| Forum Index > TL Community |
This thread is for discussing recent bans. Don't discuss other topics here. Take it to website feedback if you disagree with a ban or want to raise an issue. Keep it civil. NOTE: For those of you who want to find the actual ABL thread where the bans are posted. Please look in here: https://tl.net/forum/closed-threads/ | ||
|
Ansibled
United Kingdom9872 Posts
On August 14 2016 12:04 Pugfarmer wrote: I hope David Kim announces they are scrapping Sc2 and just releasing a prettier BW because every new idea and unit they have made for Sc2 is horseshit. User was temp banned for this post. Yeah the DH thread is interesting. Very subtle. | ||
|
Elentos
55555 Posts
On August 14 2016 21:47 Ansibled wrote: Yeah the DH thread is interesting. Very subtle. Yeah it is. Though from what I see in that thread, apparently saying "Adepts are probably worse than BL/infestor" is fine. So everyone who got modded for balance whine in recent Protoss games should just say that instead. They have to learn to work around the system so they don't get banned all the time. So then when we finally get someone banned this thread will be funnier. | ||
KadaverBB
Germany25657 Posts
| ||
|
Elentos
55555 Posts
On August 14 2016 23:54 KadaverBB wrote: Incorrect. Damn, foiled again. | ||
|
Karis Vas Ryaar
United States4396 Posts
On August 15 2016 07:51 ParadeofMadness wrote: CLG making TL into bitches again. Another gg easy freelo from TrashLosers. CLG says ty  User was temp banned for this post. | ||
|
Cricketer12
United States13990 Posts
TI? | ||
FO-nTTaX
Johto4954 Posts
LCS Quarters I would guess. | ||
|
Phredxor
New Zealand15076 Posts
Yeap. What an odd guy. | ||
|
Cascade
Australia5405 Posts
On August 14 2016 23:24 Elentos wrote: Yeah it is. Though from what I see in that thread, apparently saying "Adepts are probably worse than BL/infestor" is fine. So everyone who got modded for balance whine in recent Protoss games should just say that instead. They have to learn to work around the system so they don't get banned all the time. So then when we finally get someone banned this thread will be funnier. People just don't seem to get that it is 90% about HOW you say it, not WHAT you say... | ||
|
beentheredonethat
2934 Posts
On August 15 2016 11:55 Cascade wrote: People just don't seem to get that it is 90% about HOW you say it, not WHAT you say... basically "how to cross the line without crossing the line" | ||
|
opisska
Poland8852 Posts
On August 15 2016 11:55 Cascade wrote: People just don't seem to get that it is 90% about HOW you say it, not WHAT you say... Which, honestly, is what irks me most about bans on this site usually. It's not as bad as 90 %, but this kind of openly embraced hypocrisy is definitely visible on TL. Some people are able to get away with posting complete nonsense that would otherwise be banned without blinking an eye just by using enough long words to do so ... Anyway, talking about bans, is it possible to see all the blog a poster is banned from? Could a blog-ban-graph between used be visualized using this data? I have just recently found that I am banned from a blog, but the nickname did not ring a bell, so I had to go through his posts to find out if we ever interacted (and the result was pretty boring tbh). I am vaguely aware that I am banned from some other blogs too - in any case, not seeing the reply box is a very convenient reminder that I am probably not gonna like this blog anyway, good usability right there, TL! | ||
|
Dangermousecatdog
United Kingdom7084 Posts
| ||
|
Cascade
Australia5405 Posts
On August 16 2016 02:42 opisska wrote: Which, honestly, is what irks me most about bans on this site usually. It's not as bad as 90 %, but this kind of openly embraced hypocrisy is definitely visible on TL. Some people are able to get away with posting complete nonsense that would otherwise be banned without blinking an eye just by using enough long words to do so ... Anyway, talking about bans, is it possible to see all the blog a poster is banned from? Could a blog-ban-graph between used be visualized using this data? I have just recently found that I am banned from a blog, but the nickname did not ring a bell, so I had to go through his posts to find out if we ever interacted (and the result was pretty boring tbh). I am vaguely aware that I am banned