Pointless Boy, when joining a community, you must understand that there are rule enforcers, just like the police. They have authority and can make decisions about rules, including things that are not explicitly stated in the rules, because a lot of things are subjective and writing rules to cover every little possible thing is just not possible.
I understand that some judgments are subjective, however, my posting habits in this thread were clearly reasonable, I have been nothing but level headed, dispassionate, and reasonable for the entire duration of this thread (except for a well-deserved jab at Mr.KRF), and the moderator's actions against me were clearly wildly inappropriate. (I do not believe mild expression of annoyance to be unreasonable, and after the juncture at which I was censored, I do not believe extreme protest to be unreasonable.)
If you dislike the change they've made, then PM another moderator or admin informing them that you think that their decision was faulty and explain your reasoning. They will investigate and notify you with their decision.
That is one option. Another option is to speak out, to protest, to publicly decry abuse as loudly and as often as you can, so that abuses of power never, ever go unnoticed, even if they still go largely unacknowledged and unpunished.
Publically denouncing moderators is not going to work in your favor. It is going to make you look worse in everyone's eyes, which will make them less likely to listen to you.
A moderator that allows his or her objectivity to be compromised by protest should not be a moderator. Anyone that doesn't care to listen while I fight for my inalienable rights as a human being is free to plug their ears and submit to tyranny. I won't.
You've already made your point. You want to change the logo. Fine. Let the community decide if they like it or not. You are going to get anywhere by continuing this argument. It will just make it less likely that your suggestions will get accepted in the future.
What do my protests have to do with the merits of my suggestions? That is not a rational criticism. I will continue to protest as long as I believe I have something to protest about.
feos wrote:
This site is built of contributions. Contributors are from all over the world. The comunity has its own unique spirit and attitude. The ones who never contribute are wellcome when they keep the same spirit and attitude. You do not wish to try to win any of these. Either because you're proud or because you're trolling. The quoted lunge implies that the latter.
I literally do not understand the meaning of your post, here. I am not being proud, or trolling, and I do not have intent to insult or demean. I am being literal. Literally. I literally do not understand the meaning of your post.
Wow, you're a massive ass. Every single post you've made in this thread is condescending to the maximum, and you wonder why people are telling you to fuck off? Your username is quite appropriate, you're the most pointless person in this thread. Yes, that was an attack on your person. No, I can't be arsed to look up what type of attack it is.
You claim to be an "expert" on the English language. A self-described expert. Using big words and telling everyone else they know nothing does not an expert make. Here's a word for you: "humility". Try it sometime.
Even if you have a point, noone's going to take you seriously if you keep treating everyone who disagrees with you as lesser human beings than you. Get off your fucking pedestal, you're not of a higher standing than anyone else on this forum. Being demeaning and insulting is the only thing you've done for the last three pages.
Det man inte har i begåvning får man ta ut i energi.
"I think I need to get to Snoop Dogg's level of high to be able to research this post." -Samsara
Read my fanfic, One Piece: Pure Corruption
I understand that some judgments are subjective, however, my posting habits in this thread were clearly reasonable, I have been nothing but level headed, dispassionate, and reasonable for the entire duration of this thread (except for a well-deserved jab at Mr.KRF), and the moderator's actions against me were clearly wildly inappropriate. (I do not believe mild expression of annoyance to be unreasonable, and after the juncture at which I was censored, I do not believe extreme protest to be unreasonable.)
That is your subjective opinion. Not a fact.
If you dislike the change they've made, then PM another moderator or admin informing them that you think that their decision was faulty and explain your reasoning. They will investigate and notify you with their decision.
That is one option. Another option is to speak out, to protest, to publicly decry abuse as loudly and as often as you can, so that abuses of power never, ever go unnoticed, even if they still go largely unacknowledged and unpunished.
You are cluttering the forum with your unproven opinions. This is a private matter between you and the moderator in question. You are only making it more difficult for the staff moderating the site to handle your complaint.
If you had a problem with the authorities in real life, would go out on the street and scream about injustice or would you somehow contain the authorities? You are disturbing public order.
Publically denouncing moderators is not going to work in your favor. It is going to make you look worse in everyone's eyes, which will make them less likely to listen to you.
A moderator that allows his or her objectivity to be compromised by protest should not be a moderator. Anyone that doesn't care to listen while I fight for my inalienable rights as a human being is free to plug their ears and submit to tyranny. I won't.
What you are saying is true, but that is your subjective opinion, and again, you are flooding this forum with your subjective and, to us, irrelevant rants.
Well, whatever. Your seem to be a problem child. You are not listening, and you are unlikely to, so I am thinking that this is the last post I am going to make against you.
The thread started out fine, but then derailed, and you are the one responsible. Just know that.
But I do wish this farce should come to an end -_-
Pointless Boy: you don't TAS, you don't encode, you don't code, you act like a troll. You're not willing to improve yourself. Go away then, it's pretty simple.
Warning: When making decisions, I try to collect as much data as possible before actually deciding. I try to abstract away and see the principles behind real world events and people's opinions. I try to generalize them and turn into something clear and reusable. I hate depending on unpredictable and having to make lottery guesses. Any problem can be solved by systems thinking and acting.
Right, which means you have the option to express an opinion. That doesn't mean you should always exercise that option, or that when you do, your opinion will be respected. Do you have an expert grasp of English usage and style? No? Then your opinion concerning English usage and style is not relevant. Your opinion -- in this instance -- may reasonably be ignored.
