Jump to content

Welcome to Rune Tips, the first ever RuneScape help site. We aim to offer skill guides, quest guides, maps, calculators, informative databases, tips, and much more to help you get the most from the Massive Online Adventure Game, RuneScape, by Jagex Ltd © 2009.

Report Ad

Welcome to Forum.Tip.It
Register now to gain access to all of our features. Once registered and logged in, you will be able to create topics, post replies to existing threads, give reputation to your fellow members, get your own private messenger, post status updates, manage your profile and so much more. If you already have an account, login here - otherwise create an account for free today!
Photo

Tip.It times - 3rd October 2010


  • This topic is locked This topic is locked
188 replies to this topic

#181
stonewall337
[ Display Name History ]

stonewall337

    Ice Giant Melter

  • Members
  • 3,681 posts
  • Gender:Male
  • Joined:17 September 2007
  • RuneScape Status:Retired
  • RSN:Stonewall337
  • Clan:<Killing Time> of Dawnbringer


I would almost agree with you. But here is the thing - Assumptions are present, but never stated. So I'd disagree with your second paragraph.



One can't use assumptions, inference, or implications in a court of law, or debate, to hold anywhere near the same gravity which actual statements hold. You can't ASSUME what I meant with the same degree of certainty as what I actually said. As such, assuming someone perpetrated a crime is grounds for surveillance, and evidence gathering, but not for committing to jail as guilty.

Stonewall337.png

Drops

#182
Racheya
[ Display Name History ]

Racheya

    A noob

  • Editorial Panel
  • 7,253 posts
  • Gender:Female
  • Location:Salford, England
  • Joined:17 October 2008
  • RuneScape Status:Retired
  • RSN:Bernkastel



I would almost agree with you. But here is the thing - Assumptions are present, but never stated. So I'd disagree with your second paragraph.



One can't use assumptions, inference, or implications in a court of law, or debate, to hold anywhere near the same gravity which actual statements hold. You can't ASSUME what I meant with the same degree of certainty as what I actually said. As such, assuming someone perpetrated a crime is grounds for surveillance, and evidence gathering, but not for committing to jail as guilty.

This isn't the court of law... I'm not on trial here. No matter how much it feels like I am. This is JUST a discussion topic for an article on Runescape... :-|


Posted Image
I edit for the [Tip.It Times]. I rarely write in [My Blog]. I am an [Ex-Moderator].


#183
Erewhon2
[ Display Name History ]

Erewhon2

    Bear Fur

  • Members
  • 288 posts
  • Gender:Female
  • Joined:10 August 2009
  • RuneScape Status:P2P
  • RSN:Aquillegia

As a debater, and as someone involved in local politics, one of the tricks one need's to learn early is to argue both sides. It isn't rare in debate to have to argue both affirmative AND negative. We shouldn't need 2 authors.


Well that explains a lot, after all politicians are well known for slinging mud at their percieved adversaries. And from the other perspective I've not seen you arguing both sides either.


Its easy, if you don't have a preconceived bias, which is not incredibly hard to achieve, if one can't make up his mind which side to come down on. Otherwise, you are right. If you already has his mind made up, there can be a bias, but it really depends on the author.


Everyone has a preconcieved bias and natural prejudice, usually directed by their upbringing and life experiences. It takes a strong personality and maturity to stand back and be truly objective, not something that I have seen evidenced by your posts in any way.


You don't see the difference between one group giving examples, and the others simply playing a "leave Brittney Spears alone"?

I'm sorry. If you don't see the difference, there is little hope for you.


Is this an attempt to justify your arrogant and offensive attitude? I have no idea who Racheya is, other than a member of the Tip.it team, however I will not stand back and watch behaviour of this nature that is completely out of preportion to the circumstances.

