Tip.It Times: October 10

[magib1]

Wow...that first article was just painful. My goal in reading the Times is to listen to some players with different takes on issues, not to listen to someone rant about content updates they don't like. Besides the article feeling like a rant, I have to say I disagree with the main premise of the article that incorporating new updates into quests is bad. Honestly, if that approach was taken with every quest they'd all be the same - "go to location x, solve puzzle y, kill monster z, eat cake and celebrate". Even if you don't like a piece of content in a quest I think it's better to at least have some variety in the quests rather than having them all be the same. Sometimes these trials may turn out to be painful mistakes (I think that most of us can agree that Elemental Workshop III would have been a lot better if we could have controlled the pieces from one panel instead of having to run around the perimeter the whole time) but that's all part of the learning curve. If you never try new things, you miss out on all of their potential.

[waheera1]

Well I have to say I'm coming down strongly against article 1, for a number of reasons.

 

Firstly, as has been said before, the author seeks to misrepresent a large portion of the RS community with assertions about widespread dissatisfaction. I'll not pretend I enjoyed sitting through a game of SW for Nomad's Requiem, having played it several times to help friends in the past. Nor will I lie and say that after viewing the BA tutorial, I have since been back to play the game which never interested me anyway. At the same time, if it is relevant in any way to the storyline of a quest I simply cannot see why it is such a heinous crime to include a tutorial or game as part of the quest's requirements. I'm sure most serious questers would take an easy minigame that could potentially open up fun training routes in the future, over the light puzzle in MEP2...

 

Claims that SW is almost exclusively full of bug-abusers and low-lifes is insulting to many and grossly inaccurate anyway. Conquest was very favourably received on a different private forum that I am a member of, many of whom are what might be considered "high level". Anyone who's ever tried for lumberjack outfits will dispute the claim that talon beast charms are the only useful drop from temple trekking (it is hugely lucrative courtesy of the rewards - pure ess/ores/seeds etc and snakeskins or other gathered items). Stealing creation remains very popular with virtually all skillers seeking to save money on many buyable skills such as construction or crafting, such that if you know where to look there is almost always a non-combat game running alongside the dedicated worlds. Anyone asking for proof would do well to simply look at any of these minigames, the proof is quite clearly self-evident. The lack of knowledge and understanding implied by the author makes me question whether indeed they have ever played any of the minigames to view the kinds of community that exist for virtually all of the team games. A personal dislike of any element of the game is a perfectly good topic for an article, but should be clearly labelled as a personal view. Blithely generalising about the alleged opinions of the masses when so clearly ill-informed is precisely what will open you up to the criticisms seen on this thread. The two should be kept carefully apart.

 

Article 2:

Yes, it does irritate me somewhat, but generally the kinds of people that regularly change their names around are the kinds of people that rapidly find themselves removed from my friends list. Apart from a few friends with long-standing desires to change their names, most of my good friends have not been interested in this update and therefore it does not really affect me greatly. The article said nothing interesting or new on the topic and was quite surprisingly short, all things considered.

 

Fictional article:

Sorry to be harsh, but this series isn't up to previous standards of fictional articles. It all seems a bit twee for a storyline that supposedly involves torture, sabotage and dark arts and, although I don't ever want to read an article that brings such horrors to life on this fansite, it doesn't really fit together too well. Some parts are dreadfully predictable, others ham-fisted and others simply ridiculous. How, for example, can there be a "gaping hole in the land around the castle" when most of the castle apparently fell into the moat and the remainder is meant to be simply on fire? If it's a singular gaping hole that is around the castle, surely the castle must be surrounded by this vast emptiness? Also, what about the all the stonework, earth and water that MUST have been blown all around falador if the explosion is as big as would have been necessary? I'm pretty sure Sir Tiffy, for all his stereotyped British attributes, would be in no fit state to ponce around when considering his proximity to this gaping hole and whatever was blown out of it... Yes, I'm being incredibly pedantic and will probably come in for criticism because of it, but what marks out the greatest writers is that they show incredible attention to detail in things like that. Just a few words can entirely change the tone and meaning of an entire letter/email/paragraph/sentence if used "correctly", so it really is important to consider what is implied by sensational statements such as the one quoted previously. If it is overworked, it becomes unbelievable regardless of the fantasy setting, at which point it begins to become boring.

