Slayer Sucks

[Zierro]

All he and you mentioned was that both children and adults can appear mature, which I completely supported. My argument, detailed at viewtopic.php?f=66&t=787454&start=360#p6563861, was never responded to.

 

 

 

Umm, no you mean "be". Read our posts.

 

 

 

Odd, perhaps you should rethink in light of you having been proven wrong, as you seem to be having difficulty dealing with it. Lack of debating skills would indicate that I would generally be proven wrong in debates, when it seems to be the opposite.

 

 

 

Of course you would say this, but in reality it doesn't change a single thing.

 

 

 

I tried that with other posts, but it generally requires a copy and paste of the contents, the name of the deleting mod, and clear-cut evidence that no rule was being broken to argue it successfully to the admins - they aren't perfect either, and the prefer to let things rest rather then argue a technicality. It didn't bother me much, though; I had communicated my point, and I let it slide.

 

 

 

If you say you're right then you have nothing to lose, yet you still declined. Hmm kinda fishy.

[Clay_More12]

Obviously if your Slayer lvl is low, you won't get good drops, but when it increases, you have good drops and good xp.

 

 

 

OFF TOPIC: How do you quote like that?

[compfreak847]

 

Umm, no you mean "be". Read our posts.

 

I did, and all it references to is the appearance of maturity and capability of long term decision making.

 

 

 

Of course you would say this, but in reality it doesn't change a single thing.

 

Neither do your petty insults, used as an excuse to cover up being proven wrong.

 

 

 

 

If you say you're right then you have nothing to lose, yet you still declined. Hmm kinda fishy.

 

How are we supposed to debate over something we agree upon? Please teach me the skill, it'd enable a lot more exciting debates :shock:

 

 

 

 

Obviously if your Slayer lvl is low, you won't get good drops, but when it increases, you have good drops and good xp.

 

Agreed, but Armored Zombies still wins :P

 

 

 

 

OFF TOPIC: How do you quote like that?

 

Copy and paste or (handier) Greasemonkey scripts.

[Zierro]

I did, and all it references to is the appearance of maturity and capability of long term decision making.

 

 

 

That's "acting" you're talking about. We were agreeing about the "being" part though.

 

 

 

Neither do your petty insults, used as an excuse to cover up being proven wrong.

 

 

 

I wasn't proven wrong. You only said that I was, and like I pointed out to you, your credibility isn't too good at the moment. A few months ago I saw posters praise you for your debating skills, and I actually agreed with them. But as of lately, you've been embellishing your bad arguments with logic to make them look sound when they really aren't, and I can see that many people are starting to see this too. I don't understand why someone who want to go from a respectable poster to someone that nobody's going to listen to anymore.

 

 

 

How are we supposed to debate over something we agree upon? Please teach me the skill, it'd enable a lot more exciting debates

 

 

 

We don't agree upon it. I'm saying, hypothetically, if you are right then why wouldn't you want me to ask an admin, as you would have nothing to lose unless you were wrong.

[Clay_More12]

Agreed, but Armored Zombies still wins :P

 

 

 

The whole point of a Skill, is to work your way through and get the 99, thats what Runescape is all about really, because if there were no skills but monsters, Runescape would be boring..

[zalitz_miner]

If compfreak refused for pages and pages that he was wrong on the wilderness rant thread what makes you think that he will finally admit it here? I agree with the point about compfreak at first being a respected poster who has lost some of that respect due to his refusal to see that he is ever wrong and the way in which he responds to dissension with his arguments now. There is no point in arguing with someone who thinks they are 100% right and infallible and then proceeds to insult your intelligence and understanding of basic concepts. It's too bad it has turned into this.

 

 

 

Also, please repost your results compfreak, I read through most of the thread in the beginning ~40 pages I think and never saw them. I can't be bothered looking through another 20+ pages of the same thing over and over and over interspersed with idiotic jokes by your former debaters turned fanbois. Another thing....you seem to respond to nearly every persons posts and points that they make except for the ones that really get to the point of the thread. You can't just say you got the results and lost them (much like another poster did) and then hold everyone to the standard of 100-1000 hrs of testing with extremely detailed and in depth logs. Put them in up on google docs or something and link to it if it really is that much data like you say. I don't see why you couldn't at least just post the results on the first page. If people want to see how you got the results they can go look through the link.

[compfreak847]

That's "acting" you're talking about. We were agreeing about the "being" part though.

 

We agreed about acting, but disagreed on being...

