DIR Return Create A Forum - Home
---------------------------------------------------------
wows forum
HTML https://wows.createaforum.com
---------------------------------------------------------
*****************************************************
DIR Return to: Debates, Interviews
*****************************************************
#Post#: 694--------------------------------------------------
Re: My Encounter with Fastmotion
DIR By: wows
Date: October 18, 2022, 10:30 am
---------------------------------------------------------
--- Quote from: jayceedee link ---
>
> You spotted people for such short times and in such
advantageous positions that for them, your spotting was all but
a minor nuisance. The Hindenburg for example got spotted 16km+
from the Stalingrad, all he had to do to avoid damage was to
increase his angle and change his speed, and i didn't see him
taking any damage whatsoever. Your spotting would have been
desperately needed elsewhere, on the DDs which pushed up all the
way to the B cap and threatened to torpedo basically our entire
team (Conde, Stalin, Battleship ...) and took our cap.
>
--- End Quote ---
You seem to say that the spotting result in the difficult Cap
area, mainly with spotting the Hindenburg, was somehow useless.
My response for that is:
1. You planned inititally to go yourself to that difficult area
and you would have spotted the Hindenburg yourself the same way.
So, i did the spotting that you planned to do and if you call it
not a good spotting then this is what you yourself planned to
do. Why you plan to do such bad spotting then?
2. don't you think that it is not important which ships exactly
i spotted this time in the Difficult Area? It just happened this
time that i spotted Hindenburg, but many times you spot other
ships there. We can call it luck which ships come to spot and it
is not possible to predict how that luck comes out, and no need
to judge if such luck turned out good or bad. It is irrelevant
that Hindenburg became spotted and not others. So, i don't think
it is adequate to mention that Hindenburg argument. Don't you
agree?
#Post#: 695--------------------------------------------------
Re: My Encounter with Fastmotion
DIR By: jayceedee
Date: October 18, 2022, 10:32 am
---------------------------------------------------------
--- Quote from: wows link ---
>
> [quote author=jayceedee link=topic=121.msg687#msg687
date=1666104515]
> [quote author=wows link=topic=121.msg679#msg679
date=1666092954]
> [quote author=jayceedee link=topic=121.msg671#msg671
date=1666022759]
> At the start of the game, the stats of Fastmotion caught my
eye, since they're quite obviously bad:
>
> [IMG]
HTML https://i.imgur.com/sy2Fxb2.png[/img]
>
--- End Quote ---
I understand that your software shows Random Battles Data in
Rankeds game mode.
In Randoms the Gearing on the picture has 50% WR but in Rankeds
it has around 40%, those numbers are quite different, don't you
agree? First question is, do you consider your software adequate
if it shows data from wrong game mode?[/quote]
It can show both, you can switch between the two. I haven't
really noticed a huge difference in most games. I remember that
in that game, i actually switched it back and forth for a couple
seconds and looked at both random and ranked stats, and the
impression i got from both was absolutely the same.
[/quote]
So, you agree that your picture you posted about Randoms Stats
were inadequate for this Rankeds single battle topic? Yes or no?
[/quote]
No i don't agree with that. Stats both for randoms and ranked
are easily summarized as "bad".
--- Quote from: wows link ---
>
> That image was inappropriate, or chose whichever similar word
you like to that. I repeat: 40 and 50 are different numbers just
like 50 and 60.
>
--- End Quote ---
You get too hung up on winrate alone, where i would agree that
40 and 50 is a significant difference. But you completely omit
the PR and damage numbers also being extremely low. Winrate is
highly influenced by the team on small sample sizes, so 11 games
played makes the winrate still inaccurate, but damage and PR
tells the real story for me even on 11 games.
--- Quote from: wows link ---
>
> If you say that they are almost the same numbers then you can
say that everyone has in general the same stats, and Stats
software is useless.
>
--- End Quote ---
I'm not saying that at all.
--- Quote from: wows link ---
>
> I suggest generally people not to post links and images
because most times those become inadequate just like your that
image.
>
--- End Quote ---
You seem disconnected from reality, if you do not like some
numbers or facts, you just ignore them and propose people stop
posting or linking them.
