|
On January 24 2008 14:56 CTStalker wrote:
good post, klaz. zulu's blogs are fairly unnecessary, and the bandwagoning there from a certain group of people is pretty much pretention.
if they really cared about commentaries (i say this half-heartedly, since a know that a few other guysd are planning on doing their own shortly as well) they'd make their own, rather than sit and naysay
lol. nice italics
|
Don't respond to them haters out there. I think your commentary vids are great and you're a great value to the starcraft community. You got me into watching english commentary vids. I check youtube almost everyday now to see if you got some new commentaries out.
Keep 'em coming!
|
On January 24 2008 14:26 Last Romantic wrote:
I'm not particularly familiar with you; I've watched a couple of your commentaries but that's it.
...
nice post by last romantic ^
to let you know another part of your fanbase (and i'm sure i'm not the only one) - i played back around 1.07/1.08, quit for years, then just got back into it a couple months ago as a casual player. zulu is definitely right with most of his points...and i don't particularly learn much in the way of strats from your commentaries, but at the very least, they are helpful in making the scene accessible again. plus korean vods annoy the hell out of me (there's no foreign appeal at all, unlike music or a film), so it's great hearing casual convo in english. your energy is also great.
If you honestly have such a low opinion of what we are contributing, and are so confident in your own prowess, why don't you have a go at doing it yourself?
the point is that you did make the decision to make (a lot) of commentaries, and that carries some responsibility. i remember some of diggity's early commentaries where he would spend the first five minutes ranking his favorite players - useless, but completely harmless. as the focus of the commentaries have shifted much more towards strategy, they should communicate a level of strategic competency along with all the other aspects of broadcasting. some people are just picky, but i personally could care less if you are calling a zerg drop when it's probably not coming, the entertainment value makes it worth watching.
so reiterating some of the posts above, if you guys are able to play more, it would definitely help the quality of your commentaries, and also deflect some criticism.
|
Kennigit
Canada19447 Posts
I don't understand where you are getting this hostility from Klaz.
Zulu clearly states at the beginning of his entry that
The gist of which is "My position on your commentaries is this, I commend you guys for taking the time and effort to make English commentaries and doing something for the community, however as commentators you guys do not provide much insight and are plain wrong most of the time. What I'm worried about is if someone tried to learn from watching you guys provide insight that person will probably learn some pretty damaging stuff to his fundamentals. But as long as the audience know to take what you guys say with a grain of salt it's okay."
There is nothing hostile about this. He then proceeded to provide a list of the errors you guys had made in 2 casts - there was a substantial amount and in a community Teamliquid which is populated by elitists it's quite easy to see why members would be irritated by this. If that is the impression from two casts then we think "oh shit theres hundreds of these"
Im going to reiterate what other members have said. I think you diggity and moletrap all have great potential but rather than developing yourselves through study and analysis of builds and strategy your approach appears to be mass gaming with little correction. Heres a great example from someone who is a GREAT commentator looking for people's advice.
http://www.teamliquid.net/forum/viewmessage.php?topic_id=65576
Teamliquid as a community has always respected effort put in by its members - thats how the site has survived and prospered. The issue is that after hundreds of games we don't see what we would expect which is notable improvement. I understand your position of attracting those who wouldn't normally be interested but it is of concern that alot of the material being presented is infact flawed.
I don't learn alot from your commentaries and can point out your flaws but i would love to see the day when i can watch a triple commentary etc and be entertained even if i know what's going on - i think thats the sentiment that your "critics" share.
|
Kennigt - Pre-facing a post with "I commend you ... but..." does not change the tone and attitude of the post itself.
As for the list of errors, as has been already pointed out... many are paradoxical.
One some occasions he complains about missing things that are "obvious" on others when Diggity does point out things he blames him for "pointing out the obvious." That's what sets the alarm bells ringing for me. He's basically looking for anything, and putting the worst possible spin on it. Also, even if it is a BAD vod, that doesn't make it right to generalise and judge all of a caster's work based on it. As has been pointed it, it would be like judging savior on one bad game.
Im going to reiterate what other members have said. I think you diggity and moletrap all have great potential but rather than developing yourselves through study and analysis of builds and strategy your approach appears to be mass gaming with little correction.