 

 

 

http://forum.tip.it/viewtopic.php?f=66&t=765267&start=1320#

 

I wasn't proven wrong. You only said that I was, and like I pointed out to you, your credibility isn't too good at the moment. A few months ago I saw posters praise you for your debating skills, and I actually agreed with them. But as of lately, you've been embellishing your bad arguments with logic to make them look sound when they really aren't, and I can see that many people are starting to see this too. I don't understand why someone who want to go from a respectable poster to someone that nobody's going to listen to anymore.

 

Do you honestly think I care at all what you think of me? I'm not going to say I lost just because it makes you happy when I didn't. Sorry, but the dictionary takes precedence over you.

 

 

 

 

We don't agree upon it. I'm saying, hypothetically, if you are right then why wouldn't you want me to ask an admin, as you would have nothing to lose unless you were wrong.

 

Because it's a waste of admins time for a trivial issue. I try to keep the mods on my side; I frequently get posts deleted (sometimes with good reason, my sarcasm has been known to get out of hand :oops: ), but I only bother when I feel that an important point has been unfairly removed.

 

 

 

 

The whole point of a Skill, is to work your way through and get the 99, thats what Runescape is all about really, because if there were no skills but monsters, Runescape would be boring..

 

Agreed, that's why I love slayer \

 

 

 

 

If compfreak refused for pages and pages that he was wrong on the wilderness rant thread what makes you think that he will finally admit it here? I agree with the point about compfreak at first being a respected poster who has lost some of that respect due to his refusal to see that he is ever wrong and the way in which he responds to dissension with his arguments now.

 

First of all, if you think I'm wrong on the wildy thread, post there - not here. That being said, it was VERY obvious from the discussion who was right and wrong. Zero was trying to be stubborn, but his continued bullheadedness and refusal to accept that I knew what I meant better then him proved his Achilles's heel.

 

 

 

There is no point in arguing with someone who thinks they are 100% right and infallible and then proceeds to insult your intelligence and understanding of basic concepts. It's too bad it has turned into this.

 

It may come as a complete suprise to you, but except for a few (duely noted) exceptions, I DO think I am correct when I'm in an argument. Then again, by definition, an argument (a dispute where there is strong disagreement) REQUIRES that I think I'm right. If you don't like my opinions, your welcome to add me to your ignore list.

 

 

 

Also, please repost your results compfreak, I read through most of the thread in the beginning ~40 pages I think and never saw them. I can't be bothered looking through another 20+ pages of the same thing over and over and over interspersed with idiotic jokes by your former debaters turned fanbois.

 

Then you obviously didn't look close enough, it's all in there - and you'd have to read it anyway to argue it.

 

 

 

Another thing....you seem to respond to nearly every persons posts and points that they make except for the ones that really get to the point of the thread.

 

I make a point of responding to every issue raised by a poster by quoting each part of their argument. If they don't think I've responded to a particular part well enough, they can point it out. It's certainly much better then many other posters I've seen, who cherry pick sentences they disagree with. I'm working on it, but I readily accept feedback :P

 

 

 

You can't just say you got the results and lost them (much like another poster did) and then hold everyone to the standard of 100-1000 hrs of testing with extremely detailed and in depth logs. Put them in up on google docs or something and link to it if it really is that much data like you say. I don't see why you couldn't at least just post the results on the first page. If people want to see how you got the results they can go look through the link.

 

Results without method details are as useless as a total XP number. All of the info is in my replies, I see no reason why I should spoon feed it to them so they can blather on with points already covered long ago.

[OwnagePie]

Saying slayer sucks is like saying any other skill sucks. It's like saying "Cooking sucks because I could make a higher profit just selling the raw fish than cooking it first."

 

 

 

Pretty self explanatory.

[compfreak847]

Saying slayer sucks is like saying any other skill sucks. It's like saying "Cooking sucks because I could make a higher profit just selling the raw fish than cooking it first."

 

 

 

Pretty self explanatory.

 

And for making a profit, cooking DOES suck. But if you enjoy the skill, it doesn't suck. What's your point? :?

[Zierro]

We agreed about acting, but disagreed on being...

 

 

 

We = Omali and I

 

 

 

Do you honestly think I care at all what you think of me? I'm not going to say I lost just because it makes you happy when I didn't. Sorry, but the dictionary takes precedence over you.

 

 

 

Do you honestly think I care that you don't care what I think about you? The reason I post stuff like this is to reveal your egotistical character to the forums and looks like it's working. More and more people are starting to catch onto your ways. And stop telling me that the dictionary is on your side. You're the one who insists that kids can't be psychologically mature when it specifically states they can on Wikipedia.