--- Quote from: wows link ---
>
> Do you agree that your image was useless?
>
--- End Quote ---
Absolutely not.
--- Quote from: wows link ---
>
> If no, then you probably deny all next obvious facts and in
debates such denying means a loss in the debate.
>
--- End Quote ---
You're doing yourself what you're excusing me of: Denying
obvious facts, which means you lost the debate.
In fact i think you're completely unable to have any real
debate, since you're entirely unmoved and untouched by facts,
thus it is impossible to convince you of being wrong.
You're pretending to have a debate, but really you're just
talking to yourself.
I have provided a wealth of information for you to respond to,
yet you have ignored the vast majority of it.
You cherrypicked a tiny fraction of facts and numbers, and then
you spun a fake argument around it which only makes sense in
your fantasy version of reality, which is a distorted reality
every sane person capable of logical thinking will refute.
#Post#: 696--------------------------------------------------
Re: My Encounter with Fastmotion
DIR By: jayceedee
Date: October 18, 2022, 10:33 am
---------------------------------------------------------
--- Quote from: DD_al_Dente link ---
>
> You are wasting your time. This guy is Fastmotion himself and
you are more likely to educate a brick than this retard.
>
--- End Quote ---
I am fully aware.
#Post#: 697--------------------------------------------------
Re: My Encounter with Fastmotion
DIR By: jayceedee
Date: October 18, 2022, 10:40 am
---------------------------------------------------------
--- Quote from: wows link ---
>
> [quote author=jayceedee link=topic=121.msg684#msg684
date=1666103621]
> You spotted people for such short times and in such
advantageous positions that for them, your spotting was all but
a minor nuisance. The Hindenburg for example got spotted 16km+
from the Stalingrad, all he had to do to avoid damage was to
increase his angle and change his speed, and i didn't see him
taking any damage whatsoever. Your spotting would have been
desperately needed elsewhere, on the DDs which pushed up all the
way to the B cap and threatened to torpedo basically our entire
team (Conde, Stalin, Battleship ...) and took our cap.
>
--- End Quote ---
You seem to say that the spotting result in the difficult Cap
area, mainly with spotting the Hindenburg, was somehow useless.
My response for that is:
1. You planned inititally to go yourself to that difficult area
and you would have spotted the Hindenburg yourself the same way.
[/quote]
I would have gone to that area, yes, but not with the goal of
spotting the Hindenburg. My goal would have been to touch the
cap, start capturing it, and thus draw a response from the
enemy. What would that response be?
- Stalingrad radar
- Everyone shooting at me
I would have dealt with that the same way i dealt with it
before: run away behind the island.
What would that have achieved?
- spotting on multiple enemy ships for 20 seconds+ due to them
firing
- stalin using a radar for little effect
- creating a gap after the stalin radar where there is no radar
on the cap
- creating a gap where the enemy DDs turned out due to being
spotted
- creating an OPPORTUNITY for me to try again to capture the cap
after the initial touch
--- Quote from: wows link ---
>
> So, i did the spotting that you planned to do and if you call
it not a good spotting then this is what you yourself planned to
do. Why you plan to do such bad spotting then?
>
--- End Quote ---
I didn't. I notice a strong pattern where you always assume what
i am thinking or assume what my conclusion is and in general you
seem to be always wrong.
--- Quote from: wows link ---
>
> 2. don't you think that it is not important which ships
exactly i spotted this time in the Difficult Area? It just
happened this time that i spotted Hindenburg, but many times you
spot other ships there. We can call it luck which ships come to
spot and it is not possible to predict how that luck comes out,
and no need to judge if such luck turned out good or bad. It is
irrelevant that Hindenburg became spotted and not others. So, i
don't think it is adequate to mention that Hindenburg argument.
Don't you agree?
>
--- End Quote ---
I have outlined why exactly i think your play was bad in detail
in my initial post. Instead of responding to this again at
length, i would like to point to my initial post and i would
like you to re-read that.