EEssentia wrote:
Meh. I give up. I think ignoring this one is simply the best option.
You could attempt to address my arguments in a logically consistent fashion, as I have done for everyone else in this thread.
Guga wrote:
...
I give up. If you keep ignoring everyone's posts, I don't see the point of discussing with you.
This viewpoint is interesting, given that I have ignored literally no one's post. I have gone to great lengths to craft a level-headed and well-reasoned response to each and every person in this thread. (I consider my response to FractalFusion's abuses to be reasonable, given that my intent was to express outrage.)
KennyMan666 wrote:
Wow, you're a massive ass. Every single post you've made in this thread is condescending to the maximum, and you wonder why people are telling you to fuck off? Your username is quite appropriate, you're the most pointless person in this thread. Yes, that was an attack on your person. No, I can't be arsed to look up what type of attack it is.
This sort of post doesn't seem constructive, or to have been made in good faith. It is interesting that, despite my innocuous words and calm demeanor (excepting my righteous outrage at FractalFusion's abuse of power), some people bizarrely feel motivated to violently attack me -- as much as one can be violently attacked by words, that is.
What motivates your attack? I have neither personally insulted you (or anyone in this thread, excepting perhaps Mr.KRF, if pointing out a bad post is an insult), nor said anything that seems particularly contentious. Is my mastery of English not superior to most people who don't speak it natively? How is observing that fact and using it as the basis for determining the correctness of opinions about English usage and style controversial? It is telling that no one has been able to argue effectively against this point.
Off topic, I am also intrigued by your simultaneous use of "ass" and "arsed". Neither is incorrect, of course, but their use in conjunction is unusual. Are you an American that is unfamiliar with the (admittedly uncommon) phrase "can't be assed", who picked up the habit of using (the much more common in England) "can't be arsed" from TV or interactions with Brits? Or perhaps a Brit that has been browbeat into using "ass" on the internet?
You claim to be an "expert" on the English language. A self-described expert. Using big words and telling everyone else they know nothing does not an expert make. Here's a word for you: "humility". Try it sometime.
I am always slightly bemused by accusations of using big words. I simply use whatever word sounds most appropriate to me. (Though I recognize my English vocabulary is larger than average.) Anyway, how humble one is has no bearing on the correctness of one's argument. (Except in a highly contrived example, such as if you were arguing whether or not you always exhibit humility in arguments.)
Even if you have a point, noone's going to take you seriously if you keep treating everyone who disagrees with you as lesser human beings than you.
I haven't once treated anyone in this thread as a lesser human being, nor said anything to that effect. In fact, I have repeatedly said that, obviously, my superior mastery of English implies but one thing: that I am more equipped to make judgments about the finer points of English usage and style. I have often mentioned multiple times how good most peoples' English is, and how their English is far in advance of any second language I could claim. (In fact, I essentially have no second language.)
Get off your fucking pedestal, you're not of a higher standing than anyone else on this forum. Being demeaning and insulting is the only thing you've done for the last three pages.
I have never claimed to have higher standing than anyone else on this forum. I have (reasonably, convincingly) claimed to have superior mastery of English than most, though. I don't understand why you consider "My English is better than yours" to be a demeaning observation. It is a simple statement of fact, and one which no one has seriously seen fit to argue, because my English is quite evidently better than that of the people in this thread who don't speak it natively (and, indeed, most of those that do.) I don't preclude the possibility of another Joseph Conrad somewhere out there, but such a person has certainly not made him or herself known in this thread.
Pointless Boy, you have pretty much insulted everyone in this thread. You seem to be very good at writing English™, but utterly suck at reading between the lines, so to speak.
Alright, let's play this game.
* KennyMan666 cracks knucklesPointless Boy wrote:
KennyMan666 wrote:
Wow, you're a massive ass. Every single post you've made in this thread is condescending to the maximum, and you wonder why people are telling you to fuck off? Your username is quite appropriate, you're the most pointless person in this thread. Yes, that was an attack on your person. No, I can't be arsed to look up what type of attack it is.
This sort of post doesn't seem constructive, or to have been made in good faith. It is interesting that, despite my innocuous words and calm demeanor (excepting my righteous outrage at FractalFusion's abuse of power), some people bizarrely feel motivated to violently attack me -- as much as one can be violently attacked by words, that is.
What motivates your attack? I have neither personally insulted you (or anyone in this thread, excepting perhaps Mr.KRF, if pointing out a bad post is an insult), nor said anything that seems particularly contentious. Is my mastery of English not superior to most people who don't speak it natively? How is observing that fact and using it as the basis for determining the correctness of opinions about English usage and style controversial? It is telling that no one has been able to argue effectively against this point.
Off topic, I am also intrigued by your simultaneous use of "ass" and "arsed". Neither is incorrect, of course, but their use in conjunction is unusual. Are you an American that is unfamiliar with the (admittedly uncommon) phrase "can't be assed", who picked up the habit of using (the much more common in England) "can't be arsed" from TV or interactions with Brits? Or perhaps a Brit that has been browbeat into using "ass" on the internet?
You've not insulted me personally, no. But what you don't seem to realize is that your very demeanor, the way you say that other people's opinions aren't valid, the way you say that YOU'RE the expert and YOU always know best is inherently insulting to the very people you communicate with. Your supposed mastery of GLORIOUS ENGLISH LANGUAGE™ isn't even being taken into question, even though your expertise is nothing but self-proclaimed. It's the way you present it that makes your posts just seem like they're full of hot air and needless wordsmithing just to make yourself appear as the perfect intellectual. I, like many others in this thread, was merely trying to deflate you - because I've never in my entire life encountered someone who needs deflating as much as you do.