What do I, or others need to evidence? That the article was great? That I agree with everything she put in there? Actually the article was fine for a friendly and fun site to put forward about a game. Your evidence is bias towards expectations way beyond was was needed or required. As has previously been stated by others, this is not an article in the Financial Times or Guardian. In my opinion you (and others) need to have a serious reality check.
Posted Image

#184
stonewall337
[ Display Name History ]

stonewall337

    Ice Giant Melter

  • Members
  • 3,681 posts
  • Gender:Male
  • Joined:17 September 2007
  • RuneScape Status:Retired
  • RSN:Stonewall337
  • Clan:<Killing Time> of Dawnbringer


As a debater, and as someone involved in local politics, one of the tricks one need's to learn early is to argue both sides. It isn't rare in debate to have to argue both affirmative AND negative. We shouldn't need 2 authors.


Well that explains a lot, after all politicians are well known for slinging mud at their percieved adversaries. And from the other perspective I've not seen you arguing both sides either.


Its easy, if you don't have a preconceived bias, which is not incredibly hard to achieve, if one can't make up his mind which side to come down on. Otherwise, you are right. If you already has his mind made up, there can be a bias, but it really depends on the author.


Everyone has a preconcieved bias and natural prejudice, usually directed by their upbringing and life experiences. It takes a strong personality and maturity to stand back and be truly objective, not something that I have seen evidenced by your posts in any way.


You don't see the difference between one group giving examples, and the others simply playing a "leave Brittney Spears alone"?

I'm sorry. If you don't see the difference, there is little hope for you.


Is this an attempt to justify your arrogant and offensive attitude? I have no idea who Racheya is, other than a member of the Tip.it team, however I will not stand back and watch behaviour of this nature that is completely out of preportion to the circumstances.

What do I, or others need to evidence? That the article was great? That I agree with everything she put in there? Actually the article was fine for a friendly and fun site to put forward about a game. Your evidence is bias towards expectations way beyond was was needed or required. As has previously been stated by others, this is not an article in the Financial Times or Guardian. In my opinion you (and others) need to have a serious reality check.


Another straw man, the initial 2 quotes were simply in response to the idea of dual-author articles, and were in no way relating to the current times article. Maybe you should try and learn more about a certain quote before using it out of context. Just a tip. As well, the 3rd quote you used was directly pointed out as applying ONLY to the parties described, not you. As such, you don't fit the defined parties, and thus, it doesn't apply to you. I thought that was fairly obvious.

@Racheya. ONCE AGAIN you 100% missed my point. Why bother explaining anything to you when you JUST DON'T GET IT.

My point wasn't that you were "on trial". Rather that you were inferring things which weren't stated, and then basing your argument on inferences, instead of actual facts. That is called a LOGICAL FALLACY.

Not to mention you refused to either show where my (alleged) quotes were from, etc, or explain yourself, and your false quotes.

"its just a discussion topic"...Geez. That type of argument is overused. In fact, it is nothing more then an excuse, where one claims that poor job was poorly done because "its just so and so" or "it doesn't matter".

I've written several guest articles so far, and scrapped everyone. Why? Because I wasn't happy with them.

Stonewall337.png

Drops

#185
Guest_jrhairychest_
[ Display Name History ]

Guest_jrhairychest_
  • Guests

Another straw man, the initial 2 quotes were simply in response to the idea of dual-author articles, and were in no way relating to the current times article. Maybe you should try and learn more about a certain quote before using it out of context. Just a tip. As well, the 3rd quote you used was directly pointed out as applying ONLY to the parties described, not you. As such, you don't fit the defined parties, and thus, it doesn't apply to you. I thought that was fairly obvious.

@Racheya. ONCE AGAIN you 100% missed my point. Why bother explaining anything to you when you JUST DON'T GET IT.

My point wasn't that you were "on trial". Rather that you were inferring things which weren't stated, and then basing your argument on inferences, instead of actual facts. That is called a LOGICAL FALLACY.


Is all this venom because you didn't get your article posted in the times?

#186
stonewall337
[ Display Name History ]

stonewall337

    Ice Giant Melter

  • Members
  • 3,681 posts
  • Gender:Male
  • Joined:17 September 2007
  • RuneScape Status:Retired
  • RSN:Stonewall337
  • Clan:<Killing Time> of Dawnbringer


Another straw man, the initial 2 quotes were simply in response to the idea of dual-author articles, and were in no way relating to the current times article. Maybe you should try and learn more about a certain quote before using it out of context. Just a tip. As well, the 3rd quote you used was directly pointed out as applying ONLY to the parties described, not you. As such, you don't fit the defined parties, and thus, it doesn't apply to you. I thought that was fairly obvious.

