Jump to content
n_odie

Tip.It Times: 25 Jan 2009

Poll  

  1. 1. Poll



Recommended Posts

But if you take that view, what is the point of the discussion topic? It may be for our pleasure, but if I did not enjoy it then I have as much right as you to post about it.

 

Well, I didn't want to put it that bluntly, but yes, it is pointless to discuss whether we should like something or not, and none can presume to give a universal judgement on anything. I didn't want to write it down because almost every argument can come down to: 'Prove it!.' 'I can't.' 'Ha!' which is as stupid.

 

 

 

As for reading "wrongly", do not presume to insult me by suggesting that I don't know those books or have not read them. Or indeed that I am not well aware of the pleasures of learning. If i dislike a book, I will write a bad review in the hope that the next will be better. Thus I do the same when it comes to these forums.

 

I never try to insult someone. If I may conclude from this that you did read these books, I hope you liked them. If you didn't read them, I recommend them. That's all. I chose them as example because I'm reading them right now, and I like them. Bad exaples, maybe. I could agree to that. And it is your full right to write a bad review.

 

 

 

On topic of why those books were written, who knows. However, they do follow a sophisticated and well constructed storyline based on the incredible imaginations of their authors. My point is not so much why the articles were written, but why they were written as poorly as they were. I have no doubt that any of the articles (even the ridiculous imp) could have been very interesting and/or enjoyable for me to read if they were better considered before the writing began.

 

As I said, they were published for our reading pleasure. They were written because the writers liked it, presumably. And why the articles were written as they were? Possibly because they were not written poorly? They were written to please, and stressed easy reading. Written poorly is only a matter of taste, so long as the style does not interrupt the content. And the content is also a matter of taste. You wanted the article on the gods to be longer. OK, I'd like that. But the fact it wasn't long enough to you doesn't make it bad.

 

 

 

I never once said that the times should be fact based only. I merely stated that the times should have a point. By and large this week's articles contained neither facts or a point.

 

I never said you said that. And the point is pleasure. It was there, to me. The god article may have been written to make people interested by leaving out a lot? The pet rock article to make you laugh, and the hunter article to make you... well, not cry, but at least to move you?

 

 

 

"Empathy makes us feel human, and nice." That I have to say is one of the more pointless comments I've ever come across.

 

Well thanks, but do you think it true? And everything is pointless.

 

 

 

What kind of "point" would you expect the articles to have? I'm a beginner in this respect; that was only my second article. I don't yet know exactly to what the readers will respond positively. I'm more interested in criticism than compliments at this point, so tell me, how could that article have been better?

 

It is true that your criticism isn't very constructive until your last post, in which you say:

 

[hide=Waheera1's post]

First up, before I say anything else, whenever you're writing ALWAYS ask yourself: "Why am I writing this?" If you yourself don't know, it will be harder to achieve anything with what you're writing. If you have a clear purpose, such as a "religious" preach even, you will be able to focus what you write much better to support your ideas. It is always harder reading through something that doesn't have a purpose, so if you're not sure what yours is, sit back, get a brew/pint/whatever and think about what it is you REALLY want to write about. I don't know what the times are like with regard to making you write to specific topics, but I'd recommend you focus largely on anything that really interests you. Then you can contemplate how you're going to make other people read it to find out why you find it interesting.

 

 

 

Also stick to one topic, or make it clear when you're switching within your article: your article was all about gods, but touched on 1) the gods, 2) their dishonesty/unreliability, 3) the narrators within the game concerning gods, 4) you finished with asking who "you" would support? That's 4 things that could be individually approached, or at least separately paragraphed, which became blurred together at times. Keep it simpler for yourself and it will become an easier read as well as making your job easier.