Also, neither. I'm Swedish.
You claim to be an "expert" on the English language. A self-described expert. Using big words and telling everyone else they know nothing does not an expert make. Here's a word for you: "humility". Try it sometime.
I am always slightly bemused by accusations of using big words. I simply use whatever word sounds most appropriate to me. (Though I recognize my English vocabulary is larger than average.) Anyway, how humble one is has no bearing on the correctness of one's argument. (Except in a highly contrived example, such as if you were arguing whether or not you always exhibit humility in arguments.)
I, myself, have a tendency to use language that is more formal than average, both when I write in Swedish and English. I fancy myself a bit of a language connoisseur, but I don't feel any need to be a dick about it. You're right, humility has nothing to do with the inherent correctness of the argument - but it has everything to do with getting people to actually listen to your argument and take it seriously. Presenting it as "Here's an opinion, you're dumb if you disagree" will make people think you're a pompous ass not worth listening to no matter how much truth actually lies in your initial point. Case in point: This thread.
Even if you have a point, noone's going to take you seriously if you keep treating everyone who disagrees with you as lesser human beings than you.
I haven't once treated anyone in this thread as a lesser human being, nor said anything to that effect. In fact, I have repeatedly said that, obviously, my superior mastery of English implies but one thing: that I am more equipped to make judgments about the finer points of English usage and style. I have often mentioned multiple times how good most peoples' English is, and how their English is far in advance of any second language I could claim. (In fact, I essentially have no second language.)
Every post you've made in this thread has been about how you're so much better than other people. If you can't see that, you're a dumbfuck.
Get off your fucking pedestal, you're not of a higher standing than anyone else on this forum. Being demeaning and insulting is the only thing you've done for the last three pages.
I have never claimed to have higher standing than anyone else on this forum. I have (reasonably, convincingly) claimed to have superior mastery of English than most, though. I don't understand why you consider "My English is better than yours" to be a demeaning observation. It is a simple statement of fact, and one which no one has seriously seen fit to argue, because my English is quite evidently better than that of the people in this thread who don't speak it natively (and, indeed, most of those that do.) I don't preclude the possibility of another Joseph Conrad somewhere out there, but such a person has certainly not made him or herself known in this thread.
You've not claimed it in words. But from the way you act, it's obvious you think less of the following groups of people:
- People who disagree with you
- People who aren't native English speakers
- People who are native English speakers but aren't you
- ...no, that's pretty much everyone.
An example of where you do it: "my English is quite evidently better than that of the people in this thread who don't speak it natively (and, indeed, most of those that do.)"
Something I'm curious about now: How old are you? No, "What does my age matter?" is not a valid answer to that question.
Det man inte har i begåvning får man ta ut i energi.
"I think I need to get to Snoop Dogg's level of high to be able to research this post." -Samsara
Read my fanfic, One Piece: Pure Corruption
Joined: 8/14/2009
Posts: 4083
Location: The Netherlands
Pointless Boy, the moderator actions were not "wildly inappropriate". It's a near universal forum rule that one must not double post/triple post/multi post, as these are generally disruptive and occasionally considered spam. The Forum Rules, which you like to refer to, state that "making multiple useless [...] posts", like spam, is considered disruptive posting, which is not allowed. Therefore, it's reasonable for the moderation staff to interfere.
The imagery was clearly obnoxious and annoying. This was, again, disruptive, and intentional obnoxious behavior is more than likely considered uncivil, and uncivil behavior is also not allowed as per the Forum Rules. Again, the moderators are allowed to edit your message for cleaning out the uncivil behavior.
So you can see, FractalFusion was clearly following the Forum Rules in his moderation, and therefore you shouldn't have any reason to complain.
Also, technically, as moderators are site staff, we are allowed to do whatever we want with anyone's posts. Deal with it.
Post scriptum: We are not censoring anything. None of your text was modified in any way. The only things removed were useless flashing .gif images. Claiming your expression was stifled in any way is bullshit.
http://www.youtube.com/Noxxa
<dwangoAC> This is a TAS (...). Not suitable for all audiences. May cause undesirable side-effects. May contain emulator abuse. Emulator may be abusive. This product contains glitches known to the state of California to cause egg defects.
<Masterjun> I'm just a guy arranging bits in a sequence which could potentially amuse other people looking at these bits
<adelikat> In Oregon Trail, I sacrificed my own family to save time. In Star trek, I killed helpless comrades in escape pods to save time. Here, I kill my allies to save time. I think I need help.
Pointless Boy: you don't TAS, you don't encode, you don't code, you act like a troll. You're not willing to improve yourself. Go away then, it's pretty simple.
I am not trolling. I have consistently maintained throughout this entire thread (because I am being completely sincere) that my intent is for the TASVideos motto (and subtitle) to be modified slightly so that they "read better". This thread is an honest attempt to make a substantive contribution to the community. Sure, in the grand scheme of things, giving the site a little spit and polish isn't a huge deal. But it's something. It's something I can reasonably do. It doesn't seem any less valid than tassing, encoding, or coding.
