Tip.It times - 3rd October 2010

[lordkafei]

I have the solution.

 

Instead of calling these pieces Featured Articles, call them Guest Editorials.

 

Problem solved. =D>

[GreenStorm]

How can you know that she is NOT? For all you know, you and the people you talk to are the only ones who hold opinions contrary to Racheya's, while every single other player agrees with her.

 

MIND[bleep] IRL.

why would you make a second account just to do this

 

How about

 

Its not?

 

It helps to be able to read before posting.

[das]

Racheya ONCE AGAIN showing her lack of logic skills.... and reasoning ability....

 

Okay, seriously. I see your point and everything, but enough with the insults. Saying the author is wrong is one thing, but stating that author lacks logic skills is NOT the best way to show that you are expressing your opinion, however valid, POLITELY and CONSTRUCTIVELY, about the article. Sorry about that, annoyance showing through there.

there is no right way

 

nothing will change because the times is basically a circle jerk of friends who refuse to listen to criticism

according to searchYou're the first person to use the word Circlejerk in general, gotta admit - i'm surprised it's not been used before.

 

Anyways I'd be willing to go on the record and say the time's doesn't exactly add people who are BFF's to the panel because someone is friends with them, and if you or anyone thinks the articles suck so bad that you can do better certainly talk to me and i'll work with you on getting an article published.

 

Most of the current staff was recruited in a recruitment drive ages ago.

 

However I'll make one correction

 

At the Times we are free to write whatever the hell we want

 

Not exactly. O.o

[Jonanananas]

But you can never write your own opinion and then behave like it's the opinion of others too without any evidence to back it up.

 

Stonewall did pull a lot of quotes out of context, and where the idea of the editorial panel being a group which doesn't listen to anyone come from, I don't know.

 

 

Still, there were three mistakes in racheya's article which me and others have pointed out.

 

1.Being efficient does not mean being high-leveled, elitist or caring only about achievement, not about fun

2.In one point of the article, it is worded as efficient players would be rude quite often, or at least more often than average. Racheya adds that she doesn't mean that, but in fact, the harm is already done, and secondly, if she really didn't mean it, a whole paragraph of the article is pointless.

3.While it of course becomes clear that it's Racheyas personal opinion, this opinion is not marked as such but rather as certain statements that are widly agreed with.

 

 

 

Imo, most of these mistakes simply derive from flawed writing, so I'd like to point it out that she does have some kind of constructive criticism and maybe she won't do the same mistake in the future, hopefully.

 

 

And that's just one last point, where I have to disagree with Stormrage: There is no need to "do better". These are mistakes we as readers can point out. If we make these mistakes ourselves doesn't matter as long as the discussion stays objective and does not get personal.

[Troacctid]

If you read thoroughly through the article, you can see it is her own opinion. At the Times we are free to write whatever the hell we want. Opinion, fact, analysis, fiction, its all good.

Except, like I said, she's writing as if she is representing the opinion of lots of different players.

 

Sorry, was there a specific paragraph you're speaking of? I thought it was pretty clear it was all her own opinion, even the parts where she uses 'we' seem to be using the editorial 'we' (which, I hate on a stylistic basis, but that's neither here nor there).

 

First, and often most prominent, is the average player. This average player is someone that plays Runescape maybe an hour or two a day. They often play it with friends and are what Jagex would consider an average player to be: usually fairly balanced, typical stats with not many high levels.

 

Then you have the second type, and perhaps the most important type being discussed in this article, the high level. Im going to include people who have certain goals to reach high levels in this category too. These are players that want their skills in the 90s or even 99. Theyre usually interested in playing efficiently, making money and aiming to reach their lofty goals. They tend to make up a very big part of fansites, but not the full player base. This means that theyre often overrepresented on fansites, giving people and themselves a mistaken idea of what the demography of Runescape is really like.

 

There are many, many other types of players, but the third Im going to name is the one that plays for typical fun. I use the name typical fun to mean, activities that most players would usually consider to be fun. Playing minigames, Dungeoneering with friends and going to fansite events you might find a typical fun player doing these sort of things. They might have a mixture of levels, depending on what skills they enjoy and which they dont. If they dont like a skill, they wont train it often unless they really need to so that they can do something they think will be fun.

