|
Uff, those were some looong interviews but very fun. Especially that Soe interview Hot_Bid was kind of overwhelmed.
And all the things Soe can, speaking 6 or more languages, knowing sword fight, talented artist, hosting events.... why does she have to remind me of of how bad I am at everything. ... 
|
On December 12 2012 08:31 garlicface wrote:Show nested quote +On December 12 2012 08:28 kollin wrote:On December 12 2012 08:27 garlicface wrote:On December 12 2012 07:01 kollin wrote:
Urgh, thought the Lauren interview was actually pretty good right up until what she said about Scarlett. Disgusting. DISGUSTING. Wow. I can only imagine what terrible names you call people who dip their fries into their milkshakes. No, what I find disgusting is the clear ignorance she displays, and the audacity she has to display that ignorance in an interview a large amount of people, including Scarlett, could well see. How is it a bad thing? What if they were talking about Zergs, Scarlett specifically, and Lauren instead asked, "Wait, Scarlett is a Zerg?"?
Not derailing this thread with an argument about this. We disagree, now move on.
|
On December 12 2012 08:33 kollin wrote:Show nested quote +On December 12 2012 08:31 JimmyJRaynor wrote:On December 12 2012 08:25 kollin wrote:On December 12 2012 08:15 JimmyJRaynor wrote:On December 12 2012 07:48 MrBitter wrote:
No one from Liquipedia contacted me to ask about prize money, and I think most those guys know me well enough to do so.
Our prize pool was never a secret. Why is this an issue? because its no where on the NASL site... and over all the NASL site is very informative... that is why it seems odd. 2 liquipedia editor guys stated they tried and failed to get prize money info... check the thread and talk to them maybe? Would you mind linking me to that post? here is the first one...later in the thread another liquipedia editor guy re-enforces this comment http://www.teamliquid.net/forum/viewmessage.php?topic_id=387294#11 So 1 guy, who I would like to point out has no position of importance within the hierarchy of Liquipedia, says that when he and a few others who did some work on a page anyone could edit couldn't find a source for the prize pool, that means there isn't one? That's....just wrong.
no, if you read the thread further another liquipedia editor agrees with him.
that is 2 not 1... and previously in a different thread a third says the same thing.
i was kind enough to find that 1..
dig through that thread if you want to.
you are the 1 concluding there is no prize pool. i am merely pointing out what i see.
in the murky world of eSports i guess anything is possible... but its highly unlikely "no prizepool" will occur.
|
On December 12 2012 08:32 Ballack wrote:Show nested quote +On December 12 2012 08:25 garlicface wrote:
Spouts bullshit? She genuinely didn't know. Quit trying to white knight for Scarlett when it isn't warranted.
And I though Hot_Bid was a girl before these interviews. The more you know, huh? You presenting "she genuinely didn't know" as fact is not any better then me presenting that she did as fact....Oh wait, I didn't... I do find it hard to believe a person who's been employed full time in Esports, specifically Starcraft 2, for quite a while, don't know who Scarlett is. Oh and she did claim to know who she was as well. Even if she didn't know, it was a borderline moronic comment that could not do any good no matter the answer to her question.
The issue at hand is whether or not she's ignorant for not knowing who Scarlett is, or if she was intentionally malicious.
Hint: + Show Spoiler +
|
On December 12 2012 08:35 JimmyJRaynor wrote:Show nested quote +On December 12 2012 08:33 kollin wrote:On December 12 2012 08:31 JimmyJRaynor wrote:On December 12 2012 08:25 kollin wrote:On December 12 2012 08:15 JimmyJRaynor wrote:On December 12 2012 07:48 MrBitter wrote:
No one from Liquipedia contacted me to ask about prize money, and I think most those guys know me well enough to do so.
Our prize pool was never a secret. Why is this an issue? because its no where on the NASL site... and over all the NASL site is very informative... that is why it seems odd. 2 liquipedia editor guys stated they tried and failed to get prize money info... check the thread and talk to them maybe? Would you mind linking me to that post? here is the first one...later in the thread another liquipedia editor guy re-enforces this comment http://www.teamliquid.net/forum/viewmessage.php?topic_id=387294#11 So 1 guy, who I would like to point out has no position of importance within the hierarchy of Liquipedia, says that when he and a few others who did some work on a page anyone could edit couldn't find a source for the prize pool, that means there isn't one? That's....just wrong. no, if you read the thread further another liquipedia editor agrees with him. that is 2 not 1... and previously in a different thread a third says the same thing. dig through that thread if you want to. you are the 1 concluding there is no prize pool. i am merely pointing out what i see.