[Foodfight13]

I find the first article a bit of a disgrace. It is nothing more than a collection of unsupported opinions and slander...

 

When the author begins to discuss Conquest, we step once again into the territory of unsupported opinion. Many high leveled players, myself included, enjoy Conquest as a fun and alternative way to earn Pest Points. Also, it is a bit ridiculous to classify Pest Control as a outmoded and underused minigame. One has only to go to one of the Pest Control worlds, or interact with a clan like Heart Unit to find that Pest Control is as vibrantly active as ever.

 

...For future reference, Tip.It Times Editorial Panel, it would help to pick a writer who has a functional grasp of language, instead of whatever inbred monkey we have here.

 

I also find an extremely unpleasant whining undertone to this article.

 

I beg the Editorial Panel to not allow pieces of this quality to be published again, for the sake of humanity's collective rationality.

I find it ironic that you criticize the author of using unsupported opinions and slander when you also are using unsupported opinions and slander in your criticism. <_< You're offering no more factual evidence than he is. You may think that people enjoy Conquest, but your opinion isn't necessarily the truth. If you're trying to convince someone who has no knowledge of Conquest and it's popularity (such as myself) that it's actually played a lot you're not doing a very good job. It certainly doesn't help that you did an excellent job of being polite and not calling names. </end sarcasm>

 

On a different note, thanks for all the comments on the fictional. ;)

 

COUGH logical fallacy.

 

A "letter to the editor" (these responses, for sake of argument) does not require the same amount of evidence that an article writer needs. There is a major difference. In fact, a person responding in the negative about one of the author's claims is proof, however small, that the author may actually be incorrect.

 

He may be incorrect, but that doesn't mean that anyone who objects to any argument with a lack of evidence supporting their objection is automatically more likely to be correct than the person they're arguing against. Just because they say "no, you're wrong" doesn't mean they're right.

[veziv]

The main problem with the first article (and the one that annoyed me enough to log in and comment on it) is that despite the fact that the author sounds like a logical person, who knows the rules for good writing, he has to resort to childish insults and massive exaggerations to make his point.

 

For example: "... Soul Wars, a horrific minigame, visited largely by those who wished to abuse bugs to harvest heaping experience, and pure characters who wanted fast experience without the annoyance of killing monsters or watching a screen." Do Tip.It Times editors really think that this kind of rhetoric helps the writer make his point? Is it really necessary to resort to blanket accusations of rule-breaking against everybody who enjoys something you don't like?

 

Unfortunately, this kind of rhetoric is becoming common in RL politics. I will not divert the thread off-topic by bringing up specific examples, but I do hope that the article's negative reception teaches the writer (and also Tip.It editors who chose to publish it) that mixing your opponents with dirt isn't the most effective or persuasive way to make your point.

[stonewall337]

I find the first article a bit of a disgrace. It is nothing more than a collection of unsupported opinions and slander...

 

When the author begins to discuss Conquest, we step once again into the territory of unsupported opinion. Many high leveled players, myself included, enjoy Conquest as a fun and alternative way to earn Pest Points. Also, it is a bit ridiculous to classify Pest Control as a outmoded and underused minigame. One has only to go to one of the Pest Control worlds, or interact with a clan like Heart Unit to find that Pest Control is as vibrantly active as ever.

 

...For future reference, Tip.It Times Editorial Panel, it would help to pick a writer who has a functional grasp of language, instead of whatever inbred monkey we have here.

 

I also find an extremely unpleasant whining undertone to this article.

 

I beg the Editorial Panel to not allow pieces of this quality to be published again, for the sake of humanity's collective rationality.

I find it ironic that you criticize the author of using unsupported opinions and slander when you also are using unsupported opinions and slander in your criticism. <_< You're offering no more factual evidence than he is. You may think that people enjoy Conquest, but your opinion isn't necessarily the truth. If you're trying to convince someone who has no knowledge of Conquest and it's popularity (such as myself) that it's actually played a lot you're not doing a very good job. It certainly doesn't help that you did an excellent job of being polite and not calling names. </end sarcasm>

 

On a different note, thanks for all the comments on the fictional. ;)

 

COUGH logical fallacy.