#Post#: 698--------------------------------------------------
Re: My Encounter with Fastmotion
DIR By: wows
Date: October 18, 2022, 10:47 am
---------------------------------------------------------
--- Quote from: jayceedee link ---
>
> [quote author=wows link=topic=121.msg694#msg694
date=1666107043]
> [quote author=jayceedee link=topic=121.msg684#msg684
date=1666103621]
> You spotted people for such short times and in such
advantageous positions that for them, your spotting was all but
a minor nuisance. The Hindenburg for example got spotted 16km+
from the Stalingrad, all he had to do to avoid damage was to
increase his angle and change his speed, and i didn't see him
taking any damage whatsoever. Your spotting would have been
desperately needed elsewhere, on the DDs which pushed up all the
way to the B cap and threatened to torpedo basically our entire
team (Conde, Stalin, Battleship ...) and took our cap.
>
--- End Quote ---
You seem to say that the spotting result in the difficult Cap
area, mainly with spotting the Hindenburg, was somehow useless.
My response for that is:
1. You planned inititally to go yourself to that difficult area
and you would have spotted the Hindenburg yourself the same way.
[/quote]
I would have gone to that area, yes, but not with the goal of
spotting the Hindenburg. My goal would have been to touch the
cap, start capturing it, and thus draw a response from the
enemy. What would that response be?
- Stalingrad radar
- Everyone shooting at me
I would have dealt with that the same way i dealt with it
before: run away behind the island.
What would that have achieved?
- spotting on multiple enemy ships for 20 seconds+ due to them
firing
- stalin using a radar for little effect
- creating a gap after the stalin radar where there is no radar
on the cap
- creating a gap where the enemy DDs turned out due to being
spotted
- creating an OPPORTUNITY for me to try again to capture the cap
after the initial touch
--- Quote from: wows link ---
>
> So, i did the spotting that you planned to do and if you call
it not a good spotting then this is what you yourself planned to
do. Why you plan to do such bad spotting then?
>
--- End Quote ---
I didn't. I notice a strong pattern where you always assume what
i am thinking or assume what my conclusion is and in general you
seem to be always wrong.
--- Quote from: wows link ---
>
> 2. don't you think that it is not important which ships
exactly i spotted this time in the Difficult Area? It just
happened this time that i spotted Hindenburg, but many times you
spot other ships there. We can call it luck which ships come to
spot and it is not possible to predict how that luck comes out,
and no need to judge if such luck turned out good or bad. It is
irrelevant that Hindenburg became spotted and not others. So, i
don't think it is adequate to mention that Hindenburg argument.
Don't you agree?
>
--- End Quote ---
I have outlined why exactly i think your play was bad in detail
in my initial post. Instead of responding to this again at
length, i would like to point to my initial post and i would
like you to re-read that.
[/quote]
You seem to agree that you would have resulted the same thing
that i did in the difficult area. you say that you would have
spotted something, well, i did it too, you say that you would
have tried to cap but would have failed in it, well i did
capping too and successfully. So, seems to me that all of your
plan would have resulted the same that i did: spotting and
capping. You mention that your goal wasn't to spot Hindenburg,
but i explained earlier that you can't plan really to spot
luckily Hinden or not. I repeat that there is no need to judge
what the psotting luck produced. Also, you would have maybe died
in the cap area. Even you yourself say that your plan would have
resulted "Everyone shooting at me".
I don't think it is reasonable to predict how the batle would
have gone if something dad been done differently.
But, mentioning that spotting Hinden was a bad result, is not
adequate, it is not good or bad, it is just a spotting
randomness. And, you yourself planned to do things that would
have resulted spotting him and capping, just like i did. So, if
i did something bad then you planned to do yourself that bad
thing. And maybe you would have died at all, who knows. Most
people think that rushing to cap to that difficult area is very
risky.
#Post#: 699--------------------------------------------------
Re: My Encounter with Fastmotion
DIR By: wows
Date: October 18, 2022, 10:58 am
---------------------------------------------------------
--- Quote from: jayceedee link ---
>
> [quote author=DD_al_Dente link=topic=121.msg690#msg690
date=1666105877]
> You are wasting your time. This guy is Fastmotion himself and
you are more likely to educate a brick than this retard.