What? You're arguments literally don't make sense. I am saying, anyone can edit Liquipedia, not a small group of people designated as editors. At no point do I say there is no prize pool. What I am saying is, what if it was actually a guy a from NASL who added in the prize pool? Then while we need a source to reference, we still have a reliable source if that makes sense.
|
On December 12 2012 08:38 kollin wrote:Show nested quote +On December 12 2012 08:35 JimmyJRaynor wrote:On December 12 2012 08:33 kollin wrote:On December 12 2012 08:31 JimmyJRaynor wrote:On December 12 2012 08:25 kollin wrote:On December 12 2012 08:15 JimmyJRaynor wrote:On December 12 2012 07:48 MrBitter wrote:
No one from Liquipedia contacted me to ask about prize money, and I think most those guys know me well enough to do so.
Our prize pool was never a secret. Why is this an issue? because its no where on the NASL site... and over all the NASL site is very informative... that is why it seems odd. 2 liquipedia editor guys stated they tried and failed to get prize money info... check the thread and talk to them maybe? Would you mind linking me to that post? here is the first one...later in the thread another liquipedia editor guy re-enforces this comment http://www.teamliquid.net/forum/viewmessage.php?topic_id=387294#11 So 1 guy, who I would like to point out has no position of importance within the hierarchy of Liquipedia, says that when he and a few others who did some work on a page anyone could edit couldn't find a source for the prize pool, that means there isn't one? That's....just wrong. no, if you read the thread further another liquipedia editor agrees with him. that is 2 not 1... and previously in a different thread a third says the same thing. dig through that thread if you want to. you are the 1 concluding there is no prize pool. i am merely pointing out what i see. What? You're arguments literally don't make sense. I am saying, anyone can edit Liquipedia, not a small group of people designated as editors. At no point do I say there is no prize pool. What I am saying is, what if it was actually a guy a from NASL who added in the prize pool? Then while we need a source to reference, we still have a reliable source if that makes sense.
You shouldn't derail the thread with this. Best to agree to disagree, and move on.
|
On December 12 2012 08:38 kollin wrote:Show nested quote +On December 12 2012 08:35 JimmyJRaynor wrote:On December 12 2012 08:33 kollin wrote:On December 12 2012 08:31 JimmyJRaynor wrote:On December 12 2012 08:25 kollin wrote:On December 12 2012 08:15 JimmyJRaynor wrote:On December 12 2012 07:48 MrBitter wrote:
No one from Liquipedia contacted me to ask about prize money, and I think most those guys know me well enough to do so.
Our prize pool was never a secret. Why is this an issue? because its no where on the NASL site... and over all the NASL site is very informative... that is why it seems odd. 2 liquipedia editor guys stated they tried and failed to get prize money info... check the thread and talk to them maybe? Would you mind linking me to that post? here is the first one...later in the thread another liquipedia editor guy re-enforces this comment http://www.teamliquid.net/forum/viewmessage.php?topic_id=387294#11 So 1 guy, who I would like to point out has no position of importance within the hierarchy of Liquipedia, says that when he and a few others who did some work on a page anyone could edit couldn't find a source for the prize pool, that means there isn't one? That's....just wrong. no, if you read the thread further another liquipedia editor agrees with him. that is 2 not 1... and previously in a different thread a third says the same thing. dig through that thread if you want to. you are the 1 concluding there is no prize pool. i am merely pointing out what i see. What? You're arguments literally don't make sense. I am saying, anyone can edit Liquipedia, not a small group of people designated as editors. At no point do I say there is no prize pool. What I am saying is, what if it was actually a guy a from NASL who added in the prize pool? Then while we need a source to reference, we still have a reliable source if that makes sense.
you should just read that other thread.
all ur points are addressed in there.
|
That Lauren interview is surprisingly fun.
|
On December 12 2012 08:39 garlicface wrote:Show nested quote +On December 12 2012 08:38 kollin wrote:On December 12 2012 08:35 JimmyJRaynor wrote:On December 12 2012 08:33 kollin wrote:On December 12 2012 08:31 JimmyJRaynor wrote:On December 12 2012 08:25 kollin wrote:On December 12 2012 08:15 JimmyJRaynor wrote:On December 12 2012 07:48 MrBitter wrote:
No one from Liquipedia contacted me to ask about prize money, and I think most those guys know me well enough to do so.
