Professionalism in electronic sports - Page 11

On July 08 2011 02:50 Talin wrote:


Ha, this one I haven't heard before. "Dedicated to e-sports".

No, nobody wants to fine people dedicated to e-sports. The OP talks about fining people who are obnoxious in public and major live events.

A language filter would be a small solution here so atleast the words FUCK YOU dont pop out lol

On July 08 2011 02:38 ZarMulix wrote:


I think his issue, and probably the issue many people are having, is that your article doesn't do a good job of explaining your reasoning behind your thesis. I think that you assume that your point is obvious and therefore doesn't need explanation, but as is obvious from most of the replies here that is not true. If you don't argue the concept of censoring and professionalism itself, all you are doing is stating your opinion. But just stating your opinion is not your goal here. Your goal here is to inspire people to take action or see things your way (see: argument or persuasive article), hence, saying things like, "it's my opinion therefore it's biased" is not enough. You need to provide evidence, make more claims than your initial thesis, and most of all define and develop your idea.

You never explain why "unprofessionalism" is bad. Trust me, you don't. I'm looking at the article right now. There is not one sentence dedicated to explaining why this is so. Not one.

You say that BM and actions of the like should be denounced when possible, and mention that "the community's reaction was luckily very negative to this whole ordeal..." regarding the contracts issue. This is obviously an example of your stances on these issues and what you approve/disapprove of. But once again you do not tell me why this is the "right" stance to have on this.

You complain that major organizations do not take BM seriously enough and that traditional/"professional" sports keep manners hidden or private. You say that Starcraft is not currently like that, and that " The same needs to become true for electronic sports."
..
Why? Stop telling me what I NEED to do, what MUST be done, and what SHOULD be true without telling me why. I KNOW that you want things a certain way, but you have to prove that your way is superior in some way and way. Maybe it's inferior, but argue that. You don't argue anything, simply state your views. You definitely have the right to state your views, but you cannot expect people to see things your way without arguing morally, logically, etc.

For example, I think that BM at this point in Starcraft 2 is helping it. From reading through several forums I have seen evidence of it igniting passion in spectators (positive or negative). I do not believe Starcraft's current audience is easily offended, and therefore companies who sponsor Starcraft will continue to do so and do not incur much more risk doing so. I think that censorship in general is a dumb idea because I believe it falls on the viewers/recipients to decide what is acceptable or not. No sweeping generalization will ever please everyone, but to think that popular opinion (which is what defines "acceptable") sets the standards for the filters that decide what information I get to receive is absurd in my opinion.

You don't offer evidence to dispute the logical or philosophical parts that constitute my opinion (notice, not argument). I am willing to bet that anyone who reads your article (your target audience as stated at the end) and has the power to do anything about it will be testing your argument against their logic, their philosophy, and their biases. If you don't challenge their views, how do you expect to change them?

So then the issue becomes, why did you write the article in the first place? It is likely not going to achieve your goal, you did not develop any novel ,or any, ideas, and you're apparently not swaying even the casual readers of this forum. The response you're receiving isn't about you. It is about the article. People will argue about anything, but in order to have a good discussion you need to have a clear way of presenting information/arguments to one another. I know that you have this idea in your head, but all we get to see is the information placed in front of us. There is only so much that we can deduce without risking misinterpretation or wild assumptions. People are angry because you have chosen a stance that is not popular without taking the time or effort to actually say anything. People have the same reaction to those who tell everyone they're going to hell on the train (I live in NYC) because they're not of the same religion, people who say that being gay is wrong using the argument "Marriage is sacred," and the list goes on and on. These are perfectly valid opinions, but don't expect me to accept them without any discussion or evidence. Let us at least rationalize for a bit.

I repeat myself, but this is because I think this is important for both you and whoever else decides to write up their opinion in an "article." If you're attempting to sway beliefs, you have to argue properly (as in using evidence, clear flows of logic, anything else I mentioned before - and more!). Bad writing (which is what this is) does not contribute much to more to E-Sports than the traffic it brings to random threads on TeamLiquid. I would even go so far as to argue that bad writing and articles such as these are BAD FOR E-SPORTS (hahaha, I said it), but that would require more thought, effort, research and most of all time which I do not have as I have to go get my passport application handed in.

In case this wasn't clear (since I'm kind of all over the place), I claim that people are reacting on the quality of your writing rather than your opinion (since it isn't developed at all in the article). Therefore expect people to not take it seriously, and for people to react negatively when you add in bits and pieces of your argument as you respond to posts. You should not develop your idea in your replies, they should be fairly clear from the "get-go."

I look forward to seeing more "high quality" opinionated articles from people in the future. Gotta go!

