DIR Return Create A Forum - Home
---------------------------------------------------------
wows forum
HTML https://wows.createaforum.com
---------------------------------------------------------
*****************************************************
DIR Return to: Debates, Interviews
*****************************************************
#Post#: 543--------------------------------------------------
Re: Re: Term: stats
By: wows Date: September 23, 2022, 5:17 pm
---------------------------------------------------------
[quote author=SpeedrunBanAny% link=topic=70.msg491#msg491
date=1663883986]
Your coping is funny. You have bad stats so you want to believe
they don't matter so you can pretend to be good
No, no one will judge someone who has 11 battles as being good
or bad, no matter how many they won or lost. They will only
think "they only have played 11 battles, they must be a new
players"
The problem with recent win rate is the following :[list
type=decimal]
[li]Toss a coin, did it land head or toe ?[/li]
[li]It is possible for 5 consecutive toss to only land on
head[/li]
[li]Does it mean this coin only land on head ?[/li]
[li]No. If you toss the coin a lot of time, the ratio head:toe
will stabilize around 50%[/li]
[li]A lot of coin toss are more reflective of the coin chance to
land on either face, similarly, a lot of games played are more
reflective of a player's skill[/li]
[li]Therefor, recent win rate needs to be calculated over at
least 100 games to be the most reflective possible of a player's
skill and not of its luck[/li]
[li]When the recent win rate shows improvement compared to the
overall win rate and that a significant number of games have
been played, we can say a player is improving. The opposite is
also true[/li]
[/list]
[/quote]
It does not matter what is funny for you and which other mental
movements you have. and i explained that and everything else
many times.
#Post#: 544--------------------------------------------------
Re: interview 5
By: wows Date: September 23, 2022, 5:35 pm
---------------------------------------------------------
[quote author=SpeedrunBanAny% link=topic=73.msg529#msg529
date=1663969762]
Your opinion of why people care about stats is wrong and i'm
kindly providing you the real answer.
You trying to debunk the points is funny tho. You fail to
understand the presented argument even in the most simplified
form. Of course there is another reason than grinding : People
want to win because winning is better. This is the reason
winning is rewarded with a faster grind. People like winning
more than losing and people like grinding faster
[/quote]
You didn't manage to prove that i am wrong anywhere, but i did
and you silently agreed with it without answering
counter-questions or ignoring my arguments. This is a fact and
plenty of examples even with your this current post. You ignore
that you lsot in all arguments and just repeat your debunked
opinions. Telling that i am wrong again and again. No, i am not
wrong, and there is a clear evidence for that. And you are
wrong, and i gave a clear evidence for that, and all you do is
denial now and repeating like children do when they are
emotional and want to push their egoic wish through. Also you
are not kind and not doing anything kindly but mainly with
personal attack method, and that was proved plenty of times. A
typical wows community member, they are most such negative and
far from kind. Etc.
The resume will be interesting and different from others only
because you accidentally (?) proved yourself that stats don't
matter. That makes your final resume-report interesting. But
everything else is typical and expected, including the emotional
denial phase at the end.
#Post#: 545--------------------------------------------------
Re: interview 5
By: wows Date: September 23, 2022, 5:38 pm
---------------------------------------------------------
In this post i guess you wrote by accident statements that you
didn't planned.
That makes your final resume report more interesting than
others. For others there wasn't almost anything interesting in
the debate process.
[quote author=SpeedrunBanAny% link=topic=73.msg423#msg423
date=1663765714]
Stats are an objective mesurement of your past performance.
There is a lot of different stats, the most regarded being :
[list]
[li]WR the win rate in %, showing the proportion of previous
games won. It is an adequate predictive stats of the likelyness
of a player to win the next gam[/li]
[li]PR the pro rating, is a standarized statistic made by the
wows community showing your stats relative to the server
average. it is influenced by damage at 60%, 30% frags and 10%
wins[/li]
[li]Damage, shows the damage dealt over the previous battles. it
shows the average damage one can expect from a player[/li]
[li]SR the survival rate, showing the proportion of previous
game survived. It is an adequate predictive stats of the
likelyness of a player dying in the next game[/li]
[/list]
Of course they are only averages. It is entirely possible to
outperform or underperform in the next game. It does however
show what can be expected from a player
[/quote]
#Post#: 546--------------------------------------------------
Re: interview 5
By: wows Date: September 23, 2022, 5:47 pm
---------------------------------------------------------
I put for your account you temporarily same privileges as guests
have, and the privilege group is called as "Isolated members".