 

Many people want to play efficiently making the most xp or gp through the quickest and most economical means. Not many people want to waste time, getting high levels on Runescape can take a long time and is a large investment of time and energy. So, its right to play it in the most efficient way, right?

 

Well no. Ive said this enough times to make you all sick of it by now, but Ill say it again. Playing Runescape for fun is the most important thing.

 

Although, I think that many people decide to quit or take it easy before reaching the point where they burn out.

 

Its true that many players find efficiency and reaching high levels to be genuinely fun, they enjoy getting the xp and racking up the high scores, theres nothing wrong with that. However

 

when these extremely efficient players that see themselves as elite

 

In fact, if youre highly efficient even though you dislike having to use certain methods - maybe you genuinely hate it, but you continue anyway because its the best xp per hour and you need that xp

 

The whole article is written in terms of "many people believe this" and "many people play like that" and "many people enjoy this". The conclusion is prefaced with "And where do I stand on this matter?" implying that everything before it is laying out and evaluating where everyone else stands.

[Ts_Stormrage]

Many people is not everyone else :P

 

Debating semantics is ok at one place, but I'd so see the overall point of the article debated, not the wording, thats for a different place...

So I hereby nominate you to be invited to be one of the Times' editors :)

[Guest jrhairychest]

Many people is not everyone else :P

 

Debating semantics is ok at one place, but I'd so see the overall point of the article debated, not the wording, thats for a different place...

So I hereby nominate you to be invited to be one of the Times' editors :)

 

Oh dear......... #-o

[Low C]

Many people is not everyone else :P

 

Debating semantics is ok at one place, but I'd so see the overall point of the article debated, not the wording, thats for a different place...

So I hereby nominate you to be invited to be one of the Times' editors :)

 

Every time someone offers improvement to an article they get the "come write for us then if you think you're so good". Not everyone has the time to do such a thing . Yes, I see where you are coming from with all the critical comments about the article, but shouldn't the times expect that? It was discussed in the clan chat that I frequent that the majority of the chat enjoyed the times many years ago. They however began bashing the recent times. I really see no harm in discussing improvements upon the articles but that's just an opinion.

[PereGrin]

@Ts_Stormrage

Nowhere did troacctid say she purported to be speaking for ALL players. I fact, he said this:

 

Except, like I said, she's writing as if she is representing the opinion of lots of different players.

 

It's not written as opinion. Racheya's article purports to speak for multiple groups of players, not just herself.

 

And then he gave multiple textual examples in support of his argument. From my point of view, he was exactly correct.

 

Don't misquote people.

[Glove]

The whole article is written in terms of "many people believe this" and "many people play like that" and "many people enjoy this". The conclusion is prefaced with "And where do I stand on this matter?" implying that everything before it is laying out and evaluating where everyone else stands.

 

One of the quotes you picked out has the phrase 'I think' in it. She uses the phrase four times in the article, and uses 'I' no less than twelve times. Even when she uses 'we' it's in an editorial 'we' context. That's substantial considering the article is only a bit over a thousand words long. 'Many people' doesn't necessarily speak for others, it just means that's what she thinks many people do, believe and enjoy; it says a lot more about her than anyone else. The closing paragraph which contains "And where do I stand on this matter?" doesn't imply that her opinion doesn't colour the rest of the article; rather I'd say it does the opposite, it reinforces that she has laid out the different sides of the issue as well as she can and is now offering up her final conclusion.

 

I'm sorry, I just don't see how this could be anything other than opinion piece.

[Low C]

On topic: I just found another thread ranting about grammar and schematics which has some criticism towards the Editorial Panel and some responses also. I would suggest reading that if you want to see more opinions of the recent articles.

Edited October 5, 2010 by Racheya
Removed reference to spammy posts

[Troacctid]

The whole article is written in terms of "many people believe this" and "many people play like that" and "many people enjoy this". The conclusion is prefaced with "And where do I stand on this matter?" implying that everything before it is laying out and evaluating where everyone else stands.