 

 

 

Because it's a waste of admins time for a trivial issue. I try to keep the mods on my side; I frequently get posts deleted (sometimes with good reason, my sarcasm has been known to get out of hand :oops: ), but I only bother when I feel that an important point has been unfairly removed.

 

 

 

I would believe you if you had credibility, but you don't deserve the benefit of the doubt anymore until you start shaping up. Until then I'm just gonna assume you don't want me to ask an admin because you're afraid you might be wrong... and you are.

 

 

 

First of all, if you think I'm wrong on the wildy thread, post there - not here. That being said, it was VERY obvious from the discussion who was right and wrong. Zero was trying to be stubborn, but his continued bullheadedness and refusal to accept that I knew what I meant better then him proved his Achilles's heel.

 

 

 

Says you. :lol:

 

 

 

It may come as a complete suprise to you, but except for a few (duely noted) exceptions, I DO think I am correct when I'm in an argument. Then again, by definition, an argument (a dispute where there is strong disagreement) REQUIRES that I think I'm right. If you don't like my opinions, your welcome to add me to your ignore list.

 

 

 

It doesn't mean you can never admit a fault - he said "thinks they are right 100% of the time".

 

 

 

And for making a profit, cooking DOES suck. But if you enjoy the skill, it doesn't suck. What's your point?

 

 

 

His point is that any player can make a "X Skill Sucks" thread by bringing up the negative aspects, blowing them out of proportion, and ignoring all the pros.

[compfreak847]

 

We = Omali and I

 

Ah, that clears it up.

 

 

 

 

Do you honestly think I care that you don't care what I think about you? The reason I post stuff like this is to reveal your egotistical character to the forums and looks like it's working. More and more people are starting to catch onto your ways.

 

And what does trying to discredit me have to do with this argument? It certainly doesn't bother me, and it's not going to make me suddenly dislike debating.

 

 

 

And stop telling me that the dictionary is on your side. You're the one who insists that kids can't be psychologically mature when it specifically states they can on Wikipedia.

 

See viewtopic.php?f=66&t=787454&start=360#p6563861, where I completely discredit your made up definitions.

 

 

 

 

 

 

I would believe you if you had credibility, but you don't deserve the benefit of the doubt anymore until you start shaping up. Until then I'm just gonna assume you don't want me to ask an admin because you're afraid you might be wrong... and you are.

 

"Shaping up" and "creditability" don't hinge on your approval of me, and I honestly couldn't care less which you think; it makes no difference in a factual argument.

 

 

 

 

 

 

It doesn't mean you can never admit a fault - he said "thinks they are right 100% of the time".

 

 

Which is quite obviously proven wrong in the threads where I am proven wrong (See the Torso thread for a recent example).

 

 

 

 

His point is that any player can make a "X Skill Sucks" thread by bringing up the negative aspects, blowing them out of proportion, and ignoring all the pros.

 

Which has nothing whatsoever to do with this thread, which seeks to prove that slayer is a fun alternative method to powertraining, but is not as efficient in terms of XP - a factual argument, not opinion based.

[Zierro]

And what does trying to discredit me have to do with this argument? It certainly doesn't bother me, and it's not going to make me suddenly dislike debating.

 

 

 

When someone ignores points, makes things up, and just straight out does not follow the rules of logic, questioning their credibility is the final resort. Surely someone as smart as yourself could figure that out?

 

 

 

See viewtopic.php?f=66&t=787454&start=360#p6563861, where I completely discredit your made up definitions.

 

 

 

Looks like you accidentally linked me one of your generic and meaningless posts: "I proved you wrong. You didn't prove me wrong. I proved you wrong. You didn't prove me wrong." and so on. Nowhere on that post did you prove me wrong - you just claimed that you did.

 

 

 

,"Shaping up" and "creditability" don't hinge on your approval of me, and I honestly couldn't care less which you think; it makes no difference in a factual argument.

 

 

 

Why do you respond to it then? If you don't care surely you'd ignore it instead of announcing that you don't care.

 

 

 

Which is quite obviously proven wrong in the threads where I am proven wrong (See the Torso thread for a recent example).

 

 

 

Sometimes you have no choice. For example:

 

 

 

The sky is green.

 

No, look above you.

 

*Looks up and it is blue*

 

 

 

Nobody would keep arguing after that, however when there are blurry lines and it's impossible to prove something 100% then of course you aren't going to admit when you're wrong. You've done it several times lately in several different threads and many people agree with me.