I will investigate later how to do so that you will get posting
rights to your interview topic and other topics should be
read-only for you.
You had enough chance to debate and provide your opinions.
no i write a conclusion in next days and clean the forum.
#Post#: 547--------------------------------------------------
Re: interview 5
By: wows Date: September 24, 2022, 1:48 am
---------------------------------------------------------
[quote author=SpeedrunBanAny% link=topic=73.msg532#msg532
date=1663970085]
Btw : the guy from interview 1 is right and you should listen to
him. He's made great points
[/quote]
As I explained you don't need to use PS and BTW sections. There
is no adequate porpoise to say BTW. It does not make your
arguments better.
You use again the debunked Listening suggestions. Don't repeat
debunked opinions. The whole interview is a dialogue which
cannot be done without listening and talking. This is the nature
of communication, dialogs. You suggestion to Listen was debunked
earlier so there is no need to repeat.
And opinions in style "something is great and tasty and easy"
are inadequate. I have explained that too. To go on your
community level I can make a dead dialogue by replying same way:
my facts are great and you should Listen those. But i have not
used inadequate methods and i ask from candidates in the
beginning to be adequate too. I explained you many times what is
adequate and what not and you still refuse to be. You won't
succeed in life if you are not capable to be adequate. Not only
you lost debates here but you will lose in real life a lot if
you don't have abilities to be adequate. That's why first
suggestions to you is that learn to be adequate. Part of
learning it means doing the spiritual practices like observing
your mental system. I provide here those lessons and also will
make lessons about adequate methods, etc. But others do such
coaching too. The suggestion to train that part comes from clear
evidence that you and your community is not adequate. If you
can'belive or understand what I mean by that term then it is
about phrases "it is cool and great and you do it too, mkay?. As
I explained above such things are not adequate and cause
sufferings. I don't suffer, don't loose debates, etc, because I
am adequate at first. There are other examples of you
inadequacy. But there are no examples from my posts of that.
That is the 1st part of the adequate resume-report.
#Post#: 552--------------------------------------------------
Re: Re: Term: reporting
By: wows Date: September 25, 2022, 7:19 am
---------------------------------------------------------
i was swimming towards enemies but then a racist team memeber
demoralized team saying that i am in his colored list. I turned
back and started to follow him and finnaly shooting his dead
wrack and then damaged enemies and make a better position in the
results that this racist person. I got 3 reports.
A good example of wows community and the reporting system for
our wikipedia.
Many lessons from this example. One is that primitive ship types
are so dependent from advanced ship types that the team
immediately loses if a CV/DD don't spot etc. My advanced ship
type DD can just stay behind a BB for 2 minutes and he dies and
team loses and he makes less impact to the battle than me
because his ships is so dependent from me and so primitive. But
everything was spotted anyway and an enemy DD far away enivey so
mainly that primitive ship died because he had bad aiming
skills.
HTML https://replayswows.com/replay/167658
HTML https://i.imgur.com/QsYqU8W.png
HTML https://i.imgur.com/yQJs6pR.png
HTML https://i.imgur.com/hplZsqx.png
HTML https://i.imgur.com/9yXh4K9.png
HTML https://i.imgur.com/uBbN7gd.png
#Post#: 554--------------------------------------------------
Re: Re: Term: stats
By: wows Date: September 25, 2022, 8:56 am
---------------------------------------------------------
From user "SpeedrunBanAny%" i leave only that his post to the
Stats topic and all other posts everywhere goes to his personal
Interview folder.
It gives a clear message that stats don't matter.
[quote author=SpeedrunBanAny% link=topic=73.msg423#msg423
date=1663765714]
Stats are an objective mesurement of your past performance.