Firstly you are making an "assumption" about our strategy. Secondly I honestly don't have the time to do more than I do. Thirdly, and I don't mean this bit defensively, how many of our individual vods have you seen that you can make a comment about our general strategy or attitude? Would I be correct in assuming that you saw one vod and based on that decided, hey this is a new vod, it's not that great, the've done a lot of vods, therefore this is the sum total, so it's all crap. I do feel that commenting on a particular vod is one thing. But making GENERAL inferences on that alone while tempting and while a lot of people do it, isn't correct on any level.
Also, eletism in any community is never in my view something to be proud of or to foster. Not if you want to grow starcraft beyond the current fragmentry following that exists out of korea.
Lastly, I'll repeat again. Just because something is missed during the commentary doesn't mean we can't grasp it. Knowledge or lack of it is only a small part of the picture. As an example look at some of the games where there is a detailed post-game analysis. I think you'll find we cover strategy in a lot more depth there. And htat again is without rewatching the game or anything. It really is wholly different when you have time to sit afterwards and thinkback and focus on strategy entirely.
Still I appreciate your concerns, and we do try to make an improvement always. Playing more games is not an option for me in the future. As for studying, I have enough of that to do for my novel, without having time for starcraft. Besides, there are already pleanty of ppl out there who focus on "strategy" alone. 
|
hm, first i had a real long post standing here that took me over 3 hours to write down about why people discredit others for doing commentaries and enjoying themselves, hating them for not having enough "ingame sense" and hating it cuz they dont give enough background informations why someone is doing this or that, i mean...u see the vod...u can see whats happening, that english commentary is just a bonus for people who wants to...but then i realised that this community on tl.net is pretty much fucked up itself that it probably doesnt matter.
cheers from someone who wouldnt visit this page at all if there wouldnt be strafes blogs and some korean proleague infos.
|
Kennigit
Canada19447 Posts
On January 24 2008 16:11 Klaz wrote:Kennigt - Pre-facing a post with "I commend you ... but..." does not change the tone and attitude of the post itself. As for the list of errors, as has been already pointed out... many are paradoxical. One some occasions he complains about missing things that are "obvious" on others when Diggity does point out things he blames him for "pointing out the obvious." That's what sets the alarm bells ringing for me. He's basically looking for anything, and putting the worst possible spin on it. Also, even if it is a BAD vod, that doesn't make it right to generalise and judge all of a caster's work based on it. As has been pointed it, it would be like judging savior on one bad game. Show nested quote +Im going to reiterate what other members have said. I think you diggity and moletrap all have great potential but rather than developing yourselves through study and analysis of builds and strategy your approach appears to be mass gaming with little correction. Firstly you are making an "assumption" about our strategy. Secondly I honestly don't have the time to do more than I do. Thirdly, and I don't mean this bit defensively, how many of our individual vods have you seen that you can make a comment about our general strategy or attitude? Would I be correct in assuming that you saw one vod and based on that decided, hey this is a new vod, it's not that great, the've done a lot of vods, therefore this is the sum total, so it's all crap. I do feel that commenting on a particular vod is one thing. But making GENERAL inferences on that alone while tempting and while a lot of people do it, isn't correct on any level. Also, eletism in any community is never in my view something to be proud of or to foster. Not if you want to grow starcraft beyond the current fragmentry following that exists out of korea. Lastly, I'll repeat again. Just because something is missed during the commentary doesn't mean we can't grasp it. Knowledge or lack of it is only a small part of the picture. As an example look at some of the games where there is a detailed post-game analysis. I think you'll find we cover strategy in a lot more depth there. And htat again is without rewatching the game or anything. It really is wholly different when you have time to sit afterwards and thinkback and focus on strategy entirely. Still I appreciate your concerns, and we do try to make an improvement always. Playing more games is not an option for me in the future. As for studying, I have enough of that to do for my novel, without having time for starcraft. Besides, there are already pleanty of ppl out there who focus on "strategy" alone.
One some occasions he complains about missing things that are "obvious" on others when Diggity does point out things he blames him for "pointing out the obvious." That's what sets the alarm bells ringing for me.
These are notable differences. These obvious things that a big deal were made out of were "early lings" (12 pool) when in fact it was a counter to the 8 rax which was obvious. Thats just the example i have right now cause i saw it most recently. 70% of the time a pro match is just a standard build. 12 hatch 11 pool...10/12 rax...nothing special yet more is made out of them through adjectives that are inappropriate at the time. It's something i and others who i discussed it (i thought i was going nuts for a while and had to seek confirmation) have noted regulary in all 3 commentators work.
