Slappy over a fucking chair and slip him what's coming.
2010-03-17
Aldaric, in fairness to atob
he has admitted that. Is this all finally resolved? XD
2010-03-17
Sigh.
I've admitted that. PLEASE pay attention. :)
2010-03-17
No, no, no
you don't get it. It is not WHAT you are saying. You are right, I shouldn't have entered this argument or called you a dick, but now that I am in it... It is HOW you said things that pissed people off enough to call you a dick.
2010-03-17
Heh.
I do like how I've said something like "oh, and one more thing" about three times now.
Addictions suck.
Addictions suck.
Right, so a simple request for someone to pay attention instead of diving in with personal insults is a bad thing?
Sorry, crescor, I'll try to mend that in future.
I apologise for condescending flag, he was using a sloppy debate but I didn't need to talk down to him. To be honest, it was actually mostly in good humour and not personal in the slightest. But I supposed that's besides the point now.
And gloomp, my debate manner is fine you little hypocrite, I've read plenty from you in the same manner.
The /entire/ community is built on double-standards. Some of you children need to take a good hard look at yourselves before criticising others.
Sorry, crescor, I'll try to mend that in future.
I apologise for condescending flag, he was using a sloppy debate but I didn't need to talk down to him. To be honest, it was actually mostly in good humour and not personal in the slightest. But I supposed that's besides the point now.
And gloomp, my debate manner is fine you little hypocrite, I've read plenty from you in the same manner.
The /entire/ community is built on double-standards. Some of you children need to take a good hard look at yourselves before criticising others.
2010-03-17
To hopefully end this:
The map and Review become a single entity as Slappy said when the map has been given a Review. Thus it is fair game that something which appears on the map is up for discussion. If we were to have a separate page to complain about everything (see: http://www.nmaps.net/180000) then I imagine we could debate all this on that page.
But we do not and the best place to facilitate discussion of something which has been given great amounts of attention by being on the homepage of NUMA is on the map which is featured on the homepage.
If you want to talk about the map then y'all should have stopped debating about the correct form of attention a map should receive and just given the map the attention you wanted it to receive. Instead we now have a huge debate that really is a no-brainer: The Review is part of the map, so the Review is up for discussion and the map is up for discussion. Simple as that.
But we do not and the best place to facilitate discussion of something which has been given great amounts of attention by being on the homepage of NUMA is on the map which is featured on the homepage.
If you want to talk about the map then y'all should have stopped debating about the correct form of attention a map should receive and just given the map the attention you wanted it to receive. Instead we now have a huge debate that really is a no-brainer: The Review is part of the map, so the Review is up for discussion and the map is up for discussion. Simple as that.
2010-03-17
re: is a fun abbreviation to use
btw
2010-03-17
Oh, and one final thing:
"I'm on your side, but your persistent claim that you are just using logic and that everybody else is using bad argumentation is flat-out annoying."
I was only saying that to Flag who persisted to defend his double standard of ok to comment on the subjectivity of map quality, but the subjectivity of review quality is pointless.
That's the only time I played that card, and it was fair.
Every other response has been to people who have either jumped in and started having ago at my conduct when hypocrites like you are running around calling people dicks.
If your'e allowed to be flat out rude, I'm allowed to condescend.
The hypocrisy in this place can be fucking epic.
I was only saying that to Flag who persisted to defend his double standard of ok to comment on the subjectivity of map quality, but the subjectivity of review quality is pointless.
That's the only time I played that card, and it was fair.
Every other response has been to people who have either jumped in and started having ago at my conduct when hypocrites like you are running around calling people dicks.
If your'e allowed to be flat out rude, I'm allowed to condescend.
The hypocrisy in this place can be fucking epic.
It are things like this that make you look like a dick.
And it's Aldaric, not Aldraic.
Cheers!
And it's Aldaric, not Aldraic.
Cheers!
2010-03-17
Whoever started it doesn't matter.
If you don't like me calling you out of your less-than-shining debate attitude, atob, maybe you should try and polish it a little.
The downside I see to this debate, for an author looking for comments on his map, is that most people, if they comment at all, will be more inclined to share their take on the review/the points being made loosely re: the review, rather than the map. There's nothing "physically" stopping people from commenting upon the scattering of objects and tiles above these words, but I would argue there are some psychological barriers erected in the way, more than if there weren't all this controversy.
And yes, I am quite aware of the irony of my complaining about this phenomena while perpetuating it. Pretty sure that's what atob meant re: my hypocrisy.
The downside I see to this debate, for an author looking for comments on his map, is that most people, if they comment at all, will be more inclined to share their take on the review/the points being made loosely re: the review, rather than the map. There's nothing "physically" stopping people from commenting upon the scattering of objects and tiles above these words, but I would argue there are some psychological barriers erected in the way, more than if there weren't all this controversy.
And yes, I am quite aware of the irony of my complaining about this phenomena while perpetuating it. Pretty sure that's what atob meant re: my hypocrisy.