>
--- End Quote ---
I am fully aware.
[/quote]
Your response is unprofessional. Your response support the
personal attack and other inadequate methods by replying so. If
anyone adresses you as a brick then i would immediatly isolate
him.
We have ca 30 small threads here that can all take several
pages. I haven't even completed yet commenting your first post.
Very long is the Stats Mattering thread, etc.
So, let's see how we proceed. I try to close as early as
possible some threads. For example, let's agree that your one
image was inadequate. I don't see anything adequate in that
image and that is a small mistake, so jsut accept it. I don't do
such mistakes because i don't like pictures and other spam at
all in debates.
#Post#: 700--------------------------------------------------
Re: My Encounter with Fastmotion
DIR By: jayceedee
Date: October 18, 2022, 11:04 am
---------------------------------------------------------
--- Quote from: wows link ---
>
> [quote author=jayceedee link=topic=121.msg697#msg697
date=1666107613]
> [quote author=wows link=topic=121.msg694#msg694
date=1666107043]
> [quote author=jayceedee link=topic=121.msg684#msg684
date=1666103621]
> You spotted people for such short times and in such
advantageous positions that for them, your spotting was all but
a minor nuisance. The Hindenburg for example got spotted 16km+
from the Stalingrad, all he had to do to avoid damage was to
increase his angle and change his speed, and i didn't see him
taking any damage whatsoever. Your spotting would have been
desperately needed elsewhere, on the DDs which pushed up all the
way to the B cap and threatened to torpedo basically our entire
team (Conde, Stalin, Battleship ...) and took our cap.
>
--- End Quote ---
You seem to say that the spotting result in the difficult Cap
area, mainly with spotting the Hindenburg, was somehow useless.
My response for that is:
1. You planned inititally to go yourself to that difficult area
and you would have spotted the Hindenburg yourself the same way.
[/quote]
I would have gone to that area, yes, but not with the goal of
spotting the Hindenburg. My goal would have been to touch the
cap, start capturing it, and thus draw a response from the
enemy. What would that response be?
- Stalingrad radar
- Everyone shooting at me
I would have dealt with that the same way i dealt with it
before: run away behind the island.
What would that have achieved?
- spotting on multiple enemy ships for 20 seconds+ due to them
firing
- stalin using a radar for little effect
- creating a gap after the stalin radar where there is no radar
on the cap
- creating a gap where the enemy DDs turned out due to being
spotted
- creating an OPPORTUNITY for me to try again to capture the cap
after the initial touch
--- Quote from: wows link ---
>
> So, i did the spotting that you planned to do and if you call
it not a good spotting then this is what you yourself planned to
do. Why you plan to do such bad spotting then?
>
--- End Quote ---
I didn't. I notice a strong pattern where you always assume what
i am thinking or assume what my conclusion is and in general you
seem to be always wrong.
--- Quote from: wows link ---
>
> 2. don't you think that it is not important which ships
exactly i spotted this time in the Difficult Area? It just
happened this time that i spotted Hindenburg, but many times you
spot other ships there. We can call it luck which ships come to
spot and it is not possible to predict how that luck comes out,
and no need to judge if such luck turned out good or bad. It is
irrelevant that Hindenburg became spotted and not others. So, i
don't think it is adequate to mention that Hindenburg argument.
Don't you agree?
>
--- End Quote ---
I have outlined why exactly i think your play was bad in detail
in my initial post. Instead of responding to this again at
length, i would like to point to my initial post and i would
like you to re-read that.
[/quote]
You seem to agree that you would have resulted the same thing
that i did in the difficult area.
[/quote]
No, i do not. You're not just twisting words now, you're
outright ignoring what i say and claim the opposite.
--- Quote from: wows link ---
>
> you say that you would have spotted something, well, i did it
too
>
--- End Quote ---
No, i didn't say that. I would have been spotted by radar, and
then the rest of the team would have spotted the enemies firing
at me, while i run behind an island. The team is then spotting
the enemy, not me.