from some other blogs too - in any case, not seeing the reply box is a very convenient reminder that I am probably not gonna like this blog anyway, good usability right there, TL! Yeah, the long nonsensical posts bug me off as well, agreed. But I think there is some sense to it in other cases. If you truly think adepts are OP, and you put in some effort to argue your point (and post it in a relevant thread), I think that's perfectly fine, even if I may not agree with your points. While if you just go to the LR thread and post "lol, adepts OP", you deserve your ban. IMO. Point being that you are not banned for posting that adepts are OP, you get banned for lazy posting which in practice turns into trolling. But yes, on the other end of the spectrum is what you are talking about. To be fair though, it takes some effort (and sometimes knowledge of the subject) to read through and realise that it is all actually nonsense, so can't really blame the mods.  I also think it's not that easy for everyone to put together a reasonable argument for why adepts are OP. The two of us have been trained in distilling the core of an argument and express it without too much fluff, but for people just coming out of high school (if even that), I can see it being difficult to express the adept OP-ness in a reasoned way. Should we ban for that inability? Maybe they should just realise that they should be quiet if they can't express it well? Isn't that a bit discriminatory in a way? Hmm... not easy. Thoughts? Sorry for the wall of text, I find it an interesting subject. :o) And it's pretty on topic for this thread, right? Just by chance. | ||
|
Cascade
Australia5405 Posts
On August 15 2016 23:57 beentheredonethat wrote: basically "how to cross the line without crossing the line" I think a better formulation of what I wanted to say is: you can express almost any opinion on TL, as long as you express it in a good way, and in the right place. | ||
|
OtherWorld
France17333 Posts
On August 16 2016 12:33 Cascade wrote: I think a better formulation of what I wanted to say is: you can express almost any opinion on TL, as long as you express it in a good way, and in the right place. Well isn't that completely normal? | ||
|
opisska
Poland8852 Posts
On August 16 2016 12:29 Cascade wrote: Yeah, the long nonsensical posts bug me off as well, agreed. But I think there is some sense to it in other cases. If you truly think adepts are OP, and you put in some effort to argue your point (and post it in a relevant thread), I think that's perfectly fine, even if I may not agree with your points. While if you just go to the LR thread and post "lol, adepts OP", you deserve your ban. IMO. Point being that you are not banned for posting that adepts are OP, you get banned for lazy posting which in practice turns into trolling. But yes, on the other end of the spectrum is what you are talking about. To be fair though, it takes some effort (and sometimes knowledge of the subject) to read through and realise that it is all actually nonsense, so can't really blame the mods. I also think it's not that easy for everyone to put together a reasonable argument for why adepts are OP. The two of us have been trained in distilling the core of an argument and express it without too much fluff, but for people just coming out of high school (if even that), I can see it being difficult to express the adept OP-ness in a reasoned way. Should we ban for that inability? Maybe they should just realise that they should be quiet if they can't express it well? Isn't that a bit discriminatory in a way? Hmm... not easy. Thoughts? Sorry for the wall of text, I find it an interesting subject. :o) And it's pretty on topic for this thread, right? Just by chance. You actually have a pretty interesting point if you bring science as an example of an area where people are trained to express themselves clearly - because even in those circumstances, people fail miserably ever so often. I - as is the case for probably most of people - have real experience with paper only in a very narrow field (particle physics), but I generally observe the general quality of papers going down in the last decades, at least from the point of view of brevity and getting to the point. Most authors nowadays seem to be more concerned with convincing the reader (or, likely, the