There is a lot of different stats, the most regarded being :
[list]
[li]WR the win rate in %, showing the proportion of previous
games won. It is an adequate predictive stats of the likelyness
of a player to win the next gam[/li]
[li]PR the pro rating, is a standarized statistic made by the
wows community showing your stats relative to the server
average. it is influenced by damage at 60%, 30% frags and 10%
wins[/li]
[li]Damage, shows the damage dealt over the previous battles. it
shows the average damage one can expect from a player[/li]
[li]SR the survival rate, showing the proportion of previous
game survived. It is an adequate predictive stats of the
likelyness of a player dying in the next game[/li]
[/list]
Of course they are only averages. It is entirely possible to
outperform or underperform in the next game. It does however
show what can be expected from a player
[/quote]
#Post#: 555--------------------------------------------------
interview 5
By: wows Date: September 25, 2022, 10:27 am
---------------------------------------------------------
I move posts from other topics to this topic from Interview 5
user.
#Post#: 556--------------------------------------------------
Re: Interview 5
By: wows Date: September 26, 2022, 8:06 am
---------------------------------------------------------
Your review.
Everything you said is equal to Wows community popular beleives
except that one:
[quote author=SpeedrunBanAny% link=topic=73.msg423#msg423
date=1663765714]
Stats are .. mesurement of your past ...
...
Of course they are only averages. It is entirely possible to
outperform or underperform in the next game. It does however
show what can be expected from a player
[/quote]
You said clearly that stats are history. Stats = History. That
means Stats are nothing that is Todays, Now, they are always
historical, a past. By "Stats != Now" i express that stats are
not equal to Now. This is all true, said by you and proved by
me.
Secondly, you say yourself that Stats are irrelevant averages,
Stats = Irrelevant. This is true because all averages are always
history and has nothing to do with knowledge/skills. Yes you can
predict lot of think in life but as you said yourself it is
entirely possible to outperform or underperform in the next
game. In other words, Stats = Irrelevant and Stats != Skills.
Your community uses terms Good/Bad as "Good = Randoms WR 55%"
and uses it in lowercase G and on personal attack manenr like
"you are bad". First, personal attacks are always negative
things and a proofless emotional instability and does not prove
any argument, they are inadequate. Secondly, your community has
wrong definition for Good/Bad because it titles people good/bad
now matter how they perform today no. I gave good examples where
one can play the whole day with your Good/55% level and better
like i do often, and you still call that person Bad. Calling so
is against any logics and proves that your term Good and it's
uses are wrong. You try to convince that it is luck when i do
60-70%/15 battles session but those does not look like luck at
all and even example replays have been but up and many demos
made from such sessions for you to look and show where is the
luck there. And why do you suffer how others performed in the
history and do personal atatcks at all?
Humans are often in different mental states and life provides
different variables often so humans perform very differently
ffrom different times but luck is not the explanation there. For
examples in relationships the betrayal happens because a person
acted subconciously, liek naimal, and after such mental episode
they return back to typical mind state and confess that they did
wrong, but that was not them, that was their subconcious. The
same is with exams, that one can make best results in the
community 1 time every year and that is not a luck but
concentration and using right mind state and using skills. But
it has nothing to do with luck. Therefore Skills/Knowledge is
not used many times in life because peopel are in in different
mind states where skills are not used. But also lot of variables
affect if skills can come out. For example, if your team asks
you to Troll, like i do every day for them, then you don't use
any skills, and therefore Stats are just irrelevant historical
averages that don't show that any skills were used. I have
provided plenty of demos that prove that i have al lthe skills
to be TOP 1 and at your Good level. So, Stats != Skills. Stats
are not skills because of also the upper equation Stats =
History, and you can express that Skills are never History. It
is ibvious that peopel who had years ago Wows installed and got
Good rating and also Good highschool grades can't demonstrate
anymore much anything because time has passed, they forgot msot
things, and the game has changed too with it's playerbase.
Your term Stats means most times Randoms overall WR. So, Stats =
Randoms WR, like synonyms.
Let's look all the proved equations now i nsummary:
Stats = History
Stats != Now
Stats = Irrelevant
Stats != Skills
2 Synonyms:
Good = Randoms WR 55%
Stats = Randoms WR
All those equations have examples, demos, and proof, they were
said straight by you or silently agreed after i rephrased.
Does it look like stats/WR matter? No, it does not. Does it look
like Stats show skills/knowledge? No. Does it look right and
ethical to say "you are bad"? No.
That all debunks your Wows community popular belief "stats
matter". And we have debunked it many times and your community
has had many times chance to prove it but they fail or even
prove accidentally liek you that that stats are irrelevant.
This is the 1st main debate topic that all candidates in your
community fail.