I could go away. You could also stop vacuously and vehemently arguing with someone who is willing and able to help, and who is (honestly) only trying to accomplish the explicitly stated goal in this thread. Again, that is to make the TASVideos motto (and subtitle) sound better without changing their actual substance.
I don't see how self improvement is relevant to this discussion. I suspect you actually mean something to the effect that I am incapable of learning or changing my ideas. If my interpretation is correct, it's interesting that you should have that opinion, especially when I've given a precise formula for how to change my opinion on this matter in this very thread. Just get a few proficient speakers of English to state, in good faith, that they disagree with my assessment of which version of the phrase sounds better. I strongly suspect you can't, as I doubt very many proficient speakers do disagree with me (in fact, it seems almost no one actually disagrees with my assessment of which phrase sounds better, which makes this entire thread even crazier. There is either very weak preference for the current version, no preference at all, or, especially among experts so far, strong preference for my version.)
Regardless, I am truly, entirely open to having my opinions changed. It has happened many times in the past. I freely admit I know almost nothing about a great many things, and have huge gaps in my knowledge in even those things I know a great deal about. Would you believe I didn't know the correct pronunciation of "Pleiades" until a few weeks ago? (That sometimes happens for words I've never heard spoken.)
Native English speakers were reading your posts for the whole day (judging by comments in IRC). No one of them got any interest in discussing the aspects of English usage here with you. Only some irrelevant issues. Guess why.
Warning: When making decisions, I try to collect as much data as possible before actually deciding. I try to abstract away and see the principles behind real world events and people's opinions. I try to generalize them and turn into something clear and reusable. I hate depending on unpredictable and having to make lottery guesses. Any problem can be solved by systems thinking and acting.
Getting back to the main topic, I actually like the suggested motto improvement made by Pointless Boy before the major derail.
Unfortunately, I am mostly a passive member on this forum, and English is not my first language, so my opinion doesn't count at all in there. :-(
Pointless Boy, you have pretty much insulted everyone in this thread. You seem to be very good at writing English™, but utterly suck at reading between the lines, so to speak.
I'm not reading between the lines because I'm not writing between them. Really.
Mothrayas wrote:
Pointless Boy, the moderator actions were not "wildly inappropriate". It's a near universal forum rule that one must not double post/triple post/multi post, as these are generally disruptive and occasionally considered spam. The Forum Rules, which you like to refer to, state that "making multiple useless [...] posts", like spam, is considered disruptive posting, which is not allowed. Therefore, it's reasonable for the moderation staff to interfere.
My posts were not useless, and were not "like spam". My posts were unique in content, substantive, written in response to separate people about each of their separate concerns, and written over a period of 60 or 90 minutes.
Making multiple useless posts is against the forum rules. Making multiple posts is not. FractalFusion's actions were completely unreasonable and were a clear abuse of his authority.
The imagery was clearly obnoxious and annoying. This was, again, disruptive, and intentional obnoxious behavior is more than likely considered uncivil, and uncivil behavior is also not allowed as per the Forum Rules. Again, the moderators are allowed to edit your message for cleaning out the uncivil behavior.
It is not against the rules to be sarcastic, obnoxious, or annoying, and I was intentionally only slightly obnoxious and annoying. As I specified earlier, I was careful to be considerate of others by using small images that wouldn't unexpectedly interfere with the forum browsing experience. I didn't do that because I wished to skirt some imaginary line, but because I genuinely didn't want to be particularly disruptive. I wanted to express a feeling that I thought those images appropriately conveyed in that context.
I have also consistently been one of the most civil people in this thread. Excepting my (justifiably) righteous outrage in response to FractalFusion's abhorrent abuse of his moderator privileges, I have been calm, collected, and level-headed throughout this entire debate. The same can't be said for many people in this thread, for example, Mr. Kelly R. Flewin, or KennyMan666. Note that I do not personally believe their actions to be consistently abusive enough to warrant moderation, but surely if an objective party were bent on moderating posts in this thread, moderation would start with the likes of those.
Singling me out for doing nothing more than calmly, dispassionately, and steadfastly defending my position against various levels of uncalled for vitriol surely indicates FractalFusion is unfit to be a moderator, no matter what motivated his inappropriate behavior.
So you can see, FractalFusion was clearly following the Forum Rules in his moderation, and therefore you shouldn't have any reason to complain.
I believe I have adequately refuted this above.
Also, technically, as moderators are site staff, we are allowed to do whatever we want with anyone's posts. Deal with it.
Just because you have the ability to do something doesn't mean that you would be correct in exercising that ability. You are "technically" allowed to do many, many terrible things. For example, not too long ago Anders Breivik was quite evidently technically allowed to slaughter children in the name of xenophobia, and he did so.
Post scriptum: We are not censoring anything. None of your text was modified in any way. The only things removed were useless flashing .gif images. Claiming your expression was stifled in any way is bullshit.
The images were not useless. They were really and truly part of my message, and they were censored. My expression was quite obviously and unarguably stifled.
Pointless Boy:
People don't think you're trolling because you suggested a slogan change, but because you're suggesting it based almost entirely on linguistic prejudice (you'll probably deny this, but it's true). It's generally agreed that this kind of argumentation is arrogant and at the very least detrimental to your own discourse. Seeing that you failed to recognize this, it's reasonable to have some doubts about your authority in language aesthetics.