Firstly you are making an "assumption" about our strategy.
Would I be correct in assuming that you saw one vod and based on that decided, hey this is a new vod, it's not that great, the've done a lot of vods, therefore this is the sum total, so it's all crap.
errr......ok ill play along with this double standard. I watched about 15-20 of your commentaries before you took your break and about 6 or so more since you've been back. Diggity/Moletrap ive watched probably 12-15 or so. Thats a pretty decent sample size considering that im not gaining much.
This community prides itself on being at the top of its game and most of the user base holds itself to that standard. I never said elitism was good or bad - but that is the nature of this beast.
You've all stated that you dont have enough time to fit in starcraft to your schedules but regularly release these vods. If it were me i'd be making the choice between cutting off my commentaries for a month or so and using that time (not necessarily playing) but asking and learning from others and then applying that to later commentaries - or continue the way you are.
|
On January 24 2008 16:42 Kennigit wrote:Show nested quote +Would I be correct in assuming that you saw one vod and based on that decided, hey this is a new vod, it's not that great, the've done a lot of vods, therefore this is the sum total, so it's all crap. errr......ok ill play along with this double standard. I watched about 15-20 of your commentaries before you took your break and about 6 or so more since you've been back. Diggity/Moletrap ive watched probably 12-15 or so. Thats a pretty decent sample size considering that im not gaining much. This community prides itself on being at the top of its game and most of the user base holds itself to that standard. I never said elitism was good or bad - but that is the nature of this beast. You've all stated that you dont have enough time to fit in starcraft to your schedules but regularly release these vods. If it were me i'd be making the choice between cutting off my commentaries for a month or so and using that time (not necessarily playing) but asking and learning from others and then applying that to later commentaries - or continue the way you are.
Hey, thanks for the post.
Good call on the double standard. My bad. I guess it's a decentish sample to be fair.
I feel that the whole community pride/high standard stuff is over played a bit. As to standards, I submit that it is purely subjective. Not that I'm saying there isn't room for improvement. But ultimately it's down to opinions. One person's Shakespeare is another's Mills and Boon.
Lastly. Your suggestion is a nice thought. But I enjoy doing the commentaries, and while there are people out there who want to listen to them, that's what I'd rather focus my time on. I'll leave the "teaching vods" for those who have that inclination.
In the end, I probably would have been better off ignoring zulu's post entirely, but we all need to vent from time to time.
|
Valhalla18444 Posts
On January 24 2008 13:21 Klaz wrote:
The first thing that strikes me when reading something like this, is what the motivation of the author might be in giving feedback.
If I were you I would pay attention to the part of zulu's blog that states Diggity challenged his claim that he had found 'like 100 things wrong' with your jaedong/bisu commentary. So zulu did so, and prefaced it with assurance that he appreciates the effort that goes into the commentaries.
Is it to provide constructive advice to help someone improve something? Certainly I don't feel that is the case here, because the tone and nature of the post is highly negative as opposed to constructive and unlikely to achieve a positive effect. And I think because that is the intention of the poster rather than the reader. The "advice" if summed up amounts to "you suck, get better."
Zulu is brash in his approach, but I agreed with nearly all of his comments. Let's get that out of the way.
Is it to educate the world about the lack of quality in our commentaries? Maybe. If so.. why? It's not like we are asking anyone to pay anything for them. It's not as if they are the only available avenue for watching these pro games. If someone disagree's so strongly and has such strong opinions no one is forcing them to watch? Is it because a lot of people out there do seem to enjoy them and that irks the poster for some reason?
Again, Diggity asked zulu to make a list, so zulu made a list. Yes, its alarming that he has such an excess of time on his hands, but no, he didn't make the list just to spite you.
Is it to discourage us from making these commentaries to begin with? I don't know. I again don't see what the point of that would be. It's not like were stopping anyone else from doing it. Nor are we claiming anything above and beyond what we are doing.
No. It was to illustrate the simple point that you, Diggity, and moletrap, don't know the game at a very advanced level. That's fine, not everyone has been around since 1998 and played tens of thousands of games. Again, I'll stress that the effort is appreciated and that zulu acted on Diggity's response.