On July 08 2011 02:43 Talin wrote:
+ Show Spoiler +

On July 08 2011 02:38 ZarMulix wrote:


I think his issue, and probably the issue many people are having, is that your article doesn't do a good job of explaining your reasoning behind your thesis. I think that you assume that your point is obvious and therefore doesn't need explanation, but as is obvious from most of the replies here that is not true. If you don't argue the concept of censoring and professionalism itself, all you are doing is stating your opinion. But just stating your opinion is not your goal here. Your goal here is to inspire people to take action or see things your way (see: argument or persuasive article), hence, saying things like, "it's my opinion therefore it's biased" is not enough. You need to provide evidence, make more claims than your initial thesis, and most of all define and develop your idea.

You never explain why "unprofessionalism" is bad. Trust me, you don't. I'm looking at the article right now. There is not one sentence dedicated to explaining why this is so. Not one.

You say that BM and actions of the like should be denounced when possible, and mention that "the community's reaction was luckily very negative to this whole ordeal..." regarding the contracts issue. This is obviously an example of your stances on these issues and what you approve/disapprove of. But once again you do not tell me why this is the "right" stance to have on this.

You complain that major organizations do not take BM seriously enough and that traditional/"professional" sports keep manners hidden or private. You say that Starcraft is not currently like that, and that " The same needs to become true for electronic sports."
..
Why? Stop telling me what I NEED to do, what MUST be done, and what SHOULD be true without telling me why. I KNOW that you want things a certain way, but you have to prove that your way is superior in some way and way. Maybe it's inferior, but argue that. You don't argue anything, simply state your views. You definitely have the right to state your views, but you cannot expect people to see things your way without arguing morally, logically, etc.

For example, I think that BM at this point in Starcraft 2 is helping it. From reading through several forums I have seen evidence of it igniting passion in spectators (positive or negative). I do not believe Starcraft's current audience is easily offended, and therefore companies who sponsor Starcraft will continue to do so and do not incur much more risk doing so. I think that censorship in general is a dumb idea because I believe it falls on the viewers/recipients to decide what is acceptable or not. No sweeping generalization will ever please everyone, but to think that popular opinion (which is what defines "acceptable") sets the standards for the filters that decide what information I get to receive is absurd in my opinion.

You don't offer evidence to dispute the logical or philosophical parts that constitute my opinion (notice, not argument). I am willing to bet that anyone who reads your article (your target audience as stated at the end) and has the power to do anything about it will be testing your argument against their logic, their philosophy, and their biases. If you don't challenge their views, how do you expect to change them?

So then the issue becomes, why did you write the article in the first place? It is likely not going to achieve your goal, you did not develop any novel ,or any, ideas, and you're apparently not swaying even the casual readers of this forum. The response you're receiving isn't about you. It is about the article. People will argue about anything, but in order to have a good discussion you need to have a clear way of presenting information/arguments to one another. I know that you have this idea in your head, but all we get to see is the information placed in front of us. There is only so much that we can deduce without risking misinterpretation or wild assumptions. People are angry because you have chosen a stance that is not popular without taking the time or effort to actually say anything. People have the same reaction to those who tell everyone they're going to hell on the train (I live in NYC) because they're not of the same religion, people who say that being gay is wrong using the argument "Marriage is sacred," and the list goes on and on. These are perfectly valid opinions, but don't expect me to accept them without any discussion or evidence. Let us at least rationalize for a bit.

I repeat myself, but this is because I think this is important for both you and whoever else decides to write up their opinion in an "article." If you're attempting to sway beliefs, you have to argue properly (as in using evidence, clear flows of logic, anything else I mentioned before - and more!). Bad writing (which is what this is) does not contribute much to more to E-Sports than the traffic it brings to random threads on TeamLiquid. I would even go so far as to argue that bad writing and articles such as these are BAD FOR E-SPORTS (hahaha, I said it), but that would require more thought, effort, research and most of all time which I do not have as I have to go get my passport application handed in.

In case this wasn't clear (since I'm kind of all over the place), I claim that people are reacting on the quality of your writing rather than your opinion (since it isn't developed at all in the article). Therefore expect people to not take it seriously, and for people to react negatively when you add in bits and pieces of your argument as you respond to posts. You should not develop your idea in your replies, they should be fairly clear from the "get-go."

I look forward to seeing more "high quality" opinionated articles from people in the future. Gotta go!

On July 08 2011 02:52 Trowa127 wrote:


People who have given up other life oppurtunities such as going to university or getting jobs to be proffessional starcraft 2 players. Don't you think that is dedication?

On July 08 2011 02:53 AndyGB4 wrote:


.. or a 'warning' to the viewers of the stream, like 16+ or whatever. that way if youre offended by "Fuck You" just dont watch that stream.

Bad manners in traditional sports are very private and hidden

On July 08 2011 00:08 mki wrote:
Furthermore, rather than fine Delpan 2,500 EURO, they should fine him the maximum fee they possibly could. In the future, if that fee is 2,500 EURO, they should change their contract to make such a fee 10,000 EURO. In addition to all this, all contracts MUST BE notarized by a qualified lawyer. If such harsh action would be taken, all organizations around the world will know that a change has come and that we can't steal each other's players anymore. This is how this matter is taken care of in every traditional sports league around the world, and until organizations take a hard blow for such negative actions, they will continue with said negative actions.