 

 

 

Which has nothing whatsoever to do with this thread, which seeks to prove that slayer is a fun alternative method to powertraining, but is not as efficient in terms of XP - a factual argument, not opinion based.

 

 

 

So any other rant about a skill cannot be based on facts?

[compfreak847]

 

When someone ignores points, makes things up, and just straight out does not follow the rules of logic, questioning their credibility is the final resort. Surely someone as smart as yourself could figure that out?

 

That's a definite yes, but I don't think I've ever encountered such a person yet. I stick to the logic\factual debates where everything is set in stone and there is a definite wrong and right. English sometimes stretches this, but definitions can usually clear things up. Hence why I generally don't participate in religious debates; there is no information that can be used for a definite conclusion.

 

 

 

 

Looks like you accidentally linked me one of your generic and meaningless posts: "I proved you wrong. You didn't prove me wrong. I proved you wrong. You didn't prove me wrong." and so on. Nowhere on that post did you prove me wrong - you just claimed that you did.

 

You must have looked at the wrong post, as the post I linked to referenced your "arguments" against being vs. mature. The last section covers it best, though the argument is best confined to that thread.

 

 

 

 

Why do you respond to it then? If you don't care surely you'd ignore it instead of announcing that you don't care.

 

It's a debate. I don't care who is right or wrong on an online forum about RS. I love debating; if I didn't, would have left this forum long ago. I'm here mainly to argue.

 

 

 

 

Sometimes you have no choice. For example:

 

 

 

The sky is green.

 

No, look above you.

 

*Looks up and it is blue*

 

 

 

Nobody would keep arguing after that, however when there are blurry lines and it's impossible to prove something 100% then of course you aren't going to admit when you're wrong. You've done it several times lately in several different threads and many people agree with me.

 

For every critical post, I've had 3 other people PM me saying what a great job I'm doing. Don't try and use the 'I can't prove you wrong, but since other people agree with me you must be wrong!' argument. We're talking about a concrete argument, not a complete vs. incomplete debate.

 

 

 

 

So any other rant about a skill cannot be based on facts?

 

You misunderstood my post. I'm simply saying that the skill is worse combat XP then powertraining methods, correcting a common misconception I noted, especially in the H&A forums. I'm not saying the skill isn't enjoyable or worth training for fun.

[Zierro]

That's a definite yes, but I don't think I've ever encountered such a person yet. I stick to the logic\factual debates where everything is set in stone and there is a definite wrong and right. English sometimes stretches this, but definitions can usually clear things up. Hence why I generally don't participate in religious debates; there is no information that can be used for a definite conclusion.

 

 

 

You mean what people interpret as the "definite right or wrong". Everyone makes mistakes, but some people make a lot more and these are the people who people generally start paying littler and littler attention to.

 

 

 

You must have looked at the wrong post, as the post I linked to referenced your "arguments" against being vs. mature. The last section covers it best, though the argument is best confined to that thread.

 

 

 

No, I didn't touch the scroll bar. And what do you mean "Being VS Mature"?

 

 

 

It's a debate. I don't care who is right or wrong on an online forum about RS. I love debating; if I didn't, would have left this forum long ago. I'm here mainly to argue.

 

 

 

It's obvious that you don't care who is right because you never listen to them, and it's obvious that you love debating because you try to juice them out as much as you possibly can.

 

 

 

For every critical post, I've had 3 other people PM me saying what a great job I'm doing. Don't try and use the 'I can't prove you wrong, but since other people agree with me you must be wrong!' argument. We're talking about a concrete argument, not a complete vs. incomplete debate.

 

 

 

Sureee, but that's mighty convenient how your positive reputation is hidden from our view in your PM box but your negative reputation has been posted around on visible threads.

 

 

 

Also, I never said 'I can't prove you wrong, but since other people agree with me you must be wrong!'. I've never seen so many strawmans from a single poster in my entire TIF career. You're lucky your credibility can't possibly go any lower or else that would be bad news for you.

[compfreak847]

 

You mean what people interpret as the "definite right or wrong". Everyone makes mistakes, but some people make a lot more and these are the people who people generally start paying littler and littler attention to.

 

I disagree with that. It tends to draw more attention to them; unless they fade into the background, they are generally hounded upon more and more as people spy easy prey. Everyone likes to be right, and most people like to correct obvious mistakes in others.