2010-03-17
Apologies.
It is a double-standard. I'm not too worried about older members flaming each other (most of the time it's done in jest or we know that we're just calling each other out for some stupid shit) but I thought you were flaming Aldaric. My bad.
2010-03-17
Aldraic.
Sorry mate, but my comments only turned sour when other's either started getting huffy themselves.
Please learn to follow the thread. Cheers!
Please learn to follow the thread. Cheers!
2010-03-17
If I recall correctly
I said you were being a dick before you admitted so. If you think it was justified, that's your opinion, and I won't bother arguing it any further. And I'm not the one who deleted your comment; I don't think it should have been deleted, but I have no say in the matter.
2010-03-17
Death Demo
Surprisingly fun. Not anything mind blowing, but a fun map.
It does not matter how I come to think something. The fact is, when I read every post I though, "Wow, atob is being a dick." It is not that you are defending yourself. It is HOW you are defending yourself and stating your arguments.
It does not matter how I come to think something. The fact is, when I read every post I though, "Wow, atob is being a dick." It is not that you are defending yourself. It is HOW you are defending yourself and stating your arguments.
| Demo Data |
|---|
2010-03-17
Almost every one*
Tiring, this is.
2010-03-17
Fine, then exactly
how am I being a dick my good man?
I've already admitted being condescending was dickish, but I don't mind that as I think it was justified.
How else?
all I've done aside from that is offer my opinion and defend myself. Been called a dick straight-up then had my response removed because /I/ was flaming, and had almost every single one of my salient points ignored.
Frustrating is the word.
I've already admitted being condescending was dickish, but I don't mind that as I think it was justified.
How else?
all I've done aside from that is offer my opinion and defend myself. Been called a dick straight-up then had my response removed because /I/ was flaming, and had almost every single one of my salient points ignored.
Frustrating is the word.
2010-03-17
I only said it was true
I never said it was a big deal. As I've said before, I agree with you. :///
Which is my entire point, that any attention is good. You honestly think this map would be getting more comments about the actual map if this debate were not happening? Perhaps a few more, but it would hardly make that much difference.
This happens every now and then on NUMA when something is sparked, it's no big thing. The maps is still here, I've played it and left my comment.
How about you lot?
This happens every now and then on NUMA when something is sparked, it's no big thing. The maps is still here, I've played it and left my comment.
How about you lot?
2010-03-17
Just because you don't think your a dick,
does not mean that I can not. A lot of people think you were being a dick, not just me. You were a dick to maxson in addition to flag. If you don't care that other people think you are a dick, then that is your problem.
2010-03-17
It wasn't flaming o_a
it was a response to slappy calling me a dick. His is allowed and mine isn't.
See below.
See below.
2010-03-17
Right.
my comment was removed why exactly? People are swearing all over this page. Double fucking standards...
2010-03-17
hm
flaming isn't allowed, atob.
Aldaric, none of this has been spam as far as I'm concerned. Just as forum threads go off topic so do discussions on NUMA.
Aldaric, none of this has been spam as far as I'm concerned. Just as forum threads go off topic so do discussions on NUMA.
When he says that it kind of ruins the attention it should receive, he could have taken out "kind of" and still said the same thing. I'm pretty sure he meant that all the attention is on the debate and comments than the actual map, which is mostly true.
Either way, arguing over where "kind of" should go is rather pointless to the overall debate here anyway -_-
Either way, arguing over where "kind of" should go is rather pointless to the overall debate here anyway -_-
2010-03-17
The fuck aldraic.
"None of that has to do about the review or the map. Spam."
No, I'm not being a dick, not in the slightest. And majority opinion is not a marker for truth.
I didn't start this debate, as mentioned, my first comment was about the map and the map alone. It was others who started rambling on about qualities of reviews and such, and I chimed in because, shock horror, we're allowed to do that here. You know, share opinion?
And the only dickish thing I've done is condescend flag, but I think it was justified as he put forward a very sloppy debate and started getting all fussy about it.
I'll apologise to flag if I upset him, but some of you other guys are being really reactionary and slightly retarded about this whole thing.
No, I'm not being a dick, not in the slightest. And majority opinion is not a marker for truth.
I didn't start this debate, as mentioned, my first comment was about the map and the map alone. It was others who started rambling on about qualities of reviews and such, and I chimed in because, shock horror, we're allowed to do that here. You know, share opinion?
And the only dickish thing I've done is condescend flag, but I think it was justified as he put forward a very sloppy debate and started getting all fussy about it.
I'll apologise to flag if I upset him, but some of you other guys are being really reactionary and slightly retarded about this whole thing.
2010-03-17
Slappy posted what I wanted to say
before I refreshed. Now my comment looks kinda silly. Although, I do think comments are spam if the don't have anything to with the map or the review.
2010-03-17
Right, right, subjectivity...