Also the "what" of what would be spotted would be different,
too, not just the "how".
--- Quote from: wows link ---
>
> , you say that you would have tried to cap but would have
failed in it
>
--- End Quote ---
Most likely outcome due to stalin radar.
--- Quote from: wows link ---
>
> , well i did capping too and successfully. So, seems to me
that all of your plan would have resulted the same that i did:
spotting and capping.
>
--- End Quote ---
You ignore the factors of time and luck. I would have achieved
it much quicker than you, and with way less risk attached, so i
would not have had to rely on the luck you had in your game. My
result would have been a result produced by a sound plan, while
your result was pure luck since the enemy could have punished
you for it, but failed to do so.
I do not rely on luck.
--- Quote from: wows link ---
>
> You mention that your goal wasn't to spot Hindenburg, but i
explained earlier that you can't plan really to spot luckily
Hinden or not. I repeat that there is no need to judge what the
psotting luck produced.
>
--- End Quote ---
Your approach to the cap was to stay so far behind that you had
no chance of spotting a DD. You could only have spotted a
cruiser or a battleship. The battleship can tank. The cruiser
will usually not be stalin, since stalin will die there or have
to run into useless position. So likely it will be a kiting
cruiser, like hindenburg. So yes, you "planned" for spotting
hindenburg merely by the way the game works and how you
approached your cap, you just did so unknowingly.
--- Quote from: wows link ---
>
> Also, you would have maybe died in the cap area. Even you
yourself say that your plan would have resulted "Everyone
shooting at me".
>
--- End Quote ---
I had a plan to deal with the "everyone shooting at me" and the
likelihood of me dying would have been small.
--- Quote from: wows link ---
>
> I don't think it is reasonable to predict how the batle would
have gone if something dad been done differently.
>
--- End Quote ---
That attitude will ensure that you will never learn from your
mistakes, and it ensures that you will never master the game.
--- Quote from: wows link ---
>
> But, mentioning that spotting Hinden was a bad result, is not
adequate, it is not good or bad, it is just a spotting
randomness.
--- End Quote ---
Don't make it about the result, i made it about the approach and
the span of possible results, which are all bad compared to
better approaches which i suggested. At length. And which you
ignore. Continuously.
--- Quote from: wows link ---
>
> And, you yourself planned to do things that would have
resulted spotting him and capping, just like i did. So, if i did
something bad then you planned to do yourself that bad thing.
And maybe you would have died at all, who knows. Most people
think that rushing to cap to that difficult area is very risky.
>
--- End Quote ---
Your language is so imprecise and you ignore so many factors
that you end up saying something that is so far removed from
reality that i'm almost unable to respond to. You need to be
more precise in your language to have a real debate, and not
abandon 90% of the presented facts right away.
#Post#: 701--------------------------------------------------
Re: My Encounter with Fastmotion
DIR By: jayceedee
Date: October 18, 2022, 11:09 am
---------------------------------------------------------
--- Quote from: wows link ---
>
> [quote author=jayceedee link=topic=121.msg696#msg696
date=1666107194]
> [quote author=DD_al_Dente link=topic=121.msg690#msg690
date=1666105877]
> You are wasting your time. This guy is Fastmotion himself and
you are more likely to educate a brick than this retard.
>
--- End Quote ---
I am fully aware.
[/quote]
Your response is unprofessional.[/quote]
No, it isn't. The poster thinks i am wasting my time, and i
agree, the discussion seems to be going nowhere. I am aware of
the factors that make him think i am wasting my time, and i
concur roughly with his assessment, albeit i would be more
polite about it. I could spend a lifetime defining what exactly
we're agreeing upon, but there is an unspoken agreement between
us which i simply communicated with him by telling him that i am
aware of what is happening.
--- Quote from: wows link ---
>
> Your response support the personal attack and other inadequate
methods by replying so.
>
--- End Quote ---
That's your interpretation and it is, as usual, very one-sides
and ignores a plethora of other factors.
--- Quote from: wows link ---
> I try to close as early as possible some threads.
>
--- End Quote ---
The ones you don't agree with? Is that 100% of threads opened by
other people than you? What does that tell us about you?