funding agent) about the utmost importance of their research instead of telling them what they have actually found. If you read the papers from the golden era of Standard Model (50s to 70s), many of the seminal papers (with now hundreds of citations, if not more) are just a couple of pages, starting right away with the main point and are a delight to read. I just don't see papers like that very often now - but one of the reasons might be that back then, there really was a lot of problems that obviously needed to be solved, whereas now theoretical physics is in a weird state when most of the research is done just for the sake of the research ... Anyway, I went off on too much of a rant I guess. However, the trend of "saying little with a lot of words" exists currently both in science and in the general society and is in my opinion a manifestation of the broader trend of treating form over substance, which is in turn a manifestation of the general lack of substance, caused by the much broader participation of people in discourse - in short, when everyone is discussing everything, then if you pick a contribution to the discussion, it gets less likely that both the topic and the author are of above average merit. And then a natural reaction is that people at least pretend depth by using deeply sounding phrases. | ||
|
OtherWorld
France17333 Posts
| ||
|
AbouSV
Germany1278 Posts
Going back to Opisska's point (as I have noticed the exact same behaviour in my domain), if you read papers from before the 80-90's, they are indeed much shorter, straight to the point, and, most importantly, factual. Whereas nowadays they are much longer to set up the (mostly very specific) context, and to try and convince the reader, if not even themselves. I believe that we are becoming more and more superficial, and yet we don't like it at all. So we do are best to cover it up and give sense to it by any mean. To take back the analogy to SC2, or any other domain than science, if adepts really are OP, what prevents you from giving at least a beginning of a justification? You don't need to show 100+ games of KeSPA level pros or to do advanced balance calculus to do so, but a beginning of something can be enough, like 'They can shade X % of the time and as such they can only be followed by those units, the ratio of damage/tankiness of both units is this, so this looks unfair'. | ||
Teoita
Italy12246 Posts
Regarding SC2, the main problem is that "good" balance whining is essentially game design whining...nowadays every time someone doesn't like something he declares it "bad game design" and the discussion that comes from that usually almost as stupid and pointless as whining, because even when it's in the form of a well thought post it's extremely likely to be too short and it's almost always biased. In the case of adepts sure, they are hard to deal with, but you can't look at them in a vacuum and looking at every other external factor like timings, ability to scout them, ability to transition off them, how map dependent their effectiveness is, etc, very easily gets overlooked; not to mention, often times the solution to an imbalance is very deceptive. To name one, it took very small but significative adjustments to Protoss builds to learn to defend the 4Gate consistently during WoL. The strategy itself was nerfed a bit, but mostly it became weaker because players solved something that initially seemed unstoppable. edit: Also why are we even discussing science in the ABL lol. | ||
|
Cricketer12
United States13990 Posts
| ||
| ||
Kung Fu Cup
2025 Monthly #3: Day 4
Cure vs Reynor
Classic vs herO
RSL Revival
Group C
SHIN vs ByuN
[ Submit Event ] |
|
StarCraft 2 Crank StarCraft: Brood War 1192Tasteless  826RotterdaM 445IndyStarCraft  156Reynor  138Rex 109SteadfastSC 36Railgan 34Britney Dota 2  34679Rain 3837Hyuk  1331Horang2 1325firebathero  1306Jaedong 886Shuttle 597Mini 440Stork 332BeSt 259[ Show more ] Counter-Strike Other Games |
|
IPSL
ZZZero vs rasowy
Napoleon vs KameZerg
OSC
BSL 21
Tarson vs Julia
Doodle vs OldBoy
eOnzErG vs WolFix
StRyKeR vs Aeternum
Sparkling Tuna Cup
RSL Revival
Reynor vs sOs
Maru vs Ryung
Kung Fu Cup
WardiTV Korean Royale
BSL 21
JDConan vs Semih
Dragon vs Dienmax
Tech vs NewOcean
TerrOr vs Artosis
IPSL
Dewalt vs WolFix
eOnzErG vs Bonyth
Replay Cast
[ Show More ] |
|
|
EPT