 

One of the quotes you picked out has the phrase 'I think' in it. She uses the phrase four times in the article, and uses 'I' no less than twelve times. Even when she uses 'we' it's in an editorial 'we' context. That's substantial considering the article is only a bit over a thousand words long. 'Many people' doesn't necessarily speak for others, it just means that's what she thinks many people do, believe and enjoy; it says a lot more about her than anyone else.

"I think that many players believe X"? Whatever. Same thing. You're still saying many players believe X.

 

The closing paragraph which contains "And where do I stand on this matter?" doesn't imply that her opinion doesn't colour the rest of the article; rather I'd say it does the opposite, it reinforces that she has laid out the different sides of the issue as well as she can and is now offering up her final conclusion.

Yeah, that's what I said. It implies that she's laid out where everyone else stands and is, at the end, saying what she thinks.

[Racheya]

I was going to go through a load of quotes but I've started University and, tbh, I don't have the time to argue all this.

 

So, let me just make some points.

 

1. Efficiency was chosen as a topic because it's something that I find to be interesting, as well as an active topic in the community. There is literally NOTHING to write up right now, updates wise. Without updates, it's often that ideas can run dry.
   
2. I'm not a brilliant writer, I've never done any sort of professional writing and such. I don't have much experience outside of school and forums of writing 'articles'. My writing style may have improved over the last year or so but I know that it can be improved. Yes, I mean writing STYLE. Some people have made genuine suggestions and constructive criticism. Telling me that I have poor logic, crap skilsl and whatever else is not going to help.
   
3. This brings me on to the next point - this constant nit-picky criticism. Don't take out every sentence that I write and construe it the way you want, to make some overall point that I'm apparently a really bad writer and person and that I should feel bad and be hated by everyone. I don't intend on writing an article then having to write another two article's worth of words in posts ARGUING with people. Yes, I enjoy actual discussion on the matter but more often than not I'm spending my time refuting nitty points and insults.
   
4. The Times doesn't work on groupthink or whatever. We're not a circlejerk or whatever delightful insult you decided to use. Our editors are great people, they work objectively wether they're friends or not. In fact, my friends (namely Wingless) try extra hard to point out things where people might start an argument on, because they don't want it to happen. They'll take an extra critical eye to things.
   
5. When I say things like 'many people' this and 'many people' that, I'm not trying to suggest that YOU or people YOU KNOW are like that. But, in fact, I have actually met and talked to people who have these opinions and feelings. I communicate a lot to people in Runescape and skilling can bring about a great chance to discuss updates and things about the game. Maybe you just don't know people who feel this way, but I'm not just trying to say 'many people' to try and verify my own opinion, when I might be using that to do the opposite.
   
6. The article has opinions yes, because that's what the Times does. Do you want us to post 'This week Jagex made X update' with no opinions, ideas or original thoughts? Or is it just MY opinions that people don't like?
   

 

Oh, and I've removed some of the posts from this page with people just spamming & trolling each other.

[Guest jrhairychest]

I really fail to see why the editorial panel need to be picked apart. After all they're just doing a job for free in their own time. It's more to do with people disagreeing with Racheya's opinion so they'll look for faults simply because they don't like what she has to say.

Edited October 5, 2010 by Racheya
Edited out quotes of removed posts

[Low C]

Thanks for the clarifications Rach, but to be honest, what Stone wall did can only help writing skills. I sent him a paper of mine that I was writing for a College level class and he quickly pointed out my flaws. One thing I've learned from taking this course is peer review is the biggest impact on my writing skills thus far. Even my Professor hasn't provided as much insight as peers have. I do however think you are right about being overly critical and maybe two threads could be made? One for discussion and one for review? Not sure how that would work just throwing it out there.