 

A "letter to the editor" (these responses, for sake of argument) does not require the same amount of evidence that an article writer needs. There is a major difference. In fact, a person responding in the negative about one of the author's claims is proof, however small, that the author may actually be incorrect.

 

He may be incorrect, but that doesn't mean that anyone who objects to any argument with a lack of evidence supporting their objection is automatically more likely to be correct than the person they're arguing against. Just because they say "no, you're wrong" doesn't mean they're right.

My point was not that either side is more likely to be correct, rather that in this case the writer needs more proof then the others, just as I require less substantial resources for a 3 page paper then I would for a doctoral thesis. Whilst an author may have done some research, a letter to the editor is often published without much, if any, evidence given. That is my point, simple as that. Writing from different positions require various types of evidence and proof.

[Ts_Stormrage]

Wow... This goes for a lot for people responding in this thread:

 

L2DISTINGUISHFACTSUSEDFORARGUEMENTATIVEREASONSFROMOPINIONS

 

FACT: Conquest is not NEARLY as popular as Pest Control, Soul Wars, Castle Wars or even Barbarian Assault. Why? Simply put, Pest Control gets you Commendation points much faster, and therefor most people will play Conquest only to get a rank higher than 1250 for the Void Deflector, just like a lot of people used to train Slayer to 85 and not higher...

 

See what I did there? Its not an opinion I stated, but a fact, backed up by logical reasoning of why the things are the way they are...

 

 

Now an opinion; I find the minigame Conquest "horrific" in the sense that I am rather rewards driven, and would therefor play Pest Control sooner than Conquest.

 

The author has used both examples to make his ONLY point in his opinionated piece. He has come to a conclusion and warns the community about more and more minigames possibly becoming part of quests and diaries (you can bet your ass that the Wilderness Diary will include a game of Stealing Creation)...

 

A "letter to the editor" (these responses, for sake of argument) do not require the same amount of evidence that an article writer needs. There is a major difference. In fact, a person responding in the negative about one of the author's claims is proof, however small, that the author may actually be incorrect.

 

What?! You really are the FOX news of these forums are you not? Glen Beck could not have done it better himself...

You literally claim that, as a reader and responder, you do not need proof because the simple fact that you disagree is proof enough? Are you completely [developmentally delayed]ed? If you truly believe this, than it is no surprise to me that you never even got a response back from the Times Panel...

 

Responses like these are the sole reason this community is turning into a mudslinging flamefest, and I have now made it my personal mission to have people like you banned form these forums...

 

I would agree that this article was, actually, rather lacking in real content. Quotes such as this

In Nomad’s Requiem, players were forced to try out Soul Wars, a horrific minigame, visited largely by those who wished to abuse bugs to harvest heaping experience, and pure characters who wanted fast experience without the annoyance of killing monsters or watching a screen.

are ones I hope to never see attached to another TIF times article.

 

Is it horrific, well that is more due if anything to the quality of the PLAYERS then anything else. There are balance issues, etc, but the game more often fails because the players are either clueless, or they just don't care.

 

He is not wrong though... Those things that you name are one of the many reasons that make it a horrible minigame to play, especially since there is no mention from Jagex of fixing it in the near future. But here's my advise; since you do not want to see conclusions drawn by authors on the Tip.it Times article anymore, based on their own experience, I'd say stop readng the Times? You are not obliged to read it about being obliged to play a minigame in order to complete a quest :)

 

 

I find the first article a bit of a disgrace. It is nothing more than a collection of unsupported opinions and slander. Some of the author's notions are patently untrue. For instance, the idea that the only people to frequent Soul Wars are bots and pures is quite obviously a falsehood, as is evidenced by the existence of well-organized and maintained high level SW clans.

You do realise that the Times panel is ALLOWED to write opinionated, don't you? But, have to tried playing Soulwars on one of the designated worlds? If you have, then you'd agree with the author on this.

 

When the author begins to discuss Conquest, we step once again into the territory of unsupported opinion. Many high leveled players, myself included, enjoy Conquest as a fun and alternative way to earn Pest Points. Also, it is a bit ridiculous to classify Pest Control as a outmoded and underused minigame. One has only to go to one of the Pest Control worlds, or interact with a clan like Heart Unit to find that Pest Control is as vibrantly active as ever.