Our prize pool was never a secret. Why is this an issue? because its no where on the NASL site... and over all the NASL site is very informative... that is why it seems odd. 2 liquipedia editor guys stated they tried and failed to get prize money info... check the thread and talk to them maybe? Would you mind linking me to that post? here is the first one...later in the thread another liquipedia editor guy re-enforces this comment http://www.teamliquid.net/forum/viewmessage.php?topic_id=387294#11 So 1 guy, who I would like to point out has no position of importance within the hierarchy of Liquipedia, says that when he and a few others who did some work on a page anyone could edit couldn't find a source for the prize pool, that means there isn't one? That's....just wrong. no, if you read the thread further another liquipedia editor agrees with him. that is 2 not 1... and previously in a different thread a third says the same thing. dig through that thread if you want to. you are the 1 concluding there is no prize pool. i am merely pointing out what i see. What? You're arguments literally don't make sense. I am saying, anyone can edit Liquipedia, not a small group of people designated as editors. At no point do I say there is no prize pool. What I am saying is, what if it was actually a guy a from NASL who added in the prize pool? Then while we need a source to reference, we still have a reliable source if that makes sense. You shouldn't derail the thread with this. Best to agree to disagree, and move on.
The difference between this disagreement and the one before is, the guy who disagrees with me this time around is basing his viewpoint on a completely skewed and incorrect version of how Liquipedia works. Though I will, move on, because I am mature enough to know when to stop.
|
On December 12 2012 08:40 JimmyJRaynor wrote:Show nested quote +On December 12 2012 08:38 kollin wrote:On December 12 2012 08:35 JimmyJRaynor wrote:On December 12 2012 08:33 kollin wrote:On December 12 2012 08:31 JimmyJRaynor wrote:On December 12 2012 08:25 kollin wrote:On December 12 2012 08:15 JimmyJRaynor wrote:On December 12 2012 07:48 MrBitter wrote:
No one from Liquipedia contacted me to ask about prize money, and I think most those guys know me well enough to do so.
Our prize pool was never a secret. Why is this an issue? because its no where on the NASL site... and over all the NASL site is very informative... that is why it seems odd. 2 liquipedia editor guys stated they tried and failed to get prize money info... check the thread and talk to them maybe? Would you mind linking me to that post? here is the first one...later in the thread another liquipedia editor guy re-enforces this comment http://www.teamliquid.net/forum/viewmessage.php?topic_id=387294#11 So 1 guy, who I would like to point out has no position of importance within the hierarchy of Liquipedia, says that when he and a few others who did some work on a page anyone could edit couldn't find a source for the prize pool, that means there isn't one? That's....just wrong. no, if you read the thread further another liquipedia editor agrees with him. that is 2 not 1... and previously in a different thread a third says the same thing. dig through that thread if you want to. you are the 1 concluding there is no prize pool. i am merely pointing out what i see. What? You're arguments literally don't make sense. I am saying, anyone can edit Liquipedia, not a small group of people designated as editors. At no point do I say there is no prize pool. What I am saying is, what if it was actually a guy a from NASL who added in the prize pool? Then while we need a source to reference, we still have a reliable source if that makes sense. you should just read that other thread. all ur points are addressed in there.
There's a reason your other thread was closed. ANYONE with a TL account can edit Liquipedia. I have, so I suppose I could be considered an "editor." I'd put the tinfoil hat back in the drawer.
|
On December 12 2012 08:35 JimmyJRaynor wrote:Show nested quote +On December 12 2012 08:33 kollin wrote:On December 12 2012 08:31 JimmyJRaynor wrote:On December 12 2012 08:25 kollin wrote:On December 12 2012 08:15 JimmyJRaynor wrote:On December 12 2012 07:48 MrBitter wrote:
No one from Liquipedia contacted me to ask about prize money, and I think most those guys know me well enough to do so.
