Jump to content

Tip.It Times - 19th February 2012


tripsis

Recommended Posts

To Ibcrootbeer: That's certainly an appealing solution. However, identifying someone's IP through a proxy with their location may not be so easy <_< .

"Fight for what you believe in, and believe in what you're fighting for." Can games be art?

---

 

 

cWCZMZO.png

l1M6sfb.png

My blog here if you want to check out my Times articles and other writings! I always appreciate comments/feedback.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • Replies 100
  • Created
  • Last Reply

Top Posters In This Topic

IP bans are good in theory, but the logistics of making it successful is overwhelmingly difficult. It's simply too easy to evade the proposed system. How about giving players a tool to omit their messages (beyond ignore list, perhaps an auto-pruning list), or an incentive to comply with the rules - thus making it irrational to solicitate/spam/rwt on RuneScape?

 

I think we still haven't reached the core of the problem - we're merely tackling the symptoms of a mismanaged RuneScape. It'll be a fruitless cause.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Giving players an incentive to follow the rules sounds nice, but how would a substantial fraction of a hundred thousand players be rewarded (and much less, tracked)?

"Fight for what you believe in, and believe in what you're fighting for." Can games be art?

---

 

 

cWCZMZO.png

l1M6sfb.png

My blog here if you want to check out my Times articles and other writings! I always appreciate comments/feedback.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

 

 

It depends how you'd define bashing. If critique is considered bashing, then I'd argue that it's a meaningless term - it fails to mark the distinction between constructive feedback and criticism that lacks purpose.

 

I think you've misidentified the inference in my post - I was referring to the 'this is the best article ever written'. It's written as though it's objectively true, which it obviously isn't. Nor is it agreed via a sufficiently large group consensus. Oh, and even if he is entitled to critique articles, it doesn't make it any more valid. The entitlement has no relevance to the truth value of the claim(s).

 

I claim it is the best article written because, in my opinion not yours, it tells of a subject that has rarely been brought up in the relatively innocent Times publication. I thought it should have been featured instead of the defense one because the defense one has been discussed to no end on RSOF, in game, irc channels, etc. You don't hear about solicitation to minors, especially not to 11 year old girls, in a video game.

 

I'm not saying the defense one wasn't well written, because it was. But the third article had first hand information, drew at emotions, had a source backing some claims, and was never written about.

 

It's subjectively true, so you should identify it as such. I don't see the necessity for the unprecedented ridicule and animosity of the pre-edited post. In addition to that, your pre-edited allegations are completely unsubstantiated, so they hold no weight at all. Heck - even if it's given that they're true, they fail to discredit my points. It's merely committing the ad-hominem fallacy, which is laughable in all honesty.

 

I don't agree that drawing at emotions is considered good argumentation - it's flawed because it falsely persuades readers on the basis of evoking an emotional response as opposed to a rational response.

No he does not have to.

 

As far as the second article goes, I would love it if we had more opportunities to make decisions in quests. I especially loved the decision that we had to make at the end of One Piercing Note.

 

[spoiler=One Piercing Note spoiler]I personally enjoyed throwing the killer off the tower. :twisted:

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

@Assume Leave me the hell alone dude. I liked the article. That's it. I don't need to identify something I thought was just my opinion. No need to be arrogant.

 

I'd be cursing you out right now were it not for tripsis.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

take a little time and breathe deeply. You are missing the big picture in your focus on Best Ever and Useless.

 

The discussion content over rides the specificity. If superlatives are of exceptional value and require an adherence to their valuation, the conversation will be mired in a discussion of meaning.

 

Per your discussion of such evaluations, methinks thou dost protest too much. The Question is : Is Solicitation a problem? Quibbling over the excellence of the phrasing of the Question is a distraction from the Question.

 

Did you intend this result? Choose a side and declare yourself. For Myself: Children should not be solicited for sexual, commercial, or political activities.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

For Myself: Children should not be solicited for sexual, commercial, or political activities.

Unfortunately, they are going to be and that is the sad reality of an electronically connected society. Today's youth are connected globally like no other point in history, and it's only going to become easier and easier for predators to take advantage of children who are ignorant of the risks in the future. All we can do is try to educate and prepare our children for when it does happen. It's no longer enough to warn them about strangers who come up to them on the street, now we have to warn them about strangers no matter where they talk to them.