 

 

 

 

No, I didn't touch the scroll bar. And what do you mean "Being VS Mature"?

 

My bad, I meant "being vs. acting". See my previous posts in that thread if you need more background. It basically boils down to appearing vs. having the frontal lobe thought processes that signify psychological (mental) maturity.

 

 

 

 

It's obvious that you don't care who is right because you never listen to them, and it's obvious that you love debating because you try to juice them out as much as you possibly can.

 

I certainly care who's right, or I wouldn't have admitted it when I believed I was wrong, and it would be hard to debate without listening to the other person :lol:

 

 

 

 

Sureee, but that's mighty convenient how your positive reputation is hidden from our view in your PM box but your negative reputation has been posted around on visible threads.

 

Read any review site for an example. Critics are always more outspoken.

 

 

 

 

Also, I never said 'I can't prove you wrong, but since other people agree with me you must be wrong!'. I've never seen so many strawmans from a single poster in my entire TIF career. You're lucky your credibility can't possibly go any lower or else that would be bad news for you.

 

How many times must I repeat I really don't care what you think of me? You would do well to focus on the actual debate instead of trumpeting how you think my reputation is shot.

[Zierro]

I disagree with that. It tends to draw more attention to them; unless they fade into the background, they are generally hounded upon more and more as people spy easy prey. Everyone likes to be right, and most people like to correct obvious mistakes in others.

 

 

 

By "pay little attention to" I meant they don't perceive them as a source worth listening to anymore. I guess I should have said something like, "pay littler attention to their arguments."

 

 

 

My bad, I meant "being vs. acting". See my previous posts in that thread if you need more background. It basically boils down to appearing vs. having the frontal lobe thought processes that signify psychological (mental) maturity.

 

 

 

Like stated, Omali and I cleared everything up as much as physically possible. I don't think it can get any simpler than our discussion.

 

 

 

I certainly care who's right, or I wouldn't have admitted it when I believed I was wrong, and it would be hard to debate without listening to the other person

 

 

 

You said you didn't care who is right.

 

 

 

How many times must I repeat I really don't care what you think of me? You would do well to focus on the actual debate instead of trumpeting how you think my reputation is shot.

 

 

 

Only once. I see no need to repeat it. You haven't addressed the point though. I never made that argument, and you said I did.

[compfreak847]

By "pay little attention to" I meant they don't perceive them as a source worth listening to anymore. I guess I should have said something like, "pay littler attention to their arguments."

 

But they will generally still argue, and since I stick to fact-based arguments, I don't have to worry about how highly they regard me.

 

 

 

Like stated, Omali and I cleared everything up as much as physically possible. I don't think it can get any simpler than our discussion.

 

Which I agreed with, so I'm not sure why you insist upon dragging it out.

 

 

 

 

You said you didn't care who is right.

 

Only in relation to opinion based threads; as far as facts (specifically numerical) go, prove that X + 5 = 8, and there's nothing left to argue. That's what I mean by concrete arguments; as virtually everything is RS is numbers-based (Mostly because it's coded in numbers :lol: ), most RS arguments boil down to 1 number versus another.

 

 

 

 

Only once. I see no need to repeat it.

 

I'm glad we got it straight that you needn't post any more about what you think of me, we don't have to waste any more time on that. I'll assume you won't try and bring it up again, just quote this paragraph and say you agree with it so I have a quick sound byte in case you bring it up again.

 

 

 

You haven't addressed the point though. I never made that argument, and you said I did.

 

So you agree that people agreeing or disagreeing with me has nothing to do with my debate, and your whole point about a mod disagreeing with me has nothing whatsoever to do with debating, and was merely a personal jab?

[Zierro]

But they will generally still argue, and since I stick to fact-based arguments, I don't have to worry about how highly they regard me.

 

 

 

Facts can be distorted in order to support a premise. It happens all the time in debates, and credibility is important.

 

 

 

Which I agreed with, so I'm not sure why you insist upon dragging it out.

 

 

 

No... you don't agree that kids can be mature, or else you would've said so long long ago.

 

 

 

I'm glad we got it straight that you needn't post any more about what you think of me, we don't have to waste any more time on that. I'll assume you won't try and bring it up again, just quote this paragraph and say you agree with it so I have a quick sound byte in case you bring it up again.

 

 

 

Ah, but you see, I don't care that you don't care what I think about you.

 

 

 

So you agree that people agreeing or disagreeing with me has nothing to do with my debate, and your whole point about a mod disagreeing with me has nothing whatsoever to do with debating, and was merely a personal jab?