While I'm on this point I'm gonna call B S on the arguement about "newbies" being potentially damaged by listening to our commentaries. First of all, it's not like we're trying to teach creationism as a science in schools. We are just giving OUR OPINIONS on the game of starcraft. We've never claimed to be the final word or authority on that. People are welcome to disagree with what we have to say on the game, and there is nothing wrong with that, but that's not the same as making a vitriolic attack with the sole intention to undermine. Secondly. It's idiotic to suggest that someone's play will become WORSE by watching a commentary. At the end of the day we provide some basic analysis and our opinion, people can take that on board or not. The best way to improve is to actually PLAY starcraft, and see what works and what doesn't and to practise it. And obviously watching pro-games is a big help. Still everyone is watchig the same game as I am. If they think there is some weight in my strategic insight about what is happening then that is up to them. They MAY try and adopt it into their game playing, and if it works great, if it doesn't then they'll prolly try something different. No one is trying their hands or giving them an exam at the end of the day. I think it's disingenous and ridiculous to suggest that players can be damaged by listening to these commentaries, especially when you have no real evidence beyond opinion to back that up. I'm not going to discuss higher level gamers yet because I'll come to that later.
This part I agree with you on. The idea of potentially damaging newbies is really kind of stupid.
I think the fact that most of my you tube videos get 2,000 - 4,000+, views suggests to me that a lot of people enjoy watching my commented vods, for WHATEVER reason, and this also motivates me to keep going. I've had a lot of comments from people who say they don't even play starcraft anymore. They just like watching cause it's fun. Personally, I feel anything that helps grow and sustain the starcraft e-sports scene is a good thing, and should be supported, whoever happens to be doing it, but obviously I might be biased in having that view point.
Zulu isn't suggesting you stop, he's said repeated times that despite your somewhat mundane knowledge of the game, he appreciates what you do.
Now the big stuff - analysis or strategy or whatever.
I'll ask zulu directly here if he has ever tried doing a commentary, on the fly, never having watched the game first. Especially if you are one person doing it solo... here is what it involves.
1. Watching the game.
2. Thinking about the game.
3. Commenting on the play by play.
4. Anticipating what's happening and what might happen and commenting on it.
5. Trying to think of appropriate references to past games that are relevant to what's happening.
6. Throwing something funny or humerous into the mix.
7. Balancing all of the above while trying to avoid dead air.
In the context of that, it's easy to miss something, or not count the exact number of drones each player has and suss out the exact build, or predict exactly what is happening and why. I'm not saying our knowledge may not be lacking, but the knoweldge is only one part of the picture. I can guarentee you, if I watched every single game before hand, several times, I could be a lot more accurate about what I am saying, and think a lot more deeply about it and provide more depth. I think anyone could. I think watching a game once or twice or thrice. Then sitting down and pointing out with specific time indexes, whatever points you have to make, having the luxury of no other distractions to think about and infinite time to gather, compose and articulate your thoughts as you type out a post is an ENTIRELY different ballgame.
I've commentated live games before, and I've never had trouble with any of this. If you miss something in a game of StarCraft, especially key build order signs within the first ten minutes, its like a 95% chance that you missed it because you are lacking in some area of your game knowledge which in turn doesn't allow you to see things coming. Calling a game of StarCraft isn't as hectic as you're making it seem here.
On the issue of higher level players themselves. Maybe they won't gain as much, or enjoy our commentaries. Fine, fair enough. Because that's not what I'm trying to do anyway. I'm not trying to teach the pro's how to improve. I've already outlined above what I am trying to do. But I don't see why that grants them a lisence to look down upon or belittle us. It's not like I'm claiming i'm a better player than X or that I KNOW more about starcraft than Y.
I know a fucking lot about this game, because I've been playing and watching it for many years. Personally, I can't sit through one of your commentaries because you say so many things that are incorrect, or stress the importance of something that doesn't matter, or completely miss a vital point to the game. I don't enjoy or gain anything from your commentaries whatsoever.