--- Quote from: wows link ---
>
> For example, let's agree that your one image was inadequate.
>
--- End Quote ---
So far we have agreed on very little, and most certainly not an
entire image. To be honest an image is so complex in itself that
i am certain we will never agree on it on all relevant levels.
#Post#: 702--------------------------------------------------
Re: My Encounter with Fastmotion
DIR By: wows
Date: October 18, 2022, 11:20 am
---------------------------------------------------------
--- Quote from: jayceedee link ---
>
> [quote author=wows link=topic=121.msg698#msg698
date=1666108029]
> [quote author=jayceedee link=topic=121.msg697#msg697
date=1666107613]
> [quote author=wows link=topic=121.msg694#msg694
date=1666107043]
> [quote author=jayceedee link=topic=121.msg684#msg684
date=1666103621]
> You spotted people for such short times and in such
advantageous positions that for them, your spotting was all but
a minor nuisance. The Hindenburg for example got spotted 16km+
from the Stalingrad, all he had to do to avoid damage was to
increase his angle and change his speed, and i didn't see him
taking any damage whatsoever. Your spotting would have been
desperately needed elsewhere, on the DDs which pushed up all the
way to the B cap and threatened to torpedo basically our entire
team (Conde, Stalin, Battleship ...) and took our cap.
>
--- End Quote ---
You seem to say that the spotting result in the difficult Cap
area, mainly with spotting the Hindenburg, was somehow useless.
My response for that is:
1. You planned inititally to go yourself to that difficult area
and you would have spotted the Hindenburg yourself the same way.
[/quote]
I would have gone to that area, yes, but not with the goal of
spotting the Hindenburg. My goal would have been to touch the
cap, start capturing it, and thus draw a response from the
enemy. What would that response be?
- Stalingrad radar
- Everyone shooting at me
I would have dealt with that the same way i dealt with it
before: run away behind the island.
What would that have achieved?
- spotting on multiple enemy ships for 20 seconds+ due to them
firing
- stalin using a radar for little effect
- creating a gap after the stalin radar where there is no radar
on the cap
- creating a gap where the enemy DDs turned out due to being
spotted
- creating an OPPORTUNITY for me to try again to capture the cap
after the initial touch
--- Quote from: wows link ---
>
> So, i did the spotting that you planned to do and if you call
it not a good spotting then this is what you yourself planned to
do. Why you plan to do such bad spotting then?
>
--- End Quote ---
I didn't. I notice a strong pattern where you always assume what
i am thinking or assume what my conclusion is and in general you
seem to be always wrong.
--- Quote from: wows link ---
>
> 2. don't you think that it is not important which ships
exactly i spotted this time in the Difficult Area? It just
happened this time that i spotted Hindenburg, but many times you
spot other ships there. We can call it luck which ships come to
spot and it is not possible to predict how that luck comes out,
and no need to judge if such luck turned out good or bad. It is
irrelevant that Hindenburg became spotted and not others. So, i
don't think it is adequate to mention that Hindenburg argument.
Don't you agree?
>
--- End Quote ---
I have outlined why exactly i think your play was bad in detail
in my initial post. Instead of responding to this again at
length, i would like to point to my initial post and i would
like you to re-read that.
[/quote]
You seem to agree that you would have resulted the same thing
that i did in the difficult area.
[/quote]
No, i do not. You're not just twisting words now, you're
outright ignoring what i say and claim the opposite.
[/quote]
You say yourself that you would have spotted ships by that
phrase:
"- spotting on multiple enemy ships".
Also, if you go to the same place like i did then obviously you
have spotted the same enemies like i did, including the
Hindenburg.
So, why do you deny that you would have spotted ther things? I
spotted there and you would have done the same. Why to deny such
thing?
I capped there and you clearly said you planned to go into cap
circle as well. This is the same what i did.
In total you would have resulted generally the same results,
maybe died or spotted something little bit less or more, such
details doesn't matter in general.