 

 

 

Nope, never said that either.

[compfreak847]

Facts can be distorted in order to support a premise. It happens all the time in debates, and credibility is important.

 

Distortion of numbers is simply dishonesty; listing a weapons attack speed as, say, 2.8 seconds instead of 2.2 is lying, plain and simple. Any numerical debate based on a lie will quickly degenerate, as has been shown many times.

 

 

 

 

No... you don't agree that kids can be mature, or else you would've said so long long ago.

 

But I agree that kids can act mature, which for all purposes besides academic discussion is the same thing.

 

 

 

 

Ah, but you see, I don't care that you don't care what I think about you.

 

Then why keep bringing it up? I skim over it in less then a second, and it simply increases confusion and post complexity while detracting from your main debate. Best to stick to points you believe in.

 

 

 

 

Nope, never said that either.

 

It's one or the other - either you think people disagreeing with me weakens unrelated debates on different topics, or you think it doesn't. Which is it?

[Zierro]

Distortion of numbers is simply dishonesty; listing a weapons attack speed as, say, 2.8 seconds instead of 2.2 is lying, plain and simple. Any numerical debate based on a lie will quickly degenerate, as has been shown many times.

 

 

 

Since when does Facts = Numbers? "The sky is blue" is a fact but it has nothing to do with numbers.

 

 

 

But I agree that kids can act mature, which for all purposes besides academic discussion is the same thing.

 

 

 

I said they were the same thing and you were the one who argued they weren't. :lol:

 

 

 

Then why keep bringing it up? I skim over it in less then a second, and it simply increases confusion and post complexity while detracting from your main debate. Best to stick to points you believe in.

 

 

 

This quote is detracting from the main debate too, is it not?

 

 

 

It's one or the other - either you think people disagreeing with me weakens unrelated debates on different topics, or you think it doesn't. Which is it?

 

 

 

You're skipping the part I'm talking about. I'm talking about the first part of this:

 

 

 

"Don't try and use the 'I can't prove you wrong, but since other people agree with me you must be wrong!' argument."

 

 

 

Never did I say that.

 

 

 

As for the second part, you're rewording things up a bit. What I did say was that you broke a rule, denied it, and your post got deleted, proving that you did break it. Like someone said earlier - you don't look at the main point people are getting at. You take a little detail and nitpick at it then declare yourself winner of that debate.

[compfreak847]

 

Since when does Facts = Numbers? "The sky is blue" is a fact but it has nothing to do with numbers.

 

I was referring to numerical facts, as evidenced in the third paragraph of viewtopic.php?f=66&t=765267&start=1340#p6592324

 

 

 

 

I said they were the same thing and you were the one who argued they weren't. :lol:

 

What? I'm saying that acting and being mature give the same physical end result, and the debate over whether it fit the definition of mature was purely hypothetical.

 

 

 

 

 

 

This quote is detracting from the main debate too, is it not?

 

Yes, but it's detracting in hopes that the issue can be solved in a few posts instead of having to drag through the rest of the debate for no purpose but monotonous back and forth - something you stated in viewtopic.php?f=66&t=765267&start=1300#p6591586 (2nd paragraph) that you didn't like about my debate style. I'm trying to improve, I can see you have a point \

 

 

 

 

You're skipping the part I'm talking about. I'm talking about the first part of this:

 

 

 

"Don't try and use the 'I can't prove you wrong, but since other people agree with me you must be wrong!' argument."

 

 

 

Never did I say that.

 

You not only failed to respond to my posts but completely abandoned the thread, posting only once to agree with another poster on a completely separate issue. You can make all the excuses you want about "getting tired of the argument", but as it is, my points stand unchallenged, and no amount of regurgitation of old arguments on your part will change that.

 

 

 

 

As for the second part, you're rewording things up a bit. What I did say was that you broke a rule, denied it, and your post got deleted, proving that you did break it.

 

As evidenced in viewtopic.php?f=66&t=765267&start=1300#p6591119 and my response on viewtopic.php?f=66&t=765267&start=1300#p6591300 (8th paragraph), it was agreed upon (or so I thought, perhaps you have a clarification) that moderators didn't represent the end all be all of proofs.

[Zierro]

I was referring to numerical facts, as evidenced in the third paragraph of viewtopic.php?f=66&t=765267&start=1340#p6592324

 

 

 

But your debates aren't exclusively about numerical facts, therefore credibility is important. This debate isn't about numbers, is it?