If reading that upset you, you need to re-evaluate your role at this site and the audience you are presenting your commentaries to. At TL, we're used to watching translated Korean commentary, or listening to Day[9] or Tasteless or Chill or Nony or any other of the multitude of intelligent, skilled players that have made commentaries. We honestly want, and oftentimes expect, everything to be at that level of quality. Of course the effort is appreciated, but if you say things in a commentary that are flat-out wrong, the members of a professional starcraft community will be the first ones to point it out. You should know that. You shouldn't take it personally. If you truly just love doing it, you should be able to read zulu's feedback without thinking he's out to get you. If you truly love StarCraft, you should be willing to accept guidance where your present knowledge is failing.
Ultimately I come back down to purpose.
We're talking the time and effort out of our very busy lives to do something because we enjoy it, and because we feel that other people also enjoy listening to it. It's our attempt to contribute and add to to the starcraft community.
If you honestly have such a low opinion of what we are contributing, and are so confident in your own prowess, why don't you have a go at doing it yourself?
I knew this would surface somewhere in your post. Do you not realize how petty that is? Zulu has no obligation to make his own commentary before critiquing yours. If someone who has done commentaries before came in here and made the exact criticisms zulu made, would you raise a stink and say, "Well, yours suck too."?
As for comparisons to tasteless or other commentators, I'm not going to get into that because it's a whole other debate entirely, and a dangerous minefield to boot.
I think it is far easier to be an armchair general and criticise others than actually putting in the effort it takes to do something constructive.
And no, for reasons I've outlined above, this blog is not the same as doing a live commentary on a game you have never seen before or know nothing about.
What is that they say about judging a man without walking 10 miles in his shoes?
I started doing commentaries 7 months ago. I've had a lot of criticism and feedback. Yet never have I had the urge to respond in the manner that I have today. Maybe because for the first time, I feel like this isn't just feedback but a personal attack/flame. Maybe I'm silly and shouldn't swallow the bait. I don't know.
Again, you're sitting here talking about how Zulu shouldn't make such harsh judgements because you're "only doing it for the community", and yet you're taking a shit right back on Zulu? Doing commentaries isn't difficult. It's a lot of work, but calling a game of StarCraft is not difficult if you have a solidly advanced knowledge base. The reason better commentators don't have to comment on unimportant things to fill airspace is they notice things that you don't, and such things are often much more interesting points of discussion.
And if you aren't clear on it by now, zulu's list is not a personal attack on you.
The last thing I want to say on the issue of "FEEDBACK," and whether the intention is positive or negative, constructive or destructive is by the comprehensiveness or lack of the person giving the feedback. I think if you base your opinion of our work on just one game, or even two or three games, it suggests that your approaching it beforehand with your mind already made up, with the sole purpose to look to tear it down rather than add to it. I think if it was someone who had maybe even watched HALF of my vods, and then gave feedback, it was something that would be a) more helpful and b) more likely to be constructive. Because maybe something was missed in one vod that wasn't in another. Or maybe someone had an off day. WHatever. If maybe your blog was just about the analaysis of ONE vod it would be different. But a lot of grand general statements are being made, and I think generalising is always a wrong thing to do. You can't see one guy of any race and make up your mind that all the guys from that race are ugly.
Don't try to say that Zulu just hasn't watched enough of your commentaries. I've watched somewhere around 15 of your commentaries, and none of them were particularily better than any of the others. You can be displeased with the way Zulu's criticism was presented, but don't try to pretend that it misrepresents your average commentary.
I guess ultimately, this blog is just someone's rant, about why they dislike something and has no higher purpose. Just as my commentaries, are just some guys opinion on a game of starcraft, to be enjoyed or not or whatever.
Which I guess makes this reply of mine a non-sequitor, so I'm going to stop here.
If you had responded with just this paragraph in the first place, none of this would have been necessary. This last paragraph is exactly the stance you should have on criticism directed toward your commentaries. Unfortunately, all the garbage above it cheapens the effect.
The bottom line is that if you're willing to put yourself out there for review, which you are doing every time you release a commentary, you should be able to handle praise and criticism in all forms. The most common basis for evaluation in english commentaries is the commentator's ability to call the game accurately. Maybe zulu's post was unnecessary, but this long-winded reply of yours certainly is. Lots of people disagree with the Power Rank every month, but I'm not going to make a huge post telling them to leave me alone because writing the Power Rank is really hard. I discuss things with the people who disagree with the ranking based on my knowledge of StarCraft, not my pride. You should do the same.
|
On January 24 2008 15:49 Kennigit wrote:
The issue is that after hundreds of games we don't see what we would expect which is notable improvement.