[iiLy]

I kind of think that this has gone a bit to far, I really dont see why you guys and girls are bickering over a few lines in an entire article. While I dont believe in stereotyping the writer has a point, high levels with multiple 99's are usually the ones flaming others with words such as Noob etc. This is the thing though, all players should have respect for each other on the game and on these forums. Play the game and post on the forum how you want and let other players/posters do the same. Remember this is just a GAME/FORUM. I am probably the most inefficient woodcutter on the planet, I cut yews not ivy, and I have hosted Woodcutting races across runescape, (you go to every city/region and get a full inventory of logs bank them and run to the next area [not teleport]) its a fun way to mix it up and I have a couple dozen people that I do this with every week or so. Even though I prefer fun ways of training to grinding I still have respect for efficient players, and I really hate to see people resent each other over a forum on a fansite of an online video game. my 10 cents =)

[stonewall337]

Are you just arguing for the sake of argument? Stonewall was giving criticism, that isn't a bad thing. His "opinions" are to help Racheya's writing, even the best of articles can be criticized.

 

I disagree. Stonewall's argument was mostly about semantics, and occasionally irrelevant to the topic of the article. Besides, discussion is allowed which means even criticism can be criticized.

 

 

#7. I think the fact she was getting at is, although you may be elite, that doesn't mean you look-down and insullt people who aren't as "elite" as you.

 

I'm fairly certain Racheya meant elitist, not elite.

 

#9. Mostly good points, except for 76k'ers. Frankly, the only real reason that 76k'ing isn't against the rules is that there is no bureaucratic way to enforce anti-76k'ing, because the line between 76k'ing and not can be very blurry. The concept of wearing 76k and having another person kill you so they can profit, or vice-versa, is actually against the spirit of the game and frowned upon by Jagex last I checked; but like I said, it's not enforceable.

 

Stonewall didn't read the very next sentence in the article. In fact, he managed to pull several quotes out of context.

 

 

Citation needed. Without one, your argument has no standing. I gave exact quotations of her article, as well as my response to them. Personally, I find the pretend objectivity more offensive, and more a show of poor writing and logic skills, then most everything else. If you are going to write an op-ed, at least make it clear where you stand. The innate bias is so plain, and well as the lack of logic, that reading this article made me cringe.

 

Racheya, I literally laughed when I read "I don't have time to argue all this."

 

@TS_Stormrage. Due to staff politics, not only was my last application to the Times completely ignored, with not even a PM back until I got in touch with someone months later, but I havn't heard back from the several staff members whom I hit up with ideas for several of my articles, which I wanted peer-review on. Why should I bother to write when it is so obvious that, due only to politics, nothing will come of my work?

 

Also, we don't have much outside of semantics to debate, the whole article was flawed, mainly DUE to a misuse, and mis definition of numerous words.

[Glove]

The whole article is written in terms of "many people believe this" and "many people play like that" and "many people enjoy this". The conclusion is prefaced with "And where do I stand on this matter?" implying that everything before it is laying out and evaluating where everyone else stands.

 

One of the quotes you picked out has the phrase 'I think' in it. She uses the phrase four times in the article, and uses 'I' no less than twelve times. Even when she uses 'we' it's in an editorial 'we' context. That's substantial considering the article is only a bit over a thousand words long. 'Many people' doesn't necessarily speak for others, it just means that's what she thinks many people do, believe and enjoy; it says a lot more about her than anyone else.

"I think that many players believe X"? Whatever. Same thing. You're still saying many players believe X.

 

No, it's not the same thing. One is stated as though it's fact, the other is clearly stated as though opinion. Considering the context of how the article is delivered, 'I think' is implied pretty well every time she uses 'many people' (or 'many players,' whichever she actually uses in the article). Stating 'I think' clearly indicates to the reader that something isn't just based on facts; that's why professors eat you alive if you use it in an academic essay. Using 'I' implies the same thing.

 

The closing paragraph which contains "And where do I stand on this matter?" doesn't imply that her opinion doesn't colour the rest of the article; rather I'd say it does the opposite, it reinforces that she has laid out the different sides of the issue as well as she can and is now offering up her final conclusion.

Yeah, that's what I said. It implies that she's laid out where everyone else stands and is, at the end, saying what she thinks.