 

 

 

What? I'm saying that acting and being mature give the same physical end result, and the debate over whether it fit the definition of mature was purely hypothetical.

 

 

 

Then you aren't agreeing with the part that Omali and I agreed on. We said that kids can actively think and decide things on their own, which is being mature.

 

 

 

Yes, but it's detracting in hopes that the issue can be solved in a few posts instead of having to drag through the rest of the debate for no purpose but monotonous back and forth - something you stated in viewtopic.php?f=66&t=765267&start=1300#p6591586 (2nd paragraph) that you didn't like about my debate style. I'm trying to improve, I can see you have a point \

 

 

 

Me too. I'm telling you that your credibility keeps going down in order to get you to realize that you should stop making illogical arguments to get it back up again.

 

 

 

You not only failed to respond to my posts but completely abandoned the thread, posting only once to agree with another poster on a completely separate issue. You can make all the excuses you want about "getting tired of the argument", but as it is, my points stand unchallenged, and no amount of regurgitation of old arguments on your part will change that.

 

 

 

Getting tired of repeating myself = Being proven wrong? Explain.

 

 

 

As evidenced in viewtopic.php?f=66&t=765267&start=1300#p6591119 and my response on viewtopic.php?f=66&t=765267&start=1300#p6591300 (8th paragraph), it was agreed upon (or so I thought, perhaps you have a clarification) that moderators didn't represent the end all be all of proofs.

 

 

 

Mods do make mistakes, but it's quite uncommon and bringing that up is only grabbing desperately at straws.

[ydrasil]

All of my rates are mentioned earlier in the threads - I combined both Qeltar's and mine, and the demon testing came later when the rates were called into question. However, you ended up agreeing with them, so I scrapped the demon project.

 

This has just about hit pointless. Your rates are never mentioned in this thread. You refuse to post them here to show us what your rates are, and as such the only possible conclusion is that you do not have them. Don't come up with some bs excuse about not "spoon-feeding" the other people (or whatever it was you said). I have been with this thread the entire time, the least you could do is to post them now (or repost if you are correct, but I doubt).

 

 

 

Also, do not make up things (again) about what I did or did not say. The results you posted from Qeltar's database were his results alone. I found that in the thread and saw the picture of the table again as well as my response. If you did the same you would realise I never agreed with the numbers, but I did agree the calculations themselves were correct. Now what does that mean? It means that the calculation was correct (such as 100*X=100X), but the numbers were not (meaning the number represented by X is incorrect).

 

 

 

See above. I'm referring to threw it out there meaning you didn't provide enough details - I mentioned all of them earlier.

 

I had answere all the questions you asked. You keep mentioning that I hadn't seperated the drops. I have proved that for Abyssal Demons and Spiritual Mages that there would be no change if I did. None of the other tasks have rare drops with that large of a significance. Still the point is, that only applies to profit. You cannot deny that the experience rates are correct. They incontravertibly prove that you get more combat experience (and overall) when compared to Armoured Zombies. Therefore Slayer does not 'suck'. This means if your point all along was for the reverse argument, then that condition has been met and the thread was actually finished about 2 months ago.

 

 

 

No, I asked for the drop profits without any rare drops. I highly doubt all of those numbers don't include any rares, and you still have made no mention of banking time - a 150 vs. 200 task has the same banking time but considerably different killing times, skewing the rates if they are not separated.

 

See above, already proven it is not needed to seperate. Either you are an idiot or blind. I have mentioned banking times many times. I have said over and over that I have not timed it (zomg!!!! that's mentioning it!!!!!!!.... :roll: had to add that). How can I add something which I do not have.... oooh ooh I know, I know, i'll make it up like you so often do.

 

 

 

Unfortunately, the kill rate certainly isn't 300, and the drop rate isn't 1/125. I covered this long ago. Price drops were another reason for seperation.

 

And yet, I proved I could get a kill rate of 300 earlier in the thread. The drop rate is between 1/100 and 1/150, I used the median of 1/125. So yes that was all correct.

 

 

 

45k is the standard for my laid-back slaying. It's my personal rate. How do you plain to "interpret" it differently?

 

yet we have never heard anyone with maxed melee stats also get this rate. Explain to me what you could possible do in your "laid-back" state that drops the Slayer experience per hour from 30.8k to 11.25k. That is a 63% drop.

 

 

 

All of it was referring to questions that you didn't look into carefully enough. Like separation of drop rates, it's required for debate, and was not mentioned. If you have the info give it, if you don't, say so. It's quite obvious that it was already read, and the information was not in any of the questions.