I agree with you that Pestcontrol is still massivly popular, but as I previously said; Conquest's popularity will die down once everyone has their shiny deflector...

 

Lastly, I find it extremely interesting that the author has no tolerance for being "forced" to play one single game of Conquest and Soul Wars. It is quite a daunting experience to spend ten minutes familiarizing one's self with the mechanics of a minigame; far more difficult than spending hundreds of hours clicking the same rock [/sarcasm]. I could understand legitimate protests against a quest requiring the earning of hundreds of PC points, but this is an altogether different scenario. If you can't spend ten minutes playing one minigame to progress on a quest, I suggest your time would be better served by playing Pong, or perhaps by repeatedly hitting your head on a rock.

Again, you missed the point too... He talked about the emergent trend that minigames and diaries are becoming more integrated into quests. He doesn't like it at all because it looks like blatent ploy to get us to play underused content which is underused for a different reason than lack of exposure... His opinion of it is one of disgust, but signalling the trend is undebatable..

 

It is also interesting to note that the author references, with tones of horror, a quest dealing with the Mage Training Arena. We already have it-- it's called Rune Mechanics. For future reference, Tip.It Times Editorial Panel, it would help to pick a writer who has a functional grasp of language, instead of whatever inbred monkey we have here.

 

I also find an extremely unpleasant whining undertone to this article.

 

I beg the Editorial Panel to not allow pieces of this quality to be published again, for the sake of humanity's collective rationality.

I'll go easy on you, not because you're a clan member of mine, but because you're relativly new to these boards, but what you wrote there is borderline flaming. You're not wrong about Rune Mechanics, but calling the author an inbred monkey, especially if the language in the article is sound, goes too far... Just like i said to Stonewall; you don't have to read these articles if you don't want to, even I am not forcing you :)

[Sir_Squab]

I STILL love how no one but me seems to remember that the curses quest involves a round of the barrows minigame.... Or does that just not count because many people, and more importantly, probably the author, like that game? It's popular, I like it, so it doesn't count that this one quest forces us into playing it....

 

Also, you know, I could frankly deal with being forced into the burthrope games room for a quest/diary if it was for only, say, 20 minutes. As long as I don't have to play a game with another player; and the only reason I have a problem with THAT is simply because I'm worried that I wouldn't be able to FIND a player to play the game with. Shove me in a match with an NPC in the games room that I don't need to win, then I don't mind. Perhaps a quest involves the Price of Falador wanting a game of...whatever....down there before he talks serious politcs with you or something.

 

Also, there's a point that Ts_Stormrage made that I have to agree with; I'm pretty sure the tipit times are editorial, and editorial articles are allowed to be opinionated. I think the author went a little far when he mentioned things like "with the popularity of a fart contest in a spacesuit" however.

 

Come to think of it, it DOES seem to be a trend in quests, etc, for Jagex to push minigames on us. Although I still see nothing wrong with them pushing minigames on us in quests, etc, providing they aren't too heavy-handed about it; no more then one round of a minigame, or just the tutorial; which is all that Jagex HAS pushed towards us...

 

EDIT: Come to think of it, Barrows was actually the FIRST minigame to be pushed on us in a quest too, considering I know I had curses when I fought Nomad.... now I'm curious on if curses came out before the Fremnik diary, which "forces" us to view the BA tutorial.

[Racheya]

And here I was thinking that I was special... turns out you guys hate everyone on the Times.

 

Stormveritas is one of the best authors we have on this forum and I've never failed to enjoy one of his articles even if they're a different opinion to my own. Because that's what some of us do, listen to and enjoy other people's opinions and thoughts without feeling the need to barge in and attempt to belittle and destroy every point not exactly the same as our own.

 

The article brings up some valid points and at the very least should make you notice the trend of minigames becoming a requirement of quests - whether you think that's good or bad is your own opinion.

 

I'm getting fed up at the poor attitude of the community recently. Calling articles horrific or disgraceful is a little bit of an overreaction don't you think? Authors have feelings too. There wouldn't even BE articles for you to read if people didn't volunteer their time and energy towards this. I really think that people should start acting with a little more respect.