 

 

 

To be honest my main issue with it is that it is too vague for the topic. I don't take a hugely significant interest in the various gods of runescape, given their number and essential insignificance in the great scheme of things, but I have come across them many times in my questing etc. I am well aware that there is a vast amount of information on each of these deities which was not even brushed upon. Without a clear purpose for the article, the end result became a brief and even at times inaccurate ramble through the gods. For this reason I think your article would have been much better if it could've been split into multiple parts over several weeks, perhaps even focussing on just one god at a time. This would have allowed a far greater amount of information to be presented and would have made for a more interesting read.

 

 

 

Personally I found your final paragraph was the most interesting for me: an explanation of the confusion within runescape's histories due to the unreliable nature of its many sources. Here you have a golden opportunity to explain the various viewpoints and key narrators using the wealth of information available, which I think could be made into a much more interesting article. Perhaps working on a theme such as that would make the information easier to present in an interesting fashion, rather than facing yourself up with a mountain of information to squeeze into an envelope.

 

 

 

As a final note, when writing about runescape's histories etc, only write about them if you have absolute conviction: chances are that if anything isn't thoroughly researched and you write about it, someone else will already have written a better article on that particular topic.

 

 

 

I hope that helped, feel free to post back if anything doesn't quite make sense or you disagree with anything I've said. I would also add that despite my harsh postings, good effort in writing the article in the first place and for taking the criticism. I understand the challenge and look forward to reading more of your articles.

[/hide]

 

That's nice. I don't agree with some of your points in the first two paragraphs, because I know well that it is not required to write well. Still I think it's nice to help. I should try that once...

 

 

 

Anyway, the arguments in my first post (and this one again) may have been badly worded. Again, I never try to insult someone. Read my signature. Well... there goes... *submit*

 

 

 

It may have been unwise to ever start this... I foresee no solution to this argument...


Supporter of Zaros | Quest Cape owner since 22 may 2010 | No skills below 99 | Total level 2595 | Completionist Cape owner since 17th June 2013 | Suggestions

99 summoning (18th June 2011, previously untrimmed) | 99 farming (14th July 2011) | 99 prayer (8th September 2011) | 99 constitution (10th September 2011) | 99 dungeoneering (15th November 2011)

99 ranged (28th November 2011) | 99 attack, 99 defence, 99 strength (11th December 2011) | 99 slayer (18th December 2011) | 99 magic (22nd December 2011) | 99 construction (16th March 2012)

99 herblore (22nd March 2012) | 99 firemaking (26th March 2012) | 99 cooking (2nd July 2012) | 99 runecrafting (12th March 2012) | 99 crafting (26th August 2012) | 99 agility (19th November 2012)

99 woodcutting (22nd November 2012) | 99 fletching (31st December 2012) | 99 thieving (3rd January 2013) | 99 hunter (11th January 2013) | 99 mining (21st January 2013) | 99 fishing (21st January 2013)

99 smithing (21st January 2013) | 120 dungeoneering (17th June 2013) | 99 divination (24th November 2013)

Tormented demon drops: twenty effigies, nine pairs of claws, two dragon armour slices and one elite clue | Dagannoth king drops: two dragon hatchets, two elite clues, one archer ring and one warrior ring

Glacor drops: four pairs of ragefire boots, one pair of steadfast boots, six effigies, two hundred lots of Armadyl shards, three elite clues | Nex split: Torva boots | Kalphite King split: off-hand drygore mace

30/30 Shattered Heart statues completed | 16/16 Court Cases completed | 25/25 Choc Chimp Ices delivered | 500/500 Vyrewatch burned | 584/584 tasks completed | 4000/4000 chompies hunted

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
But if you take that view, what is the point of the discussion topic? It may be for our pleasure, but if I did not enjoy it then I have as much right as you to post about it.

 

Well, I didn't want to put it that bluntly, but yes, it is pointless to discuss whether we should like something or not, and none can presume to give a universal judgement on anything. I didn't want to write it down because almost every argument can come down to: 'Prove it!.' 'I can't.' 'Ha!' which is as stupid.

 

 

 

As for reading "wrongly", do not presume to insult me by suggesting that I don't know those books or have not read them. Or indeed that I am not well aware of the pleasures of learning. If i dislike a book, I will write a bad review in the hope that the next will be better. Thus I do the same when it comes to these forums.