 

Um, no. I honestly can't tell if you're deliberately misinterpreting my words, but what I'm saying is that she's laying out what she thinks the situation is for the entire article; meaning that the entire article is comprised on her own thoughts on things, even when these thoughts are about what others may think of things. The entire thing is her interpretation of a situation, a set of ideas surrounding a topic within the community; then she comes to a conclusion about that situation. Yes, she lays out what she believes is generally where people stand, but that doesn't mean she's laying it out as fact (immutable, without question); she lays it out as her opinion. She then gives her conclusion about it, which is still her opinion. The shift from interpreting to coming to a conclusion doesn't change that it's her opinion.

[Wingless]

I personally would like to make some points on the... status of how people are receiving Rachael's article. Much like the rest of the 'arguments' on this thread, my viewpoint is of my own and of my own personal opinion.

 

As most people would have noticed, I was in charge of editing this week. This gives me the opportunity to read through the articles that are lined up, spot spelling and grammatical issues (etc) and express my views on the article. At first, there were some points I told her she may want to keep an eye on, just in case, but they were quickly fixed to prevent this from happening. I saw it as a well-presented argument (once the points I brought out were cleared up) with her own opinion. It was not a flaming rant and it was certainly not trollbait. It was Racheya's, and probably other people's, viewpoint.

Now I may be wrong, but don't newsletters and such have personal viewpoints, or opinions? How else would magazines, such as Gaming genres, stay alive if it was all facts? For instance, I think Portal is one of the greatest games out there, others do not. That is not a FACT, but rather an OPINION, much like Rachael's opinion on efficiency. One has to remember that this is a newsletter, where articles are heavily opinionated. Tip.It Times is not the news.

 

Also, if you feel any lack from us, in this apparent 'bad string of articles', then please feel free to express that to us in a PM. Note to us how we are 'lacking', or, if you feel you can do better, come up with your own topic and write on it. Clearly, if you’re so good at taking points, misconstruing them and then making a completely barbaric post, then you’re obviously better than us. :)

 

Oh and one last thing. It is absolutely disgusting to bash an author. One shows a complete lack of manners if they bash an author. If you have any problems with an article, then express your views on the article and not the author.

 

That is all.

[EmEss]

I think that everyone should STFU and stop bickering over something so trivial as an article!!! >.<

 

Cut Racheya some slack, she's never said she was unbiased... It would be a very boring article had it been unbiased.

 

AND FOR GOD SAKE, PEOPLE, taking quotes out of context is BAD FORM. BAD FORM. <_<

[Troacctid]

The whole article is written in terms of "many people believe this" and "many people play like that" and "many people enjoy this". The conclusion is prefaced with "And where do I stand on this matter?" implying that everything before it is laying out and evaluating where everyone else stands.

 

One of the quotes you picked out has the phrase 'I think' in it. She uses the phrase four times in the article, and uses 'I' no less than twelve times. Even when she uses 'we' it's in an editorial 'we' context. That's substantial considering the article is only a bit over a thousand words long. 'Many people' doesn't necessarily speak for others, it just means that's what she thinks many people do, believe and enjoy; it says a lot more about her than anyone else.

"I think that many players believe X"? Whatever. Same thing. You're still saying many players believe X.

 

No, it's not the same thing. One is stated as though it's fact, the other is clearly stated as though opinion. Considering the context of how the article is delivered, 'I think' is implied pretty well every time she uses 'many people' (or 'many players,' whichever she actually uses in the article). Stating 'I think' clearly indicates to the reader that something isn't just based on facts; that's why professors eat you alive if you use it in an academic essay. Using 'I' implies the same thing.

 

The closing paragraph which contains "And where do I stand on this matter?" doesn't imply that her opinion doesn't colour the rest of the article; rather I'd say it does the opposite, it reinforces that she has laid out the different sides of the issue as well as she can and is now offering up her final conclusion.

Yeah, that's what I said. It implies that she's laid out where everyone else stands and is, at the end, saying what she thinks.