[SirHartlar]

Anyone that writes an article has to be able to take criticism, people won't always like what they read. If it's flaming then the mods need to do their jobs and remove the posts.

[Sir_Squab]

And here I was thinking that I was special... turns out you guys hate everyone on the Times.

 

Stormveritas is one of the best authors we have on this forum and I've never failed to enjoy one of his articles even if they're a different opinion to my own. Because that's what some of us do, listen to and enjoy other people's opinions and thoughts without feeling the need to barge in and attempt to belittle and destroy every point not exactly the same as our own.

 

The article brings up some valid points and at the very least should make you notice the trend of minigames becoming a requirement of quests - whether you think that's good or bad is your own opinion.

 

I'm getting fed up at the poor attitude of the community recently. Calling articles horrific or disgraceful is a little bit of an overreaction don't you think? Authors have feelings too. There wouldn't even BE articles for you to read if people didn't volunteer their time and energy towards this. I really think that people should start acting with a little more respect.

 

I don't think the article was horrific or disgraceful (except for that "fart in a space suit" line...)

 

It's just that I completely and utterly disagree with the author's opinion.

 

I do wonder though, if the majority of the posters are able to distinguish bad-opinion* from bad-article.

 

*i.e., an opinion you don't like; this is completely subjective.

[stonewall337]

And here I was thinking that I was special... turns out you guys hate everyone on the Times.

 

Stormveritas is one of the best authors we have on this forum and I've never failed to enjoy one of his articles even if they're a different opinion to my own. Because that's what some of us do, listen to and enjoy other people's opinions and thoughts without feeling the need to barge in and attempt to belittle and destroy every point not exactly the same as our own.

 

The article brings up some valid points and at the very least should make you notice the trend of minigames becoming a requirement of quests - whether you think that's good or bad is your own opinion.

 

I'm getting fed up at the poor attitude of the community recently. Calling articles horrific or disgraceful is a little bit of an overreaction don't you think? Authors have feelings too. There wouldn't even BE articles for you to read if people didn't volunteer their time and energy towards this. I really think that people should start acting with a little more respect.

Storm may be a good author, doesn't mean everything he writes is going to be a "best seller".

 

TS: Did I say that I required no proof? NO. You pulled a liberal and completely missed the point. I said various stances and various positions require various amounts of proof. A J-mod's info should be better then a random RS player, someone writing a thesis paper needs stronger, and more accredited proofs then someone writing a 6th grade paper on leaves. Don't you see that? For the later, a Wikipedia article could be accepted by the teacher as a credible source. For the thesis paper, wikipedia would NOT be an acceptable source. That is my sole point. If someone says "200 hours of fishing is not fun for anyone" and they get 5000 people who agree, then good. But I only need 1 person who disagrees to make the statement false. My sole point was: A writer requires varying strengths of proofs depending on the writing.

 

When I do public speaking, depending on my audience, I use different sources. If I am talking to my peers, I will use personal anecdotes and personal experiences far more commonly. If I am talking before a college group or a class, I will use more formal sources. See?

 

Racheya, you seem to take everything personal. I often write negative, and positive reviews for numerous products, from music to movies to books. A negative review normally focuses on what I disliked then what I liked, as the negative outweighs the positive. I agreed with some stances Storm took, such as that SW wasn't great. I took exception to his description, as it was rather lacking in proof, as well as objectivity. I believe that the article was rushed, it certainly seemed so. However, I agree. Storm is one of the better writers for the Times.

 

And sorry Racheya, you may not like it, but I can brook dissent, but I can't brook logical fallacies, unprovable points, or radical claims. I ENJOY debate, many of us do. However, when I write my next article, I'd like you to be able to actually either DEFEND or ATTACK it with specific quotes, etc. In this case, don't just tell us to [bleep] off because you don't like negativity.

[Returnofmic]

I do not agree with the first article, I did not like the way it was written. Before you say anything, this does not mean that I have anything against Stormveritas or any of the of the people who contribute to the Tip.it Times.

 

"Many can argue that perhaps the least popular activities catered towards the masses are minigames. Some are hugely popular and see enormous buy in from player..."

Umm...right.

 

"Involvement is also closely tied to rewards."