 

I never try to insult someone. If I may conclude from this that you did read these books, I hope you liked them. If you didn't read them, I recommend them. That's all. I chose them as example because I'm reading them right now, and I like them. Bad exaples, maybe. I could agree to that. And it is your full right to write a bad review.

 

 

 

On topic of why those books were written, who knows. However, they do follow a sophisticated and well constructed storyline based on the incredible imaginations of their authors. My point is not so much why the articles were written, but why they were written as poorly as they were. I have no doubt that any of the articles (even the ridiculous imp) could have been very interesting and/or enjoyable for me to read if they were better considered before the writing began.

 

As I said, they were published for our reading pleasure. They were written because the writers liked it, presumably. And why the articles were written as they were? Possibly because they were not written poorly? They were written to please, and stressed easy reading. Written poorly is only a matter of taste, so long as the style does not interrupt the content. And the content is also a matter of taste. You wanted the article on the gods to be longer. OK, I'd like that. But the fact it wasn't long enough to you doesn't make it bad.

 

 

 

I never once said that the times should be fact based only. I merely stated that the times should have a point. By and large this week's articles contained neither facts or a point.

 

I never said you said that. And the point is pleasure. It was there, to me. The god article may have been written to make people interested by leaving out a lot? The pet rock article to make you laugh, and the hunter article to make you... well, not cry, but at least to move you?

 

 

 

"Empathy makes us feel human, and nice." That I have to say is one of the more pointless comments I've ever come across.

 

Well thanks, but do you think it true? And everything is pointless.

 

 

 

What kind of "point" would you expect the articles to have? I'm a beginner in this respect; that was only my second article. I don't yet know exactly to what the readers will respond positively. I'm more interested in criticism than compliments at this point, so tell me, how could that article have been better?

 

It is true that your criticism isn't very constructive until your last post, in which you say:

 

[hide=Waheera1's post]

First up, before I say anything else, whenever you're writing ALWAYS ask yourself: "Why am I writing this?" If you yourself don't know, it will be harder to achieve anything with what you're writing. If you have a clear purpose, such as a "religious" preach even, you will be able to focus what you write much better to support your ideas. It is always harder reading through something that doesn't have a purpose, so if you're not sure what yours is, sit back, get a brew/pint/whatever and think about what it is you REALLY want to write about. I don't know what the times are like with regard to making you write to specific topics, but I'd recommend you focus largely on anything that really interests you. Then you can contemplate how you're going to make other people read it to find out why you find it interesting.

 

 

 

Also stick to one topic, or make it clear when you're switching within your article: your article was all about gods, but touched on 1) the gods, 2) their dishonesty/unreliability, 3) the narrators within the game concerning gods, 4) you finished with asking who "you" would support? That's 4 things that could be individually approached, or at least separately paragraphed, which became blurred together at times. Keep it simpler for yourself and it will become an easier read as well as making your job easier.

 

 

 

To be honest my main issue with it is that it is too vague for the topic. I don't take a hugely significant interest in the various gods of runescape, given their number and essential insignificance in the great scheme of things, but I have come across them many times in my questing etc. I am well aware that there is a vast amount of information on each of these deities which was not even brushed upon. Without a clear purpose for the article, the end result became a brief and even at times inaccurate ramble through the gods. For this reason I think your article would have been much better if it could've been split into multiple parts over several weeks, perhaps even focussing on just one god at a time. This would have allowed a far greater amount of information to be presented and would have made for a more interesting read.

 

 

 

Personally I found your final paragraph was the most interesting for me: an explanation of the confusion within runescape's histories due to the unreliable nature of its many sources. Here you have a golden opportunity to explain the various viewpoints and key narrators using the wealth of information available, which I think could be made into a much more interesting article. Perhaps working on a theme such as that would make the information easier to present in an interesting fashion, rather than facing yourself up with a mountain of information to squeeze into an envelope.