It's obvious that you are good with English grammar, but that can be irrelevant for the purposes of a motto. I'll give you an example in my native language since you care about this so much: once a large bank used in its slogan the sentence "Vem pra Caixa você também!" ("You, come to Caixa too!"), it was very successful because it rhymes and coulb be put in songs easily. Thing is, it's grammatically incorrect because "vem" expects a pronoun in the 2nd person and "você" is in the third. However, this sounds more familiar to people, even highly educated ones, because the correct language is used mostly in writing. Depending on what you want to say with too much formalism, people will ask "Why are you talking like a book?".
As you can see, there's at least one slogan that was made based on what non-experts on a language would think and it worked, simply because there are situations where being strictly correct is unimportant or just doesn't matter.
Anyway, seeing that the grammar in the motto is correct and people seem to like it, there's little motivation to change it, even less to have a novel written about it. The tasvideos IRC channel could be used right now for discussing things the users would like to see, but at the moment, people are having fun there replacing "English speaker" with "penis sucker" in your sentences. This shows that this discussion is not just stupid, but also counter-productive.
Joined: 4/21/2004
Posts: 3517
Location: Stockholm, Sweden
Demon Lord wrote:
Getting back to the main topic, I actually like the suggested motto improvement made by Pointless Boy before the major derail.
Unfortunately, I am mostly a passive member on this forum, and English is not my first language, so my opinion doesn't count at all in there. :-(
I agree with this post but unfortunately, my native language ain't english so :(
Nitrogenesis wrote:
Guys I come from the DidyKnogRacist communite, and you are all wrong, tihs is the run of the mileniun and everyone who says otherwise dosnt know any bater! I found this run vary ease to masturbate too!!!! Don't fuck with me, I know this game so that mean I'm always right!StupedfackincommunityTASVideoz!!!!!!
Arc wrote:
I enjoyed this movie in which hands firmly gripping a shaft lead to balls deep in multiple holes.
natt wrote:
I don't want to get involved in this discussion, but as a point of fact C# is literally the first goddamn thing on that fucking page you linked did you even fucking read it
Cooljay wrote:
Mayor Haggar and Cody are such nice people for the community. Metro City's hospitals reached an all time new record of incoming patients due to their great efforts :P
Joined: 8/14/2009
Posts: 4083
Location: The Netherlands
Pointless Boy wrote:
My posts were not useless, and were not "like spam". My posts were unique in content, substantive, written in response to separate people about each of their separate concerns, and written over a period of 60 or 90 minutes.
It was nothing that wouldn't have neatly fit in one single post.
Pointless Boy wrote:
Making multiple useless posts is against the forum rules. Making multiple posts is not.
It was useless in that everything could've been done perfectly in one post without any issues. Making additional posts of it was useless, therefore they were multiple useless posts.
Pointless Boy wrote:
FractalFusion's actions were completely unreasonable and were a clear abuse of his authority.
No. Just no.
Pointless Boy wrote:
It is not against the rules to be sarcastic, obnoxious, or annoying, and I was intentionally only slightly obnoxious and annoying.
Obnoxious and annoying are filed under disruptive and uncivil behavior respectively. The Forum Rules say that this is determined by moderator opinion; FractalFusion objected to the images, I object to the images. You are not in a position to argue this.
Pointless Boy wrote:
As I specified earlier, I was careful to be considerate of others by using small images that wouldn't unexpectedly interfere with the forum browsing experience. I didn't do that because I wished to skirt some imaginary line, but because I genuinely didn't want to be particularly disruptive. I wanted to express a feeling that I thought those images appropriately conveyed in that context.
And you couldn't think of not using very annoying flashing GIF animations for that?
If you didn't want to be disruptive, then use static images. Animations are far more likely to be disruptive than even much larger images.
Pointless Boy wrote:
I have also consistently been one of the most civil people in this thread. Excepting my (justifiably) righteous outrage in response to FractalFusion's abhorrent abuse of his moderator privileges, I have been calm, collected, and level-headed throughout this entire debate. The same can't be said for many people in this thread, for example, Mr. Kelly R. Flewin, or KennyMan666. Note that I do not personally believe their actions to be consistently abusive enough to warrant moderation, but surely if an objective party were bent on moderating posts in this thread, moderation would start with the likes of those.
The other instances are irrelevant. We're not talking about their posts, we're talking about yours. You deliberately triple posted with no clear reason (making for at least two useless posts), and you inserted a few massively obnoxious animated image files. We're talking about you who did these things, not anyone else. No other user in this topic made a deliberate triple post nor added unneeded animated images to his posts. You did.
Pointless Boy wrote:
Singling me out for doing nothing more than calmly, dispassionately, and steadfastly defending my position against various levels of uncalled for vitriol surely indicates FractalFusion is unfit to be a moderator, no matter what motivated his inappropriate behavior.
Actually, this would have been long resolved with if you weren't so adamant in defending your stance that FractalFusion's moderation was out of place/uncalled for/inappropriate/whatever. It wasn't. In fact, just a few days ago, FractalFusion did the same to another cluster of posts. There was zero problem there. You know why? Because the user didn't throw out repeated unnecessary complaints that his triple post was merged. We would be long done with this if you settled your case. But instead you had to bring this up again and again.
Pointless Boy wrote:
I believe I have adequately refuted this above.
Nope.
Pointless Boy wrote:
Just because you have the ability to do something doesn't mean that you would be correct in exercising that ability. You are "technically" allowed to do many, many terrible things. For example, not too long ago Anders Breivik was quite evidently technically allowed to slaughter children in the name of xenophobia, and he did so.