 

It is unfortunate that this kind of thing is happening in RuneScape, but the parental controls are there for a reason. It's not up to Jagex to make sure parents to use those controls, it's up to the parents. I know that everything my children do online is monitored and they are not simply given free reign to discover the horrors of the internet on their own.

 

Lord knows there's stuff out there I wish I had never seen, I can only imagine what those things would do to an impressionable child.

 

f2punitedfcbanner_zpsf83da077.png

THE place for all free players to connect, hang out and talk about how awesome it is to be F2P.

So, Kaida is the real version of every fictional science-badass? That explains a lot, actually...

Link to comment
Share on other sites

@Assume Leave me the hell alone dude. I liked the article. That's it. I don't need to identify something I thought was just my opinion. No need to be arrogant.

 

I'd be cursing you out right now were it not for tripsis.

And this is why we can't have a discussion ever...

Stonewall337.png
[hide=Drops]Araxxor Eye x1 Leg pieces x2
GWD: 5000 Addy bar Steam B Staff x3 Z Spear x6 Sara. Hilt x2 Bandos Hilt x2 (LS, Solo)SS x6 (1 LS)
Tormented Demons: Shard x6 Slice x5 Claws x9 Limbs x3
DKS: Archer x21 Warrior x31 Berserker x30 Axe x51[/hide]

Link to comment
Share on other sites

@Assume Leave me the hell alone dude. I liked the article. That's it. I don't need to identify something I thought was just my opinion. No need to be arrogant.

 

I'd be cursing you out right now were it not for tripsis.

 

It's funny - my detractors often tend to be highly irate like yourself. I don't understand the point of the unnecessary vitriol and animosity - for what cause? I don't see how it benefits either parties by 'cursing [one] out' [sic] as you say. Is it that difficult to compose an argument on the internet without resorting to such petty fallacies?

 

I'd like to see you quote me where I was allegedly 'arrogant', if you're even using the correct definition. Indeed, you have an entitlement to hold and express your opinion, but by no means does that substantiate it into something valid or meaningful.

 

Are you suggesting that the only qualifiers to be the 'best article ever' would be simply to talk about something seldomly discussed?

 

EDIT - I don't see why criticism should be suppressed. Why shouldn't I respond to your posts/remarks? Do remember that your opinion is rather meaningless unless you support it with argument/evidence.

 

If your remark that "it was the greatest Times article that was ever written," were presented in a way that clearly suggested that you only speak for yourself, then we wouldn't even be having this discussion.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

 

If your remark that "it was the greatest Times article that was ever written," were presented in a way that clearly suggested that you only speak for yourself, then we wouldn't even be having this discussion.

 

Exactly that.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Do remember that your opinion is rather meaningless unless you support it with argument/evidence.

Do remember that someone's opinion is exactly that, their opinion, and it does not necessitate the presence of evidence for one to hold such opinions.

 

I've been reading your replies, and Thus obviously isn't too interested in talking so why waste your time responding to his posts. Simples. :thumbup:

( ͡° ͜ʖ ͡°)

RIP Michaelangelopolous

Link to comment
Share on other sites

It can still invoke discussion.

 

I'm not saying it's morally righteous/wrong to hold onto those opinions, but if they're going to be presented as a position to uphold, the author should damn well know that it would require argument/evidence in order to be persuasive.

 

If they're merely his opinion to be uphold by himself without the objective of trying to persuade those who hold a dissenting opinion, then you would be right in the notion that his opinion doesn't need to be substantiated. I fail to see the purpose of such if that's the case, though.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

If they're merely his opinion to be uphold by himself without the objective of trying to persuade those who hold a dissenting opinion, then you would be right in the notion that his opinion doesn't need to be substantiated. I fail to see the purpose of such if that's the case, though.

 

They are! Jesus Christ it's like I'm talking to someone who only likes to hear himself talk. You are arguing the logistics of an argument on a relatively small board about Runescape, completely missing the point that all I said was I thought the article was the best. I'm not trying to sway opinions here.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

They are! Jesus Christ it's like I'm talking to someone who only likes to hear himself talk. You are arguing the logistics of an argument on a relatively small board about Runescape, completely missing the point that all I said was I thought the article was the best. I'm not trying to sway opinions here.

Have to agree here.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Please drop the discussion Assume Nothing. Thus obviously isn't interested in discussing it with you and at this point we're not even discussing the article, but rather the idea of an opinion.