 

 

 

As a final note, when writing about runescape's histories etc, only write about them if you have absolute conviction: chances are that if anything isn't thoroughly researched and you write about it, someone else will already have written a better article on that particular topic.

 

 

 

I hope that helped, feel free to post back if anything doesn't quite make sense or you disagree with anything I've said. I would also add that despite my harsh postings, good effort in writing the article in the first place and for taking the criticism. I understand the challenge and look forward to reading more of your articles.

[/hide]

 

That's nice. I don't agree with some of your points in the first two paragraphs, because I know well that it is not required to write well. Still I think it's nice to help. I should try that once...

 

 

 

Anyway, the arguments in my first post (and this one again) may have been badly worded. Again, I never try to insult someone. Read my signature. Well... there goes... *submit*

 

 

 

It may have been unwise to ever start this... I foresee no solution to this argument...

 

 

 

I don't actually have the time or inclination to write a proper response to this. However I would suggest that you carefully consider the implied meanings of some of your comments. Then you might understand my ripostes.

 

 

 

Also, not everything is pointless, and empathy is not in fact what makes one feel human. I'm certain Saddam Hussein, Stalin, Hitler and the Khmer Rouge collectively all felt human, but I very much doubt it was because they empathised with their subjects/victims... :P

 

 

 

As for some of your other comments, reading my extended post which you yourself posted to me would probably give you the causes of my dissatisfaction, and I can assure you it was not the length. 20,000 words doesn't make a better essay than a 1,000 word one just by virtue of its length.

 

 

 

And please, don't just post back again about my tastes etc being different or the point being enjoyment. I'm pretty sure we've already established that the only reason I have written so many comments is because I felt the writing in the times deserved it. To me, the times did not meet either of the criteria you claimed they did. You're welcome to your opinion that in fact they were enjoyable and to the point, but I will always disagree.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
First up, before I say anything else, whenever you're writing ALWAYS ask yourself: "Why am I writing this?" If you yourself don't know, it will be harder to achieve anything with what you're writing. If you have a clear purpose, such as a "religious" preach even, you will be able to focus what you write much better to support your ideas. It is always harder reading through something that doesn't have a purpose, so if you're not sure what yours is, sit back, get a brew/pint/whatever and think about what it is you REALLY want to write about. I don't know what the times are like with regard to making you write to specific topics, but I'd recommend you focus largely on anything that really interests you. Then you can contemplate how you're going to make other people read it to find out why you find it interesting.

 

 

 

Also stick to one topic, or make it clear when you're switching within your article: your article was all about gods, but touched on 1) the gods, 2) their dishonesty/unreliability, 3) the narrators within the game concerning gods, 4) you finished with asking who "you" would support? That's 4 things that could be individually approached, or at least separately paragraphed, which became blurred together at times. Keep it simpler for yourself and it will become an easier read as well as making your job easier.

 

 

 

To be honest my main issue with it is that it is too vague for the topic. I don't take a hugely significant interest in the various gods of runescape, given their number and essential insignificance in the great scheme of things, but I have come across them many times in my questing etc. I am well aware that there is a vast amount of information on each of these deities which was not even brushed upon. Without a clear purpose for the article, the end result became a brief and even at times inaccurate ramble through the gods. For this reason I think your article would have been much better if it could've been split into multiple parts over several weeks, perhaps even focussing on just one god at a time. This would have allowed a far greater amount of information to be presented and would have made for a more interesting read.

 

 

 

Personally I found your final paragraph was the most interesting for me: an explanation of the confusion within runescape's histories due to the unreliable nature of its many sources. Here you have a golden opportunity to explain the various viewpoints and key narrators using the wealth of information available, which I think could be made into a much more interesting article. Perhaps working on a theme such as that would make the information easier to present in an interesting fashion, rather than facing yourself up with a mountain of information to squeeze into an envelope.

 

 

 

As a final note, when writing about runescape's histories etc, only write about them if you have absolute conviction: chances are that if anything isn't thoroughly researched and you write about it, someone else will already have written a better article on that particular topic.