Oh hey look, Godwin's Law. Never thought you'd go sink that low. Although I do believe we need a new term for this one. Reductio ad Breivicum?
Either way, this comparison is utterly ridiculous and you should well know it.
Also, I don't think there was any technical allowance for murder in that situation (nor this one, nor ever really), so the comparison is not only uncalled for and offensive, it's also utterly irrelevant.
Pointless Boy wrote:
The images were not useless. They were really and truly part of my message, and they were censored. My expression was quite obviously and unarguably stifled.
They were useless. You could easily do without them. In fact, had the images not been there, nothing of the message would have been any different.
http://www.youtube.com/Noxxa
<dwangoAC> This is a TAS (...). Not suitable for all audiences. May cause undesirable side-effects. May contain emulator abuse. Emulator may be abusive. This product contains glitches known to the state of California to cause egg defects.
<Masterjun> I'm just a guy arranging bits in a sequence which could potentially amuse other people looking at these bits
<adelikat> In Oregon Trail, I sacrificed my own family to save time. In Star trek, I killed helpless comrades in escape pods to save time. Here, I kill my allies to save time. I think I need help.
Getting back to the main topic, I actually like the suggested motto improvement made by Pointless Boy before the major derail.
Unfortunately, I am mostly a passive member on this forum, and English is not my first language, so my opinion doesn't count at all in there. :-(
It's true that your opinion regarding which version of each phrase sounds best is not relevant, but you may still reasonably express appreciation of the faux justified alignment, for example. You may also have an opinion as to whether or not you believe the motto should be changed on some other basis. If so, please express that opinion.
----
KennyMan666 wrote:
Alright, let's play this game.
* KennyMan666 cracks knuckles
Honestly, I am not "playing a game". I am expressing what I believe to be a related series of rather uncontroversial opinions, the sole purpose of which is to improve the sound and appearance of the motto (and subtitle.)
You've not insulted me personally, no. But what you don't seem to realize is that your very demeanor, the way you say that other people's opinions aren't valid, the way you say that YOU'RE the expert and YOU always know best is inherently insulting to the very people you communicate with.
I realize that some people apparently believe that, but I don't think their reactions are warranted or rational, so I am not that concerned with such overreactions. Note that I have been quite careful to state ad nauseam that I only think (most) people's opinions in this thread aren't valid solely concerning English usage and style, and that their overall mastery of world languages in general is likely superior to my own, as many people here speak a second language fluently at a conversational level. From the get go I was constantly, incessantly hedging my statements for the express purpose of downplaying any perceived superiority.
I have many limitations. Compared to most people in this thread, mastery of English is not one of them. That is not a value judgment, implicitly or explicitly. It means only what it means. My English is better. I am better equipped to judge English usage and style, especially when it comes to two statements of largely equivalent meaning that are both grammatically correct. That kind of "feel" for what is "just right" is the last thing people acquire when learning a language, and, in fact, most speakers of a nonnative language never, ever acquire it. Even many native speakers of languages aren't great in that regard. I was lucky enough to grow up speaking English, and I am fairly well educated and widely read, so I just got that "feel" without much effort. Make use of me. Or fling nonstop invective at me. You know, either or.
Your supposed mastery of GLORIOUS ENGLISH LANGUAGE™
Note that I have never stated or implied that English is "glorious" or superior to any other language. English happens to be the language we, as a community, have deemed most useful for fostering communication between disparate gamers from all over the globe on this forum. I understand there are some "foreign" language forums, but it is undeniable the majority of the communication on this forum is English, as are the vast majority of the pages on the actual site, as far as I know.
I believe English's position as the de facto universal language is entirely coincidental from a historical perspective, and in fact think it is inferior to many languages in many respects. For example, spelling in English is ridiculous, and should have been phoneticized long ago, similar to Spanish.
isn't even being taken into question, even though your expertise is nothing but self-proclaimed. It's the way you present it that makes your posts just seem like they're full of hot air and needless wordsmithing just to make yourself appear as the perfect intellectual.
You are reading entirely too much into everything I write. I have consistently stated my only intent (in this thread) is to improve TASVideos by championing a stylistic change of its motto and subtitle. I am so consistent in this regard because I have been entirely truthful throughout. I believe the motto can be improved without changing its meaning. I believe I am well suited to make such a decision. I believe most of the people that have since responded in this thread are not well suited to make such a decision because their English, especially concerning such a subtle point, isn't great. That's it. Really.
I, like many others in this thread, was merely trying to deflate you - because I've never in my entire life encountered someone who needs deflating as much as you do.
That doesn't seem particularly constructive, especially considering you appear to actually agree with my assessment of the motto and subtitle. I find this somewhat astonishing. In your shoes I would simply have expressed my agreement.
Also, neither. I'm Swedish.
Interesting. No doubt I should have considered that possibility. Your English is quite good.
I, myself, have a tendency to use language that is more formal than average, both when I write in Swedish and English. I fancy myself a bit of a language connoisseur, but I don't feel any need to be a dick about it.
Nor do I. I have not attempted to be a dick about my mastery of English. I consider it entirely uncontroversial (almost not even worthy of note, except in this thread expertise in this narrow field is relevant) to state "My English appears to be better than yours, you should defer to my judgment" to a nonnative speaker. It would be equally uncontroversial for you to claim mastery of Swedish over me, or for feos to claim mastery of Russian over me, etc.