As someone stated, wouldn't it make sense to actually PLAY a game of Pest Control, to grasp what the void knights are fighting for? Wouldn't it make sense to PLAY a game of Soul Wars, to see why the Nomad acts the way he does? Secondly, it's ONE GAME. They're not asking you to get a full void set/get 100 Zeal.

 

"Recently, Jagex has begun using the pull of high-demand elements to push less popular content upon players, forcing them to at least try the minigame before completing the quest. We saw this long ago with the Easy Fremmenik Achievement Diary, which requires viewing the Barbarian Assault. Tutorial. Additionally, we noticed that summoning seconds also required players to collect items available only through unpopular minigames such as Temple Trekking."

I won't allow you to say that Barbarian Assault is an un-popular mingame, because it isn't true.

Regarding Temple Trekking, it provides an alternative way of training Summoning (Well, collecting secondaries), it isn't forced upon us.

 

"...visited largely by those who wished to abuse bugs to harvest heaping experience, and pure characters who wanted fast experience without the annoyance of killing monsters or watching a screen."

[Regarding Soul Wars]

I'm not certain what "bug" you speak of, so I won't comment on that. However, the experience from Soul Wars is far from fast. Again, Soul Wars provides an alternative to regular training. Since the addition of the Activity bar, you have to actually "do" something. I don't see you going on about skillers woodcutting Ivy's. Same concept.

 

"These force-fed elements of the game give an objective player reflux, as our intelligence is insulted with these poorly fabricated ploys to drive activity in underused areas of the game."

Like I've stated, they're asking us to get involved in the story. Would you rather have a Grandmaster Quest that says "Oh, we do this and this and this, for some odd reason."?

 

"Dont be surprised when future quests include other unpopular games..."

Perhaps to give new/unexperienced players a chance to try the games?

Perhaps to show that there's another side of RuneScape than just killing?

Perhaps to encourage older players to try a once-forgotten activity?

[Low C]

http://blogcritics.org/culture/article/theres-no-such-thing-as-a1/

 

Article about bad reviews that I found interesting. Just because someone disagrees with an article or product or dislikes it, or simply finds it to be crap doesn't mean the community is falling apart.

[Troacctid]

And here I was thinking that I was special... turns out you guys hate everyone on the Times.

 

Stormveritas is one of the best authors we have on this forum and I've never failed to enjoy one of his articles even if they're a different opinion to my own. Because that's what some of us do, listen to and enjoy other people's opinions and thoughts without feeling the need to barge in and attempt to belittle and destroy every point not exactly the same as our own.

 

The article brings up some valid points and at the very least should make you notice the trend of minigames becoming a requirement of quests - whether you think that's good or bad is your own opinion.

 

I'm getting fed up at the poor attitude of the community recently. Calling articles horrific or disgraceful is a little bit of an overreaction don't you think? Authors have feelings too. There wouldn't even BE articles for you to read if people didn't volunteer their time and energy towards this. I really think that people should start acting with a little more respect.

So some of your articles suck. So what? It's nothing personal. :-w

[Low C]

And here I was thinking that I was special... turns out you guys hate everyone on the Times.

 

Stormveritas is one of the best authors we have on this forum and I've never failed to enjoy one of his articles even if they're a different opinion to my own. Because that's what some of us do, listen to and enjoy other people's opinions and thoughts without feeling the need to barge in and attempt to belittle and destroy every point not exactly the same as our own.

 

The article brings up some valid points and at the very least should make you notice the trend of minigames becoming a requirement of quests - whether you think that's good or bad is your own opinion.

 

I'm getting fed up at the poor attitude of the community recently. Calling articles horrific or disgraceful is a little bit of an overreaction don't you think? Authors have feelings too. There wouldn't even BE articles for you to read if people didn't volunteer their time and energy towards this. I really think that people should start acting with a little more respect.

So some of your articles suck. So what? It's nothing personal. :-w

 

I think what she is trying to say is we should not have opinions and just like all the articles each and every week. Don't be a big meany and give bad reviews either its demeaning to the volunteers. I'm reading a book about that right now, it's about a High School that has issues with giving kids bad grades because it hurts their self esteem. This thread really makes me think of that book.