 

Um, no. I honestly can't tell if you're deliberately misinterpreting my words, but what I'm saying is that she's laying out what she thinks the situation is for the entire article; meaning that the entire article is comprised on her own thoughts on things, even when these thoughts are about what others may think of things. The entire thing is her interpretation of a situation, a set of ideas surrounding a topic within the community; then she comes to a conclusion about that situation. Yes, she lays out what she believes is generally where people stand, but that doesn't mean she's laying it out as fact (immutable, without question); she lays it out as her opinion. She then gives her conclusion about it, which is still her opinion. The shift from interpreting to coming to a conclusion doesn't change that it's her opinion.

In an editorial, saying "I think you think this" is functionally identical to saying "You think this." We know it's what you think because it's an opinion piece and you're the one writing it. Stating it outright is redundant.

[stonewall337]

I personally would like to make some points on the... status of how people are receiving Rachael's article. Much like the rest of the 'arguments' on this thread, my viewpoint is of my own and of my own personal opinion.

 

As most people would have noticed, I was in charge of editing this week. This gives me the opportunity to read through the articles that are lined up, spot spelling and grammatical issues (etc) and express my views on the article. At first, there were some points I told her she may want to keep an eye on, just in case, but they were quickly fixed to prevent this from happening. I saw it as a well-presented argument (once the points I brought out were cleared up) with her own opinion. It was not a flaming rant and it was certainly not trollbait. It was Racheya's, and probably other people's, viewpoint.

 

Now I may be wrong, but don't newsletters and such have personal viewpoints, or opinions? How else would magazines, such as Gaming genres, stay alive if it was all facts? For instance, I think Portal is one of the greatest games out there, others do not. That is not a FACT, but rather an OPINION, much like Rachael's opinion on efficiency. One has to remember that this is a newsletter, where articles are heavily opinionated. Tip.It Times is not the news.

 

Also, if you feel any lack from us, in this apparent 'bad string of articles', then please feel free to express that to us in a PM. Note to us how we are 'lacking', or, if you feel you can do better, come up with your own topic and write on it. Clearly, if youre so good at taking points, misconstruing them and then making a completely barbaric post, then youre obviously better than us. :)

 

Oh and one last thing. It is absolutely disgusting to bash an author. One shows a complete lack of manners if they bash an author. If you have any problems with an article, then express your views on the article and not the author.

 

That is all.

 

 

Actually, you are wrong. It is completely normal to criticize an author, as well as his pieces, and style. CLEARLY you havn't read many reviews, sir.

 

Here are some examples of different negative reviews: "I weep for the souls of the trees that died to make this book" "The occasional good parts of the book weren't really all that good at all; they just seemed that way by comparison to the other even-slower parts. I found the footnotes to be slightly more entertaining" etc

 

Not to mention, the internet is a far different brand of media the newspapers, etc. An author needs to be ready to accept criticism.

 

"But when people like Stonewall337 start disecting every single word we've written down, pulling it out of context and then blame us for the fact that it does not make sense, does not encourage us to get engaged in the conversation about our own articles"

 

Show one quote I took out of context, instead of simply claiming I did so.

[stonewall337]

I'd also like to go on record as being perfectly willing to to edit, and help in a friendly way, any article Racheya or any other Times author is writing. When criticism from the past from several of us is not only blown off completely, but treated as "trolling" or "nitpicking", future criticism is probably going to be more severe in nature.

[Ts_Stormrage]

@Pere Grin; He did actually, last line on the previous page ;)

 

@Stonewall:

 

9.)

 

And where do I stand on this matter? Well, I think after much discussion on this topic I’ve come to the conclusion that the best way to play is however you want to

 

Do you really mean this? So, you are for allowing anything, as long as it is in the rules? I should hold you to this. From now on, you have NO excuse to complain against anything which is within RS rules, and Jagex ToS. No more complaining about 76k'ers, rushers, etc.

 

The article was not about 76k or PK style ;)

 

 

 

Also @ person below me; this flurry of posts isnt goign to die down any time soon, and I doubt the current tone of voice (so to speak) wont either :P

[Vulxai]

In most cases where the "criticism" is blown off, it's because it's paired with insults. When you pair insults with criticism, no one's going to take anything you've said seriously. Just my opinion from what I've seen, but I must admit I have not read every single post.