You're right, humility has nothing to do with the inherent correctness of the argument - but it has everything to do with getting people to actually listen to your argument and take it seriously. Presenting it as "Here's an opinion, you're dumb if you disagree" will make people think you're a pompous ass not worth listening to no matter how much truth actually lies in your initial point. Case in point: This thread.
I don't think any amount of false modesty is necessary when making uncontroversial statements of fact. "I am a native speaker and I've got a pretty great sense for English usage and style, insofar as you are willing to believe I am acting in good faith, take my word for it, this is just better, so let's get it done" is not offensive or arrogant in the least.
I did end the OP with a nonsensical, flippant remark, and a picture of a kitten. I've never been in the habit of taking nonsensical, flippant remarks followed by pictures of kittens very seriously.
Every post you've made in this thread has been about how you're so much better than other people. If you can't see that, you're a dumbfuck.
To the contrary, I carefully hedged many of my statements to make it clear I had no intentions of putting on airs of superiority in general. I did repeatedly make it clear that my mastery of English was better than that of most of the people that senselessly argued with me, though I never stated or implied that mastery of English had anything to do with one's general value as a human being. I did not and do not equate "my English is better than yours" with "I am better than you".
"My English is better than yours" means precisely what it means. Nothing more, nothing less. I don't feel the need to be held responsible for people who pore through every statement in search of innuendo, especially when I state over, and over, and over, and over again that my words have none. My only goal is to get the motto (and subtitle) changed, because I truly believe my proposed changes to be in every way better. My (truthful) claims of relative mastery of English were made only in support of that goal.
You've not claimed it in words. But from the way you act, it's obvious you think less of the following groups of people:
- People who disagree with you
- People who aren't native English speakers
- People who are native English speakers but aren't you
- ...no, that's pretty much everyone.
An example of where you do it: "my English is quite evidently better than that of the people in this thread who don't speak it natively (and, indeed, most of those that do.)"
That is a simple statement of fact. Nowhere have I stated or implied that relative mastery of English has anything to do with relative value as a human being. In fact, I have stated that I harbor no such misconceptions many times. In a discussion about a subtle English rephrasing, mastery of English is perfectly relevant. When obvious nonmasters argue with a relative master, it bears repeating.
Something I'm curious about now: How old are you? No, "What does my age matter?" is not a valid answer to that question.
No, my age doesn't matter and it is perfectly valid for me to say so. You asserting otherwise doesn't change that, as I'm sure you are aware. Nevertheless, I have no particular objection to revealing general information about myself. To the nearest quinquennium, I am 30.
----
feos wrote:
Native English speakers were reading your posts for the whole day (judging by comments in IRC). No one of them got any interest in discussing the aspects of English usage here with you. Only some irrelevant issues. Guess why.
Because native English speakers by and large agree with my assessment regarding which version of the motto sounds better. (To be more precise, among native speakers, some express mild preference for the original motto, some express no preference, and some, especially most experts, express strong preference for my version of the motto.)
Additionally, I suspect most people recognize that my entire line of argumentation throughout this thread is essentially correct, see the whole argument as a pointless waste of time, and most of all don't want to get involved. That accurately describes my own feelings, but as this is my thread, and I am trying to get a change made, I feel obliged to respond to whatever questionable criticism pops up.
----
Mod edit: Merged triple post. --Mothrayas
People don't think you're trolling because you suggested a slogan change, but because you're suggesting it based almost entirely on linguistic prejudice (you'll probably deny this, but it's true).
I don't believe we agree on the meaning of prejudice. I have no particular linguistic prejudice that isn't based in reason, such as my prejudice against English spelling. As I stated before, I do not believe English to be superior to any other language for any particularly meaningful reason (except as allowed by its entirely coincidental position as a universal language of sorts, for example, but that is a purely practical concern.)
Moreover my personal opinions about specific forum members' paucity of English expertise were definitely not preconceived notions. I formulated those opinions based entirely on knowledge and experience, namely my own (excellent) grasp of English and examination of their actual posts. In the examples I cited and corrected oh so many posts ago, it is very evident the people in question lacked sufficient expertise to have a meaningful opinion concerning a very subtle change to the TASVideos motto. I also made it clear I was judging only their mastery of English in comparison to my own, not making judgments about their value as human beings.
Lastly, it is certainly an interesting rhetorical flourish to make a false statement and then confidently crow that I will no doubt deny it, but upon reflection it is clear it adds no force to your argument.
It's generally agreed that this kind of argumentation is arrogant and at the very least detrimental to your own discourse. Seeing that you failed to recognize this, it's reasonable to have some doubts about your authority in language aesthetics.
If you truly believe I am (and intend to be) arrogant and cruelly dismissive, or something of that nature, despite my repeated protests that my one and only intent is to change the TASVideos motto for the better, it still doesn't follow that you should doubt my assessment of English aesthetics. You could, however, reasonably say something like, "You have little regard for the feelings of others." I don't believe that's true, but it would be a logical conclusion to draw if you really and truly believe I am some sort of monster. On the other hand, I will continue to claim (because it is true) that my only goal is to change the TASVideos motto for the better.
It's obvious that you are good with English grammar, but that can be irrelevant for the purposes of a motto. I'll give you an example in my native language since you care about this so much: once a large bank used in its slogan the sentence "Vem pra Caixa você também!" ("You, come to Caixa too!"), it was very successful because it rhymes and coulb be put in songs easily. Thing is, it's grammatically incorrect because "vem" expects a pronoun in the 2nd person and "você" is in the third. However, this sounds more familiar to people, even highly educated ones, because the correct language is used mostly in writing. Depending on what you want to say with too much formalism, people will ask "Why are you talking like a book?".