Posted Image

 

- 99 fletching | 99 thieving | 99 construction | 99 herblore | 99 smithing | 99 woodcutting -

- 99 runecrafting - 99 prayer - 125 combat - 95 farming -

- Blog - DeviantART - Book Reviews & Blog

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Do remember that your opinion is rather meaningless unless you support it with argument/evidence.

Do remember that someone's opinion is exactly that, their opinion, and it does not necessitate the presence of evidence for one to hold such opinions.

 

I've been reading your replies, and Thus obviously isn't too interested in talking so why waste your time responding to his posts. Simples. :thumbup:

Because holding an opinion without a basis for that opinion, or when there is evidence to the contrary is asinine and preposterous? That should go without saying.

 

@Tripsis @Rainy Day if you think rules are being broken, give reps, delete posts, do whatever you normally do. If not, the discussion can continue however it will, within the rules. Its not your job to moderate discussion already within the rules.

Stonewall337.png
[hide=Drops]Araxxor Eye x1 Leg pieces x2
GWD: 5000 Addy bar Steam B Staff x3 Z Spear x6 Sara. Hilt x2 Bandos Hilt x2 (LS, Solo)SS x6 (1 LS)
Tormented Demons: Shard x6 Slice x5 Claws x9 Limbs x3
DKS: Archer x21 Warrior x31 Berserker x30 Axe x51[/hide]

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Do remember that your opinion is rather meaningless unless you support it with argument/evidence.

Do remember that someone's opinion is exactly that, their opinion, and it does not necessitate the presence of evidence for one to hold such opinions.

 

I've been reading your replies, and Thus obviously isn't too interested in talking so why waste your time responding to his posts. Simples. :thumbup:

Because holding an opinion without a basis for that opinion, or when there is evidence to the contrary is asinine and preposterous? That should go without saying.

 

@Tripsis @Rainy Day if you think rules are being broken, give reps, delete posts, do whatever you normally do. If not, the discussion can continue however it will, within the rules. Its not your job to moderate discussion already within the rules.

One of the things we "normally do" is ask people to just drop the discussion in the thread. And that's what we did here. The reason I'm asking for the discussion to be dropped is because it has gotten to the point where we're not even talking about the article any more (see rule Staying On Topic). At this point it's just one side arguing about whether or not an opinion is valid and the other side asking to discontinue the discussion. So combine the fact that one person doesn't even want to discuss it with the fact that we're going off-topic and not even talking about the article any more, there's no need to continue the discussion.

Posted Image

 

- 99 fletching | 99 thieving | 99 construction | 99 herblore | 99 smithing | 99 woodcutting -

- 99 runecrafting - 99 prayer - 125 combat - 95 farming -

- Blog - DeviantART - Book Reviews & Blog

Link to comment
Share on other sites

They were using people choosing offence over defence as evidence that defence needs fixing.

 

Well, when you don't need defense as much.. it's worth looking to see if it can be fixed.

 

Personally, I find it dumb that armor/defense has no effect on damage (excluding damage soak) and only changes how often you get hit. I would rather see the damage rate stay the same, but take lower damage, vs taking fewer hits but overall higher ones. (It would lower the random luck factor a lot more)

Serena_Sedai.png
Maxed since Sunday, January 9th, 2014
Completionist since Wednesday, June 4th, 2014

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Well, when you don't need defense as much.. it's worth looking to see if it can be fixed.

 

Personally, I find it dumb that armor/defense has no effect on damage (excluding damage soak) and only changes how often you get hit. I would rather see the damage rate stay the same, but take lower damage, vs taking fewer hits but overall higher ones. (It would lower the random luck factor a lot more)

I'd like to see a bit of both, actually. Hide armor: You dodge hits but take more damage / Plate armor: You'll get hit but it won't hurt much / Chain armor: Balance.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

They were using people choosing offence over defence as evidence that defence needs fixing.

 

Well, when you don't need defense as much.. it's worth looking to see if it can be fixed.

 

Personally, I find it dumb that armor/defense has no effect on damage (excluding damage soak) and only changes how often you get hit. I would rather see the damage rate stay the same, but take lower damage, vs taking fewer hits but overall higher ones. (It would lower the random luck factor a lot more)

 

Well, playing on an account which really doesn't use defence that much, I can tell you it's fine as it is and you're just taking it for granted.

 

And that would be fine in PVM but it would ruin PVP.

zerker_jane.png

99 farm easy

Link to comment
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.