Our prize pool was never a secret. Why is this an issue? because its no where on the NASL site... and over all the NASL site is very informative... that is why it seems odd. 2 liquipedia editor guys stated they tried and failed to get prize money info... check the thread and talk to them maybe? Would you mind linking me to that post? here is the first one...later in the thread another liquipedia editor guy re-enforces this comment http://www.teamliquid.net/forum/viewmessage.php?topic_id=387294#11 So 1 guy, who I would like to point out has no position of importance within the hierarchy of Liquipedia, says that when he and a few others who did some work on a page anyone could edit couldn't find a source for the prize pool, that means there isn't one? That's....just wrong. no, if you read the thread further another liquipedia editor agrees with him. that is 2 not 1... and previously in a different thread a third says the same thing. dig through that thread if you want to. you are the 1 concluding there is no prize pool. i am merely pointing out what i see.
Please stop - all i said was that we had no reference for the prizepool numbers. This is part of a much bigger issue with tournaments not publishing their tournament details for events, veto rules, map versions, tiebreaking and so on which sometimes is quiete important info for an event.
|
On December 12 2012 08:35 garlicface wrote:The issue at hand is whether or not she's ignorant for not knowing who Scarlett is, or if she was intentionally malicious. Hint: + Show Spoiler +
And I haven't made my thoughts on both those possible cases clear? Yes I have. Lets stop with this but if you think you saying "it wasn't the latter" makes any difference as to what we are discussing here, you're wrong, unless you have some inside info like for instance if you know Lauren personally or something. If you cannot see in any way that it could be intentional maliciousness, then I'm sorry but you don't really know how those things works. In fact, that tactic to ridicule people is very common, especially among females.
Agree to disagree shall we? Just don't try to gloss over my point of view when you have no evidence to support your theory that what I'm saying is complete bullshit, as I haven't done that to you.
|
Soe is awesome I want to marry her! She is so much more interesting than Lauren. Angel of a woman 
|
Hotbid's interview's are the butter to my bread!
|
Rofl @Soe explaining how to Pronounce Gschwind
|
I would watch the shit out of Hot_Bid trying to pick up girls by talking about his ladder ranking.
|
Lauren + Hot Bid + Natalie Portman... lol
|
obviously lauren video has way more views than any other video lol
|
That Lauren interview is actually pretty respectful, she's not the .. I'll refrain from insults... but I'm pretty glad I watched it
Although the Scarlett part was fucking hilarious
|
Canada11573 Posts
On December 12 2012 08:32 Jibba wrote:Show nested quote +On December 12 2012 06:33 ELA wrote:On December 12 2012 04:23 Jibba wrote:
Dwarves were Jews, Tolkien basically said so himself. He wasn't really racist (he became vehemently anti-racist later in life) but he was prejudiced and the stories are very Eurocentric and xenophobic. It's meant as an allegory for England through WWI and II, after all. Plus the whole eugenics thing gets a little iffy. You could probably call him an ethnicist. What Jibba? Im fairly sure that Tolkien himself refuted the theory that Middle Earth was a sort of representation of World War 2, as journalists kept drawing similarities between the two. These are his exact words on the matter: "As for any inner meaning or 'message', it has in the intention of the author none. It is neither allegorical nor topical. As the story grew it put down roots (into the past) and threw out unexpected branches." Tolkien's issue with allegory was largely semantics and personal (he hated attributing anything to allegory, even when it was with other authors.) Instead, he called it 'applicability'. We know he was influenced heavily by his time in WWI and his son's in WWII, and we know the period of 1938 is at least partially represented by the looming darkness in the stories, and I think there's fair comparisons to be made, based on his letters, between things like the Nazgul and burgeoning air power. He refused to call it allegory because it would pin down the story to a specific point in time, whereas he liked to think of his story being applicable at many points of history. Still, he drew upon the history of WWI and II heavily for the story and was using it to create a mythology for England. The greater point being that it's not like fantasy detached from real life. Even if it wasn't meant to represent real life, it was heavily inspired by it. I kind of think it's what he hoped real life would've been like - the allies destroying their ultimate weapon rather than using it.
No I rather think this issue is he hated people trying to break a story to track down every piece of biographical influence that led to the story creation. Rather than enjoying the story as its own secondary creation. No-one would argue that Tolkien was un-affected by what he experienced. But in Tolkien's opinion, breaking the story down into primary world parallels destroyed the purpose of creating a secondary world. To be carried away into another story.
|
|
|
|
|
|
EPT