Why is he expected to improve his strategical knowledge?
Has he ever advertised his commentaries as a strategical learning tool? No.
Is he being paid to do his commentaries? No.
Has he ever claimed to represent the efforts of TL.net? No.
This attitude of entitlement among certain members of TL appears very snobby to me (not directed at you).
Klaz has pointed out multiple times that certain issues (as well as time constraints) prevent him from being able to game often enough to advance his strategical understanding of Starcraft to a whole different level. That's like asking a 5"4 guy, "why can't you just grow a few inches so you can dunk and improve your game in basketball".
On January 24 2008 15:49 Kennigit wrote:I understand your position of attracting those who wouldn't normally be interested but it is of concern that alot of the material being presented is infact flawed.
It is of concern to WHO exactly? Those who understand the game at a higher level than the commentators can just pick out the mistakes themselves. It's not like they're giving out that much strategical advice during the games. So these people can either: listen to the commentaries for entertainment value, for another person's take on the same game, or just listen to the original Korean games and pretend these don't exist.
Those who are at a lower level of SC understanding are more likely to become attracted to the game, and seek out other forms of various online strategical resources if they truly wish to improve. There is absolutely no way that listening commentaries can actually be detrimental to their game, because there honestly just isn't that much advice being given out, when you compare them to educational videos such as those by Combat, Chill, or Nony for example.
Many of Zulu's criticisms are also really pulling at straws and were generally either: "oh, he got too excited at this when it was obvious", "oh, he missed that detail when he shouldn't have" or "oh, he doesn't have firm evidence to suggest this, so he shouldn't even be speculating or making predictions". Some them are even criticizing their discussion or general SC-related discussion like this one:
- 13:00, "Diggity do you think Jaedong is as on top of his game as any zerg can be right now?" wtf kind of a question is that? What could you have said? No, I think yarnc would be doing better?
WTF kind of criticism is that?
On January 24 2008 15:49 Kennigit wrote:I don't learn alot from your commentaries and can point out your flaws but i would love to see the day when i can watch a triple commentary etc and be entertained even if i know what's going on - i think thats the sentiment that your "critics" share.
I'll just say that even people who fully understand what's going and realize the inaccuracies or exaggerations can still be entertained by the commentary, such as myself. I enjoy the enthusiasm and also listening to someone else's take on the same game as I'm watching.
|
Russian Federation12 Posts
On January 24 2008 17:17 FakeSteve[TPR] wrote:Show nested quote +
I think the fact that most of my you tube videos get 2,000 - 4,000+, views suggests to me that a lot of people enjoy watching my commented vods, for WHATEVER reason, and this also motivates me to keep going. I've had a lot of comments from people who say they don't even play starcraft anymore. They just like watching cause it's fun. Personally, I feel anything that helps grow and sustain the starcraft e-sports scene is a good thing, and should be supported, whoever happens to be doing it, but obviously I might be biased in having that view point.
Zulu isn't suggesting you stop, he's said repeated times that despite your somewhat mundane knowledge of the game, he appreciates what you do.
Now here's where you missed the whole argument and your basis by not reading everything. If it was just this and if this is how he presented it, it wouldn't have been as big of a deal. His mission was more towards the public degradation route, and here's where it starts.
On January 21 2008 14:27 zulu_nation8 wrote:
I'm being nice, from what you and diggity come off as on Teamliquid I think you guys should stop doing commentaries but I fully understand your passion and respect the energy and work you guys have put in, but I doubt anyone is learning from them.
http://www.teamliquid.net/forum/viewmessage.php?currentpage=2&topic_id=65420
This is where it all starts. This is where he is making a stand. Not to put too much emphasis on this since it's only 1 person's opinion, Diggity asks hims to give some constructional analysis, in which he makes an entire inflammatory blog, condescending on all the points he makes. It's not as bad if you look at it generally and say "He's pointing out flaws" but reading the unnecessary, condescending attacks is something you have to actually sift through them to get the picture.
Typically you could say it was just a statement to Diggity/moletrap, but then comes:
English Commentaries #2
zulu_nation8, January 23
After going through the triple commentary I realized that Klazart is probably the worst offender of all so I decided to choose a Diggity only commentary and also one of my favorite games of the past year, OSL Final 4 Jaedong v Upmagic set 2 on Blue Storm.