So, you seem to agree that you would have resulted the same
thing that i did in the difficult area. And logics proves that
too. No matter if it is me or you or anybody else doing the job
with the difficult cap, the result would have been generally the
same. Why you deny it? And the reason why we have such thread
head is because you seem to mention that i did something badly
in the Hindenburg area. My response is that you was going to do
al lthat yourself, so why you adress such act as bad then,
especially mentioning Hindenburg which is totally inadequate
argument because it is jsut a spotting luck.
I think you just deny here clear facts.
#Post#: 703--------------------------------------------------
Re: My Encounter with Fastmotion
DIR By: wows
Date: October 18, 2022, 11:34 am
---------------------------------------------------------
--- Quote from: jayceedee link ---
>
> [quote author=wows link=topic=121.msg699#msg699
date=1666108716]
> [quote author=jayceedee link=topic=121.msg696#msg696
date=1666107194]
> [quote author=DD_al_Dente link=topic=121.msg690#msg690
date=1666105877]
> You are wasting your time. This guy is Fastmotion himself and
you are more likely to educate a brick than this retard.
>
--- End Quote ---
I am fully aware.
[/quote]
Your response is unprofessional.[/quote]
No, it isn't. The poster thinks i am wasting my time, and i
agree, the discussion seems to be going nowhere. I am aware of
the factors that make him think i am wasting my time, and i
concur roughly with his assessment, albeit i would be more
polite about it. I could spend a lifetime defining what exactly
we're agreeing upon, but there is an unspoken agreement between
us which i simply communicated with him by telling him that i am
aware of what is happening.
--- Quote from: wows link ---
>
> Your response support the personal attack and other inadequate
methods by replying so.
>
--- End Quote ---
That's your interpretation and it is, as usual, very one-sides
and ignores a plethora of other factors.
--- Quote from: wows link ---
> I try to close as early as possible some threads.
>
--- End Quote ---
The ones you don't agree with? Is that 100% of threads opened by
other people than you? What does that tell us about you?
--- Quote from: wows link ---
>
> For example, let's agree that your one image was inadequate.
>
--- End Quote ---
So far we have agreed on very little, and most certainly not an
entire image. To be honest an image is so complex in itself that
i am certain we will never agree on it on all relevant levels.
[/quote]
He did a personal attack and your response was supportive. Let's
imagine that i create 10 accounts into this forum now and theose
post many brick-comments about you and then i reply with "sure,
i am aware" etc. That would make a picture that everyone
believes that you are brick and more. Do you think that would be
a professional debate then and you would continue here longer?
Usually people would say No. also in debate sport and in court
there is a clear No to such brick-comments but you didn't
provide any No. You should totally ignore what personal
attackers say and never talk to them or to respond to them that
you don't support their inadequate methods and that you respect
opponents. I for example don't let people to do personal attacks
against you or any of my opponents. This is the level of ethics
we have in this forum and this should be an obvious ethics which
don't have to be written to anywhere. Because you failed with
ethics then it is very difficult to believe that your other
methods are adequate. I don't feel any need to do such msitakes.
I suggest that use as adequate methods as you know and ignore
all the brick-posts.
You seem to say that i try to close only the threads i don't
agree with, etc. My response is that i try to make the total
amount of sub-debates smaller here so it is easier to handle the
mammoth thread. If there is a thread where we clearly prove that
i am wrong then we "close" it by me saying that i agree. Or, if
it is obvious that one sub-debate looks to have a winner then
let's end it by saying the winner and only after that move to
the next open thread. That was the point of my message. I don't
pick any favourite things. You seem to ask in a personal attack
manner "What does that tell us about you?". If you try to prove
that i use inadequate methods, then prove it. Don't ask just
like "What it tell about you?".
At the end you say something about the entire image or other
images. Well, we can go to other immages maybe later. But let's
agree on 1 simple image where my arguments prove that you were
inadequate. You didn't provide anything adequate as a response.
Let's agree that you were msitaken with that image because that
what the arguments and replies show. There is no need to deny
blindly. There is no need to repeat my arguments, they are above
and clearly say that your image was a mistake.
*****************************************************
Page 3 of 6
DIR Previous Page
DIR Next Page