The 2nd main thing with you were inadequate methods. You believe
in authorities. Examples are that you believe blindly in
dictionary, in wikipedia, links, in WG articles. I don't beleive
and i proved plenty of times that your such sources are wrong.
You have a blind beleif that those with high Stats tell only the
gold. Well, such believes keep a brainwashed community
functioning but are far from the truth.
Your community believes that one gets Good if he Listens to Good
ones. By expressing such blind beleives you use again lowercase
letters but have a special menaing for the Listening term.
Example sentence can be "dude, what he said was great and cool
and you should listen to him if you want to become good, mkay?".
The real meaning of your word Listening means that one must
agree blindly with someone. Listening = Agreeing. I have
debunked many ways such popular belief. First, most Wows
community peopel are community minded, or brainwashed as i
express. They agree with everything and follow all allowed
opinions and game tactics in the community, they don't have
their own personal opinions. So, they all Listen but yet they
have very different Stats. That proved that Listening does not
produce Good Stats. There are almost no teaching in the
community, so there is no point to Listen anything. Secondly, it
is inadequate to say that somebody should do something because
someone thinks something is tasty, good and cool. If i fall on
your such level i can reply the same way creating a deadend
dialog: my facts are cool and you should lsiten to it, okydoky?
If you refuse to follow my such sentence then why do you ask
others to follow your similar inadequate suggestions? There are
not many knowledge and skills in entertainment games, like
football and Wows. Therefore there is nothingm uch to teach but
you said yourself that different tactics and things may work for
some and not work for others. In simple words it means that
there are no skills i nthe game and no teachings, and the
community already Listens everything, but dosn't have any
promised Good Stats. Also, remember here that the term Good
Stats is incompetent and there is no need to have any Good Stats
and no need to tel labout it to others and Stats != Skills.
So, you had 2 major topics, one was that we proved together that
Stats don't matter, and the second was that your inadequate
suggestion to Listen Good players is totally illusional and
wrong.
Beside those 2 major debunked topics you failed in being
adequate, made many smaller mistakes.
I asked you to give a proof to a general playerbase by
expressing a question like "Prove that One should Listen..." and
you replied totally offtopically 3 sentences on personal level
attacks like "Dude you are bad..". Such answer is totally
inadequate because it is irrelevant what a specific person does
and the questions that we cover in debates are general, the
question didn't contai nthe pronoun Me but One, and we don't do
personal attacks. I made a msitake by reading those sentences by
assuming that your reply with the word You is general but you
proved it was personal. So, i could make my reading skills
better to read it out clearly next time that you are again doing
an inadeuate persona lattack and ignoring the question.
Also you ocnstructed a list somewhere where lsit items were
totally out of topic and irrelevant. And other such smaller
mistakes, but those were small msitakes.
Big msitakes was that you somehow accidentally made 1 post that
clearly debunks you and your community by saying that stats
don't matter. such truth comes out because human mind is on
different states from time to time and truth comes out sometimes
therefore. Later you tried to change your mind but without a
success.
I was adequate like always, and won the debates like always.
From you we got good example posts for Wikipedia, and ideas who
to do better next times. One idea is that we should restrict
opponents to other topics. And we should make a rule list of how
to be adequate. For example, we don't start next time a debate
if you have racist atatcks in your account signature.
Suggestions for you: learn to be adequate, don't suffer about
stats, become free from your community opininos, don't be
racist.
#Post#: 2217--------------------------------------------------
Re: Read this first, and say Hello here
By: Hanuman Date: December 30, 2024, 11:05 am
---------------------------------------------------------
[quote author=SpeedrunBanAny% link=topic=73.msg404#msg404
date=1663717080]
Hello, I'm very bored atm and made an account here to disturb
your safe space
I will not insult people and will only argue using facts and
arguments
If I get banned, it is proof that I won the argument and that
the admin had no choice but to ban me to silence me to claim he
won any debate
[/quote]
So, did you or anybody got a Ban from me on this century? No.
You said that if one bans then that means the banned one wins
the debate. I agree generally with that, and there i didn't ban
you and you didn't win this debate. I have no urge to ban or
report anyone, and this may be the only 1 common thing that we
both share. But i am not totally sure about your true principle
about banning ethics, i believe if you had a chance in a forum
you would perhaps ban and report sometimes, or silently support
it if others do, what do you think?
*****************************************************
DIR Previous Page
DIR Next Page