As you can see, there's at least one slogan that was made based on what non-experts on a language would think and it worked, simply because there are situations where being strictly correct is unimportant or just doesn't matter.
Your example is particularly inapt. It's a great example of how some really subtle feature of a language is likely only detectable by proficient native speakers, which only proves my point. My modification of the TASVideos motto is equally subtle. Nowhere did I suggest that my modification was more formally correct or anything of that nature.
My entire argument is based on the fact that "just aren't enough" simply sounds better to (most) proficient native speakers. Both versions of the TASVideos motto happen to be formally grammatically correct, but that is irrelevant for the purposes of my argument. My version "sounds more familiar to people, even highly educated ones", and doesn't sound remotely bookish. In fact, it sounds very natural in conversation because "just aren't/isn't/can't blah" is such a common English construction.
Furthermore, based on your description, that slogan in your native language wasn't based on what nonexperts would think at all. It was simply based on conforming more closely to the spoken language as opposed to the written language. If you were to ask an expert "what sounds more natural" in most contexts, no doubt they would choose the spoken language construction as opposed to the written language construction, and would be very familiar with both.
Anyway, seeing that the grammar in the motto is correct and people seem to like it, there's little motivation to change it, even less to have a novel written about it.
Yes, this jives with my repeated claims that most people either express a weak preference for the old motto, or have no preference at all. Importantly, however, in my experience, experts tend to strongly prefer my version. There were also other good reasons given for making the change. The subtitle is inaccurate and misleading by being too inclusive, and the visual symmetry achieved by making both of my suggested changes is quite pleasing.
I readily agree no changes need to be made. The changes I am proposing are fairly minor, as I have freely admitted. A small error or inaccuracy is certainly still worth fixing, though, especially if you can find someone who is willing to fix it. Indeed, that someone is me. I've done all the heavy lifting by coming up with a sensible, positive change. All that remains to be done is minor edits in four lines in a file.
The tasvideos IRC channel could be used right now for discussing things the users would like to see, but at the moment, people are having fun there replacing "English speaker" with "penis sucker" in your sentences.
I, too, enjoy the ribald humor of substituting "penis" (or similar) into various quotes and phrases, and do not mind my words being subverted in this manner. My favorite such construction is:
"I do not feel obliged to believe that the same God who has endowed us with sense, reason, and penis has intended us to forgo their use."
- Galileo Galilei
This shows that this discussion is not just stupid, but also counter-productive.
I agree that this discussion is somewhat stupid and fairly counterproductive, but not on account of me or my English speaker.
----
Mod edit: Merged triple post. --Mothrayas
I once again protest the needless and destructive modification of my posts. It is very clear I am being singled out and harassed by Mothrayas and FractalFusion for having the nerve to reasonably express my preferences and opinions, even where they differ from those of the mods in question, and further for having the sheer audacity to protest such loathsome, iniquitous persecution. I have done absolutely nothing to warrant this unheralded stifling of my inalienable human right to free expression.
----
Mod edit: Merged double post. --Mothrayas
This shows that this discussion is not just stupid, but also counter-productive.
I agree that this discussion is somewhat stupid and fairly counterproductive, but not on account of me or my English speaker.
Ha
Hahaha
Ha.
Pointless Poster wrote:
I once again protest the needless and destructive modification of my posts. It is very clear I am being singled out and harassed by Mothrayas and FractalFusion for having the nerve to reasonably express my preferences and opinions, even where they differ from those of the mods in question, and further for having the sheer audacity to protest such loathsome, iniquitous persecution. I have done absolutely nothing to warrant this unheralded stifling of my inalienable human right to free expression.
Double and triple posting isn't allowed. Put your shit into one post. It isn't hard.
Current projects: Yoshi's Island Disassembly
Yoshi's Island any% TAS with Carl Sagan
Joined: 8/14/2009
Posts: 4083
Location: The Netherlands
Pointless Boy wrote:
Mod edit: Merged triple post. --Mothrayas
I once again protest the needless and destructive modification of my posts. It is very clear I am being singled out and harassed by Mothrayas and FractalFusion
Have you, by any chance, missed the post wherein I stated that this happens to other double and triple posts as well?
Again, the multiple posts are useless and could all fit well in one single post. Use the edit button.
And I didn't modify anything of the content this time. There's no "destructive modification" at all.
http://www.youtube.com/Noxxa
<dwangoAC> This is a TAS (...). Not suitable for all audiences. May cause undesirable side-effects. May contain emulator abuse. Emulator may be abusive. This product contains glitches known to the state of California to cause egg defects.
<Masterjun> I'm just a guy arranging bits in a sequence which could potentially amuse other people looking at these bits
<adelikat> In Oregon Trail, I sacrificed my own family to save time. In Star trek, I killed helpless comrades in escape pods to save time. Here, I kill my allies to save time. I think I need help.
Double and triple posting isn't allowed. Put your shit into one post. It isn't hard.
That is simply false. Useless double and triple posting isn't allowed. My multiple posts are constructive and serve an obvious purpose that I have stated multiple times already in this thread.
Pointless Boy: Use the edit function if no one has posted after your last post and do not be a dick about it. I think that enough moderators have pointed this out already.