It's a personal attack in my eyes. Anyways, i'm gonna stop reading on. Klaz's commentaries shouldn't be lumped with Diggity/moletrap's imho, and making a bad judgement on 1 triple commentary is just flat out stupid.
-D|Q-}FiZZon{
|
Valhalla18444 Posts
Hey here comes some nobody to tell me how wrong I am!
The points I made were that Klazart shouldn't be reacting the way he is to zulu's post, and that zulu's claim that these commentators lack game knowledge isn't born of some ludicrous hated toward them. In Klazart's case, zulu is completely right in his statement, and in any case, Klazart shouldn't have made a post like this.
That last thing you quoted was an admittance that it may not be fair to judge Diggity by the number of errors Klazart made in the Jaedong/Bisu game, and so he chose a game that only Diggity commentated. This whole thing started with zulu and Diggity to begin with. You don't really know zulu, but he is direct and to the point in every single thing he says. That's just how he is. Again, it shouldn't matter this much.
|
Russian Federation12 Posts
On January 24 2008 17:54 FakeSteve[TPR] wrote:
Hey here comes some nobody to tell me how wrong I am!
Yes, you were wrong. Being sarcastic doesn't change that.
The points I made were that Klazart shouldn't be reacting the way he is to zulu's post, and that zulu's claim that these commentators lack game knowledge isn't born of some ludicrous hated toward them. In Klazart's case, zulu is completely right in his statement, and in any case, Klazart shouldn't have made a post like this.
That last thing you quoted was an admittance that it may not be fair to judge Diggity by the number of errors Klazart made in the Jaedong/Bisu game, and so he chose a game that only Diggity commentated. You don't really know zulu, but he is direct and to the point in every single thing he says. That's just how he is. Again, it shouldn't matter this much.
Saying they lack knowledge and should improve is one thing. Telling them, "You suck and i'm not trying to be mean, but you should quit right now. The impact you're having on the community is detrimental." is another. He took the second route.
-D|Q-}FiZZon{
|
Valhalla18444 Posts
I already said that Zulu's comments were brash and maybe unnecessary. Whether Klazart liked Zulu's tone has so little to do with what I posted that I'm just shaking my head as you try to tell me what a monster Zulu is.
Also this is unrelated but we don't sign our posts here.
|
On January 24 2008 17:54 FakeSteve[TPR] wrote:
The points I made were that Klazart shouldn't be reacting the way he is to zulu's post, and that zulu's claim that these commentators lack game knowledge isn't born of some ludicrous hated toward them. In Klazart's case, zulu is completely right in his statement, and in any case, Klazart shouldn't have made a post like this.
Can you not tell how insulted Klazart and the other commentators feel after reading Zulu's comments. If I spent my spare time making all these commentaries and sharing them to benefit the community, only to be personally attacked and picked apart in a derogatory and sarcastic manner, I would be pissed as hell too. Just read all of it closely. Zulu is correct in many of his points, but that's not the issue at stake here. It's the ugly tone and underlying intentions that are the problem. Being "direct" is entirely different from making insulting comments and posts that are just oozing with smug sarcasm. Klazart has every right to make a post defending himself.
On January 21 2008 14:27 zulu_nation8 wrote:
I'm being nice, from what you and diggity come off as on Teamliquid I think you guys should stop doing commentaries but I fully understand your passion and respect the energy and work you guys have put in, but I doubt anyone is learning from them.
On January 21 2008 23:58 zulu_nation8 wrote:
I immediately dug up you + diggity + klazart's triple commentary on the bisu vs jaedong blue storm game. I wanted to pick a good example to see if I was wrong to flame you guys or not.
...
as commentators you guys do not provide much insight and are plain wrong most of the time.
On January 23 2008 18:18 zulu_nation8 wrote:
After going through the triple commentary I realized that Klazart is probably the worst offender of all
This pretty much exposes his true intentions behind his commentary. He even openly states that he's flaming them. It doesn't matter if he slips in one or two sentences showing the he's "okay" with them or "respects them". He wouldn't be writing in that tone if he wanted to show respect. It pretty much amounts to saying "No offense, but fuck you".
On January 21 2008 23:58 zulu_nation8 wrote:
What I'm worried about is if someone tried to learn from watching you guys provide insight that person will probably learn some pretty damaging stuff to his fundamentals.