@Racheya. ONCE AGAIN you 100% missed my point. Why bother explaining anything to you when you JUST DON'T GET IT.

My point wasn't that you were "on trial". Rather that you were inferring things which weren't stated, and then basing your argument on inferences, instead of actual facts. That is called a LOGICAL FALLACY.


Is all this venom because you didn't get your article posted in the times?

Nope, as I stated before, I haven't submitted the ones which I've written, as I wasn't happy with them. As well, due to college, work, and real life, I haven't been able to either re-write, or write, more. Not to mention it would most likely be a futile attempt, as from past experience anything "official" on TIF is far more dependent on inter-politics then on any actual skill.

As well, I don't see any "venom". That is, unless pointing out errors is now called Venom in these politically correct days...

Stonewall337.png

Drops

#187
Erewhon2
[ Display Name History ]

Erewhon2

    Bear Fur

  • Members
  • 288 posts
  • Gender:Female
  • Joined:10 August 2009
  • RuneScape Status:P2P
  • RSN:Aquillegia

Another straw man, the initial 2 quotes were simply in response to the idea of dual-author articles, and were in no way relating to the current times article. Maybe you should try and learn more about a certain quote before using it out of context. Just a tip.

@Racheya. ONCE AGAIN you 100% missed my point. Why bother explaining anything to you when you JUST DON'T GET IT.

My point wasn't that you were "on trial". Rather that you were inferring things which weren't stated, and then basing your argument on inferences, instead of actual facts. That is called a LOGICAL FALLACY.


Firstly don't make references that only you understand, what on earth is a "straw man"?

As for the quotes, are you saying they were 'off topic'? They appeared to have a lot of relevance to the arguement you are maintaining (I won't dignify your responses by calling them part of a debate). As for providing me with a tip, no thank you, I'm as likely to take advice from you as I would Nick Leeson on financial advice, and I would suggest Racheya takes the same stance. :grin:

As for you last point, I reiterate....take a reality check!
Posted Image

#188
stonewall337
[ Display Name History ]

stonewall337

    Ice Giant Melter

  • Members
  • 3,681 posts
  • Gender:Male
  • Joined:17 September 2007
  • RuneScape Status:Retired
  • RSN:Stonewall337
  • Clan:<Killing Time> of Dawnbringer


Another straw man, the initial 2 quotes were simply in response to the idea of dual-author articles, and were in no way relating to the current times article. Maybe you should try and learn more about a certain quote before using it out of context. Just a tip.

@Racheya. ONCE AGAIN you 100% missed my point. Why bother explaining anything to you when you JUST DON'T GET IT.

My point wasn't that you were "on trial". Rather that you were inferring things which weren't stated, and then basing your argument on inferences, instead of actual facts. That is called a LOGICAL FALLACY.


Firstly don't make references that only you understand, what on earth is a "straw man"?

As for the quotes, are you saying they were 'off topic'? They appeared to have a lot of relevance to the arguement you are maintaining (I won't dignify your responses by calling them part of a debate). As for providing me with a tip, no thank you, I'm as likely to take advice from you as I would Nick Leeson on financial advice, and I would suggest Racheya takes the same stance. :grin:

As for you last point, I reiterate....take a reality check!



Wow, Straw man is a very well known logical fallacy. A little research would have shown that to you.

http://lmgtfy.com/?q=Straw+man+fallacy

Stonewall337.png

Drops

#189
n_odie
[ Display Name History ]

n_odie

    N. In Charge!

  • Members
  • 5,383 posts
  • Gender:Male
  • Location:Tipped Cowman
  • Joined:17 January 2006
  • RuneScape Status:P2P
  • RSN:N_odie
Guys, I tried to ask that we stay on topic, but this thread isn't improving.

Going to go ahead and lock it, feel free to pm me with any concerns. :)

Posted Image
RIP Michaelangelopolous
Thanks to cowboy14 for the pimp sig!





0 user(s) are reading this topic

0 members, 0 guests, 0 anonymous users