 

 

 

I hope that helped, feel free to post back if anything doesn't quite make sense or you disagree with anything I've said. I would also add that despite my harsh postings, good effort in writing the article in the first place and for taking the criticism. I understand the challenge and look forward to reading more of your articles. =D>

 

 

 

One of my greatest struggles with the whole historical article concept is how do I make it an editorial instead of just a history lecture? This article was my attempt to blend the two together, but apparently they weren't blended well enough. I'm wary of going for a straight historical fact article, but my hybrid history/editorial article and my fully editorial article both didn't go over as well as I'd hoped, so perhaps I should just go for it. I suppose the worst thing that could happen is that I would be lynched by those determined and resourceful enough to track me down, but I'm sure I can avoid that by getting several more firewalls.

 

 

 

P.S. criticism is tragically underrated.

 

 

 

Well i think what you have to consider is WHY is that history relevant? For those who just wanted a brief outline of who the gods are, in a kind of "meet your makers" kind of way, it was probably spot on. But I personally felt that by the end of the article I had yet to unearth the reason you wrote it in the first place. I didn't post on your previous editorial, but just so you know, I thought it was much better set out than this attempted hybrid.

 

 

 

And again, the reason for that is because by the end of that previous article I knew why you had chosen to write it. Feel free to put your own opinions and thoughts/observations into an editorial and see where it gets you. The thing to watch out for with those is that it may well become too personal and you may take great insult if people don't like it.

 

 

 

I'd be interested to read what your "go for it" article would be, so by all means try it! :-) I'll be sure to let you know what i think! :P

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I found the introspective outlook on the hunter article the most interesting. Some of those qualities I see in myself.


4455.jpg

Always forgive your enemies; nothing annoys them so much.

Oscar Wilde

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

My clan set up a hunter challenge for February and are currently taking bets on which day I will get 99. :lol:


rssig2.png

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Could You Go From Riches to Rags? <-- very interesting! I'd like to see the people who used to bash my ol' untrimmed fletching cape to read it :P

 

:ohnoes:


aporia.png

 

95/99 Summoning

95/99 Slayer

 

[hide=This is what you look like when you play RS too long]2vvq0z4.jpg[/hide]

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I loved the article by Tripsis! And yes, I could do it and I have done it three times before and I'm about to do it again. I even spent 35m, all the cash I had at that time, on 87 Herblore. And yesterday I spent another 14m(all my cash again) to get it to 90.

 

 

 

I've never had that much cash though that I could afford multiple 99's. I had 35m, yes, but I already had 99 Cooking, Firemaking and Fletching then.



7rwjf.png
Leik.png
LIVERPOOL WILL WIN THE PREMIER LEAGUE THIS SEASON.
[01:24:34] CJ Hunnicutt: it takes skill to be that [bleep]ing stupid

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

God wars rages on was a good article. I agree that none of the gods are perfect. It also helped explain to me some runescape history.

 

 

 

The rock guide was funny and very intresting. Normally I put my kebbit hat on my rock and take frequent naps.

 

 

 

I liked the nice story of the imp as well. It gave an modern runescape aspect to an old tale.

 

Though I miss the continuation of the other series

 

 

 

The last two guest articles were really good. I can not say that 99 construction is bad, because frankly Im poor and I don't have a 99. I agree that Hunter is really boring and pretty useless as a skill. Besides imps... but who wants to wait hours for dragon imps?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

 

Though I miss the continuation of the other series.

 

It will be finished this weekend and then a new Fictional writers will be featured. 8-)


nodiehytnew.png
RIP Michaelangelopolous
Thanks to cowboy14 for the pimp sig!

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Create an account or sign in to comment

You need to be a member in order to leave a comment

Create an account

Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!

Register a new account

Sign in

Already have an account? Sign in here.

Sign In Now

×
×
  • Create New...

Important Information

By using this site, you agree to our Terms of Use.