[Ts_Stormrage]

Anyone that writes an article has to be able to take criticism, people won't always like what they read. If it's flaming then the mods need to do their jobs and remove the posts.

Unfortunately, spewing logical sounding crap isnt constituted as breaking a rule, nor the level of criticism I'd like to read here... It's some people's version of Glenn Beck's "I'm only asking the question!"...

 

TS: Did I say that I required no proof? NO. You pulled a liberal and completely missed the point. I said various stances and various positions require various amounts of proof. A J-mod's info should be better then a random RS player, someone writing a thesis paper needs stronger, and more accredited proofs then someone writing a 6th grade paper on leaves. Don't you see that? For the later, a Wikipedia article could be accepted by the teacher as a credible source. For the thesis paper, wikipedia would NOT be an acceptable source. That is my sole point. If someone says "200 hours of fishing is not fun for anyone" and they get 5000 people who agree, then good. But I only need 1 person who disagrees to make the statement false. My sole point was: A writer requires varying strengths of proofs depending on the writing.

 

When I do public speaking, depending on my audience, I use different sources. If I am talking to my peers, I will use personal anecdotes and personal experiences far more commonly. If I am talking before a college group or a class, I will use more formal sources. See?

 

Missing the point seems to be something I learned from you then? ;) Actually I got your point, but your writing brings it across rather differently... Something you will gladly flame someone else for (your little pot starts to turn rather black there)...

Anywho, you DID say that someone disagreeing with a certain statement may actually be considered enough to disprove that statement... I would just LOVE to rub your face in it again, but you're making it too easy... Instead I will fight your other point; that the writer of the article is supposed to be held to a higher standard than the person criticising it... Again, you try to be the alpha-male here without having a leg to stand on... If you want to criticise an article, you damn well better know what you are talking about... These articles are written on a voluntairy basis, and we intent to write for your enjoyment... If you don't enjoy the articles, don't read em, do not start attacking the writers for it...

 

We will gladly put up with your crap... But not for free...

 

Do like Returnofmic or Sir_Squab... These guys get it spot on; debate the article, debate the opinions, and disagree if you must, and do it without nitpicking... But DO NOT berate the writer for having that opinion... It makes you look like a cliché smart-mouth, just asking for an asswhooping...

 

So some of your articles suck. So what? It's nothing personal. :-w

And yet somehow, with some of the people here (and these idiots will never understand that it is THEM that I am talking about), it does turn personal...

[stonewall337]

Anyone that writes an article has to be able to take criticism, people won't always like what they read. If it's flaming then the mods need to do their jobs and remove the posts.

Unfortunately, spewing logical sounding crap isnt constituted as breaking a rule, nor the level of criticism I'd like to read here...

 

TS: Did I say that I required no proof? NO. You pulled a liberal and completely missed the point. I said various stances and various positions require various amounts of proof. A J-mod's info should be better then a random RS player, someone writing a thesis paper needs stronger, and more accredited proofs then someone writing a 6th grade paper on leaves. Don't you see that? For the later, a Wikipedia article could be accepted by the teacher as a credible source. For the thesis paper, wikipedia would NOT be an acceptable source. That is my sole point. If someone says "200 hours of fishing is not fun for anyone" and they get 5000 people who agree, then good. But I only need 1 person who disagrees to make the statement false. My sole point was: A writer requires varying strengths of proofs depending on the writing.

 

When I do public speaking, depending on my audience, I use different sources. If I am talking to my peers, I will use personal anecdotes and personal experiences far more commonly. If I am talking before a college group or a class, I will use more formal sources. See?

 

Missing the point seems to be something I learned from you then? ;) Actually I got your point, but your writing brings it across rather differently... Something you will gladly flame someone else for (your little pot starts to turn rather black there)...

Anywho, you DID say that someone disagreeing with a certain statement may actually be considered enough to disprove that statement... I would just LOVE to rub your face in it again, but you're making it too easy... Instead I will fight your other point; that the writer of the article is supposed to be held to a higher standard than the person criticising it... Again, you try to be the alpha-male here without having a leg to stand on... If you want to criticise an article, you damn well better know what you are talking about... These articles are written on a voluntairy basis, and we intent to write for your enjoyment... If you don't enjoy the articles, don't read em, do not start attacking the writers for it...

