EPTThe brainless, the negative, and the positive - Page 2
| Blogs > SiskosGoatee |
|
docvoc
United States5491 Posts
| ||
|
radscorpion9
Canada2252 Posts
You say that brainless negativity can bring someone to do things, but positivity does not. To this I would say that sometimes when a caster is doing really good things, they have no reason to change (analogously, if your car was working perfectly, you would not change any components). If someone were to be brainlessly negative in that case (not because he/she wants to, but purely as a consequence of your theory), then the caster might feel as if the majority of what they are doing is bad, when in reality it is good to the majority and to the person commenting. Thus the caster would change, and its likely that he would alter these good qualities (like his humour) to something that is worse for everyone (just being purely analytical and boring, or forcing a new, weird sense of humour that no one enjoys). Basically you can't assume that the change will always be positive in light of negative feedback, you also have to consider that the caster might make a change for the worse, especially when there is no constructive information to be had, just pure negative reinforcement. Of course in other cases, like with Moletrap in the GSL, negativity really can be good because there really is something that he is doing wrong. And although its not clear, at least he can start to figure things out and try out other styles of casting. So altogether I think that the balance of 'brainless' positive and negative opinions actually serves as a good barometer of how well you are doing as a caster, so it can be used as a very broad guide to help yourself improve. If you (theoretically) were to only include the negative, then no one would have any understanding of how well they're doing - everything would seem wrong. It would make life horribly confusing and sad for them, and the viewers would likely not get the entertainment they are seeking as a result of the unwanted changes. Also at some point, they would simply accept negative reinforcement as a fact of life and not read any meaning into it at all which counteracts your theory. If you could only say "I don't like that" towards everything in your life, and people understood that, how seriously would they take your commentary? You don't even have a choice in what you say, so they have no idea whether you really mean what you are saying or whether its just as a result of a very rigid philosophy. So ultimately your theory is self-defeating if it were implemented. Also a quick comment to dark plasma - I think I agree with your points but he is discussing the pure, brainless comments. I think we all agree constructive commentary is better, but of the two 'brainless' categories, which would you prefer and why? Its kind of an interesting philosophical question in a way, although I feel I have resolved it pretty well  | ||
|
hypercube
Hungary2735 Posts
On July 13 2014 21:33 SiskosGoatee wrote: More like "Let's sacrifice the happiness of one person to benefit that of thousands." Cool. I nominate yours. + Show Spoiler + But seriously, let's not "sacrifice" someone else's happiness. Especially not over something so trivial as the quality of commentary. That's just not cool. | ||
|
Big J
Austria16289 Posts
| ||
|
supernovamaniac
United States3046 Posts
On July 14 2014 01:14 docvoc wrote: Advice from a scifi show is regularly, on a scale from one to ten, a solid terrible/ten. But scifi shows are really cool  | ||
|
7mk
Germany10157 Posts
If someone tells me my photos are good that makes me happy. Therefore I wanna keep making photos, keep improving to get even more positive feedback. Simple, really. | ||
|
Kleinmuuhg
Vanuatu4091 Posts
| ||
| ||