That's complete and utter bullshit. Very few of Zulu's "100 criticisms" are fundamentals to players that are relatively new to SC, but are rather just minor points that they wouldn't understand even if explained to them.
|
Valhalla18444 Posts
....Right, and my main point is that despite how this shit is presented, Klazart shouldn't try to dismiss the criticisms themselves based on the fact that Zulu doesn't make commentaries, or based on the difficulty of making commentaries. Despite how Zulu worded everything, almost all of his specific comments are valid and true.
In a similar vein, the rest of you shouldn't immediately ignore that point just because I personally don't think Zulu's off-color remarks were as bad as some of you are making them out to be.
|
On January 24 2008 17:54 FakeSteve[TPR] wrote:
Hey here comes some nobody to tell me how wrong I am
I don't want to debate endlessly on the commentary stuff so I've stopped responding in that regard. Since I think anything further by me on the topic is merely repitition. I've made my points and stance as clearly and coherently as I can.
However...
No offence but you have no right to call anyone a nobody. Who exactly are you that gives you that right exactly? Even if you were the president of the U.S. This kind of dismissal of other people's opinion as if they are beneath you somehow is not good. It shocks and sads me to see someone with your level of standing in TL behave this way, even sadder still if it's any representation of the community as a whole.
I'll repeat what I said before. Elitism is not something to be lauded or fostered as a virtue.
|
On January 24 2008 18:27 FakeSteve[TPR] wrote:
....Right, and my main point is that despite how this shit is presented, Klazart shouldn't try to dismiss the criticisms themselves based on the fact that Zulu doesn't make commentaries, or based on the difficulty of making commentaries. Despite how Zulu worded everything, almost all of his specific comments are valid and true.
In a similar vein, the rest of you shouldn't immediately ignore that point just because I personally don't think Zulu's off-color remarks were as bad as some of you are making them out to be.
Really? Like honestly?
Do you want me to pick apart Zulu's criticisms with my own? You don't see the condescending tone throughout?
|
Valhalla18444 Posts
On January 24 2008 18:27 Klaz wrote:Show nested quote +On January 24 2008 17:54 FakeSteve[TPR] wrote:
Hey here comes some nobody to tell me how wrong I am I don't want to debate endlessly on the commentary stuff so I've stopped responding in that regard. Since I think anything further by me on the topic is merely repitition. I've made my points and stance as clearly and coherently as I can. However... No offence but you have no right to call anyone a nobody. Who exactly are you that gives you that right exactly? Even if you were the president of the U.S. This kind of dismissal of other people's opinion as if they are beneath you somehow is not good. It shocks and sads me to see someone with your level of standing in TL behave this way, even sadder still if it's any representation of the community as a whole. I'll repeat what I said before. Elitism is not something to be lauded or fostered as a virtue.
You don't need to respond. The point has been made, and I really don't care if you understand it because I don't listen to your commentaries anymore anyway.
On to the other thing: that comment wasn't directed at you. I'm not gonna rattle off things that I've done that allow me to call someone with 8 posts I've never read a nobody after their ninth post is so ignorant. Furthermore, the insinuation that my attitude is disgraceful to the site I've put so much work into is utterly fucking offensive, and I suggest you don't take that notion any further.
|
Valhalla18444 Posts
On January 24 2008 18:30 teamsolid wrote:Show nested quote +On January 24 2008 18:27 FakeSteve[TPR] wrote:
....Right, and my main point is that despite how this shit is presented, Klazart shouldn't try to dismiss the criticisms themselves based on the fact that Zulu doesn't make commentaries, or based on the difficulty of making commentaries. Despite how Zulu worded everything, almost all of his specific comments are valid and true.
In a similar vein, the rest of you shouldn't immediately ignore that point just because I personally don't think Zulu's off-color remarks were as bad as some of you are making them out to be. Really? Like honestly? Do you want me to pick apart Zulu's criticisms with my own? You don't see the condescending tone throughout?
HOW ITS PRESENTED ISNT THE IMPORTANT PART
If you want to make a huge list that no one will read of everything mean about zulu's post, go right ahead. I mean shit dude, I said "Zulu is brash and maybe the post was unnecessary" and you're still trying to tell me I don't think any of it is rude at all. Cooooooool.
|
|
|
|
|
|
EPT