Except I'm the guy who gives people Reviewer status. I'm the guy who also takes away Reviewer status. Because it's a position of responsibility I expect people to be responsible with their Reviews. Had diamondeye submitted this in his application I would have looked over it. I expect all of the Reviewers to hold a level of quality which they would have submitted to me to become a Reviewer. Granted, Diamondeye was one of the few chosen from the Week of Reviews, but that doesn't mean I shouldn't want him to do better. I took away eternal_moonlight's status for Reviews similar to this one and nobody seemed to complain; I will do the same if Reviews like this continue to come from Diamondeye.
If you want to write a simple Review about the map, look at rocket_thumped's Reviews, as they are short, sweet and to the point. I believe they exercise what I think DE was going for but with better form.
I think it's sad that flag and atob and Slappy can only fill 10% of mintnut's Arguin' Shoes.
If you want to write a simple Review about the map, look at rocket_thumped's Reviews, as they are short, sweet and to the point. I believe they exercise what I think DE was going for but with better form.
I think it's sad that flag and atob and Slappy can only fill 10% of mintnut's Arguin' Shoes.
2010-03-17
@atob
I worship you and your maps, but I have to disagree with you. It does not matter who is right or who is wrong. Everyone here thinks your being a dick. Even Slappy who agrees with you argument said, "atob is such a tyrannical dick." I think your being a dick.
You are spamming this map.
"Look. I'm not saying this shit to be malicious, nor because I think I'm better than any of you. I'd expect the same treatment from anyone.
I'm just calling it as I see it guys, that's all."
"Sorry, but if you're going to use such fail logic and stand adamantly by it while perfect counter arguments are presented you deserve the treatment.
I'll be the first to admit I'm wrong if someone uses logic against me in this way, why the hell would you choose not to? We all want to grow and get better at stuff, right?
Honestly..."
None of that has to do about the review or the map. Spam.
You are spamming this map.
"Look. I'm not saying this shit to be malicious, nor because I think I'm better than any of you. I'd expect the same treatment from anyone.
I'm just calling it as I see it guys, that's all."
"Sorry, but if you're going to use such fail logic and stand adamantly by it while perfect counter arguments are presented you deserve the treatment.
I'll be the first to admit I'm wrong if someone uses logic against me in this way, why the hell would you choose not to? We all want to grow and get better at stuff, right?
Honestly..."
None of that has to do about the review or the map. Spam.
2010-03-17
no no no no
You guys are talking about how it is frustrating for a featured map to have all of the comments be about the feature.
let me be clear, then: none of these comments would exist without this debate. The people who commented do not have to comment, and furthermore, would not have. There is literally no downside for the author. This debate is not consuming space, because that space is not finite.
And, yeah, atob, you are acting like a goddamn twat. I'm on your side, but your persistent claim that you are just using logic and that everybody else is using bad argumentation is flat-out annoying. You're being condescending. There is no two-ways about that. If you think you have earned the right to be condescending because others have used bad argumentation (?), then you have also earned the right to be criticized for being condescending instead of discussing the merits of both sides. I've found your posts to be unclear and just plain mean.
But again, the comments on this map, so long as they pertain to the feature, belong here.
let me be clear, then: none of these comments would exist without this debate. The people who commented do not have to comment, and furthermore, would not have. There is literally no downside for the author. This debate is not consuming space, because that space is not finite.
And, yeah, atob, you are acting like a goddamn twat. I'm on your side, but your persistent claim that you are just using logic and that everybody else is using bad argumentation is flat-out annoying. You're being condescending. There is no two-ways about that. If you think you have earned the right to be condescending because others have used bad argumentation (?), then you have also earned the right to be criticized for being condescending instead of discussing the merits of both sides. I've found your posts to be unclear and just plain mean.
But again, the comments on this map, so long as they pertain to the feature, belong here.
quote from atob:
"See, this is the kind of statement I'm talking about.
The /kind/ of attention?
/ANY/ attention is good, and it's GOOD that attention is divided between positive and negative."
That's not what he said. "because it kind of ruins the attention that the map should recieve." Not "it ruins the kind of attention." "it kind of ruins the attention." Big difference. And for god's sake, atob, I was agreeing with you >.>
fixed.
"See, this is the kind of statement I'm talking about.
The /kind/ of attention?
/ANY/ attention is good, and it's GOOD that attention is divided between positive and negative."
That's not what he said. "because it kind of ruins the attention that the map should recieve." Not "it ruins the kind of attention." "it kind of ruins the attention." Big difference. And for god's sake, atob, I was agreeing with you >.>
fixed.
astheoceansblue
Don't hold me to such a high standard man.
In fact, one of the main reasons I stood down as admin was because I think diplomacy is needed as a standard and i don't believe diplomacy is always the most valid tactic.
It's not an opinion that wins me the most friends, but then the friends I have understand me and the way I conduct myself and know it's nothing to do with anything but a strive for balance.