 

Again, I have shown it is not needed in this case. Seriously now, are you that stupid. I am pretty sure I even explained when I first posted it that I only gave the total profit.

 

 

 

Stop playing dumb. We didn't argue for 40 pages over non existent rates.

 

I am not playing or acting dumb in any way. Go to page 8, 18th post. Here, i'll even quote it for you:

 

Using what I believe can be averaged, 20-25k Slayer xp/h and i'll say 65k of melee xp/h (though it can be higher). You could get up to 20k Summoning experience per hour. However, say it is about 17.5k. That means on average per hour you gain around 22.5k Slayer, 65k Melee, (not sure how much experience you get per damage with cannon, I think it is 2x) so 12.5k Range, 17.5k Summoning experience per hour. In total that is 117.5k experience per hour (without Hitpoints), or 140k experience per hour (with Hitpoints. Zombie Monkies gains about 100k Melee xp/h and 10k extra from a familiar. That is about 143k experience per hour with Hitpoints.

 

See how I said "believed" and how I brought up the 65k? It infers that there was now testing. See how that works?

[compfreak847]

But your debates aren't exclusively about numerical facts, therefore credibility is important. This debate isn't about numbers, is it?

 

This one isn't, but this thread and the vast majority of my RS debates are.

 

 

 

 

Then you aren't agreeing with the part that Omali and I agreed on. We said that kids can actively think and decide things on their own, which is being mature.

 

They can consider long term consequences, but it's not in the same manner that an adult would, for reasons mentioned in my post at viewtopic.php?f=66&t=787454&start=340#p6562002, detailed in the 3rd paragraph.

 

 

 

Me too. I'm telling you that your credibility keeps going down in order to get you to realize that you should stop making illogical arguments to get it back up again.

 

But I haven't been making illogical arguments, my creditability has been doing fine, and my creditability really doesn't concern me much - I deal almost exclusively with numerical fact based arguments, where numbers are the only debate.

 

 

 

 

Getting tired of repeating myself = Being proven wrong? Explain.

 

Sure. You brought up a point, I refuted it. You reworded the point, I reworded mine. This was repeated until you gave up as you had either run out of patience or ways to reword your point. My original point still stood, as I had led you into a logic trap by forcing you to center your debate on act vs. be before I pulled out the dictionary and proved my use of them to be separate - effectively proving you wrong, with no other way to respond.

 

 

 

 

Mods do make mistakes, but it's quite uncommon and bringing that up is only grabbing desperately at straws.

 

On the contrary, basing an otherwise-lost argument on the fact that in a completely unrelated argument I thought a post was within rules and one moderator didn't is grasping at straws.

[Zierro]

This one isn't, but this thread and the vast majority of my RS debates are.

 

 

 

Just because there are numbers in the debate doesn't mean it's a debate about numbers.

 

 

 

They can consider long term consequences, but it's not in the same manner that an adult would, for reasons mentioned in my post at viewtopic.php?f=66&t=787454&start=340#p6562002, detailed in the 3rd paragraph.

 

 

 

Yes, adults are generally more mature - I agreed to that from the start. Are you forgetting what the argument was? It was you saying children can't be mature... and now you're saying they can be?

 

 

 

But I haven't been making illogical arguments, my creditability has been doing fine, and my creditability really doesn't concern me much - I deal almost exclusively with numerical fact based arguments, where numbers are the only debate.

 

 

 

Statistics can be manipulated too. It occurs quite often, where one party will ignore the numbers the other party brings up, but put so much emphasis on their own numbers. Like I said, nobody's debating what 5+5 is. They're mostly debating the meaning behind the numbers.

 

 

 

Sure. You brought up a point, I refuted it. You reworded the point, I reworded mine. This was repeated until you gave up as you had either run out of patience or ways to reword your point. My original point still stood, as I had led you into a logic trap by forcing you to center your debate on act vs. be before I pulled out the dictionary and proved my use of them to be separate - effectively proving you wrong, with no other way to respond.

 

 

 

You didn't answer the question, and did nothing but your normal "I proved you wrong" routine. Again, how does not responding back automatically make someone wrong?

 

 

 

On the contrary, basing an otherwise-lost argument on the fact that in a completely unrelated argument I thought a post was within rules and one moderator didn't is grasping at straws.

 

 

 

Yes it is, because there's very very few ways that people can get a point across to you without you distorting, ignoring, sidetracking, strawmanning, etc. etc.