 

We will gladly put up with your crap... But not for free...

 

Do like Returnofmic or Sir_Squab... These guys get it spot on; debate the article, debate the opinions, and disagree if you must, and do it without nitpicking... But DO NOT berate the writer for having that opinion... It makes you look like a cliché smart-mouth, just asking for an asswhooping...

 

So some of your articles suck. So what? It's nothing personal. :-w

And yet somehow, with some of the people here (and these idiots will never understand that it is THEM that I am talking about), it does turn personal...

 

Maybe because SOME of the authors shouldn't be writing for the Times?

 

I don't care if the author holds an opinion, I care when the writer either:

 

1.) Can't write, or don't know when an article shouldn't be published.

 

2.) Writes using poor logic, bad examples, no proof, idiotic reasoning, etc.

[Ts_Stormrage]

Maybe SOME people shouldn't be criticising voluntairly written articles by a standard of thesis writers?

 

Like it or not, this is the best the community has to offer, cuz noone sane enough would want to write month after month and then proceed to listen to your [cabbage]storm :)

[stonewall337]

Maybe SOME people shouldn't be criticising voluntairly written articles by a standard of thesis writers?

 

Like it or not, this is the best the community has to offer, cuz noone sane enough would want to write month after month and then proceed to listen to your [cabbage]storm :)

But isn't that what Tip.it forums are about? Discussion? Hm, when did we convert to censorship? You are going to get opinions you don't like. Deal with it. I don't like listening to faulty logic, it bugs the HELL out of me. Trolls I just ignore, but if someones logic is flawed, then I am going to point it out. Same for writing.

[Ts_Stormrage]

I can handle opinions I dont like... But once again you are trying to point out flaws in others that are really your own... Faulty logic? Have you read to your last 4 posts? It's fine for pointing it out up to a point, take the example of some of the more, shall we say, "restraint" responders here. They tend to stay within the boundries of normal and polite discussion... So start with pointing out your own mistakes in logic first? Same for writing ;)

[Bladewing]

TS, may i ask what is the point in publishing if you cannot take criticism?

[GreenStorm]

After reading the ensuing posts in this thread, I can see how my post contributed to some (i.e. stonewall's) quite obvious bashing of the author. This was not my intent. I still disagree with him, yet, I see that calling him an inbred monkey was way over the line. Apologies. I did not mean to, in any way shape or form be as unpleasant and negative as some have been.

[Ts_Stormrage]

You may indeed ask that, Bladewing... But I am the wrong person to ask, because so far, everything I have written, did recieve criticism and I either agreed or disagreed with those critiques after a debate... But the critisicm was ON MY ARTICLE... Not on me personally...

 

It is that difference why I will defend other people from attacks from the likes of stonewall and yourself (I havent forgotten your stunt last week)...

[stonewall337]

I can handle opinions I dont like... But once again you are trying to point out flaws in others that are really your own... Faulty logic? Have you read to your last 4 posts? It's fine for pointing it out up to a point, take the example of some of the more, shall we say, "restraint" responders here. They tend to stay within the boundries of normal and polite discussion... So start with pointing out your own mistakes in logic first? Same for writing ;)

And you are deciding to what point I should carry out my criticism. Convoluted?

 

I don't like Obama, I think he is ruining America in several ways, and I don't ONLY criticize his policies. I criticize the man as well. Yaknow what? He does the same to others, (Limbaugh, etc) If you want to know about my political views, however, PM me.

 

One may not like my personal criticism, and as I've said at times I've carried it too far, yet I still stand 100% behind my expressed views. I don't think Racheya is a good author. That is my OPINION. I then gave my REASONS for why I think her ARTICLE was bad. In this case, I think Storm just had a flopped article. You may do the same to me, as you have already.

 

t makes you look like a cliché smart-mouth, just asking for an asswhooping

[Ts_Stormrage]

Nah, I'm going to leave the limits of where criticism ends and where flaming begins up to the mods ;)

 

Btw, what has Obama or american politics to do with this? Not only can you not write, but have you forgotten to read as well?

I mentioned Glenn Beck and Fox news to make a comparrisson to how you act in this community, mainly on this thread... Your personal political views dont interest me...