|
Calgary25963 Posts
On October 26 2011 04:59 tommywaaf wrote:
I opened a thread in General Discussion asking teamliquid for name suggestions for a LAN im starting up to have starcraft 2 tournaments since teamliquid is a creative community. Since its starcraft related and will help esports and is a LAN. i thought general was a good spot. It was closed and i was warned saying things about my LAN shouldnt be on teamliquid. I had like 10 responses in 5 min so people on Teamliquid seemed to want to help...
Why was it closed?
This is what i got:
"Stop making threads about your LAN center's name. This is not the kind of thing that should be on TL. Also if your threads are getting closed please don't keep reopening them."
I made 1 and it was a 1 liner, so it was closed. So i figured if i opened up another thread and typed a paragraph it wouldnt be closed. Then it was and i got that
Why do people lie?
You made four threads. You put zero effort into any of them. Further, it's not our job to name your LAN center. Stop making threads about it.
|
On October 26 2011 05:19 Chill wrote:Show nested quote +On October 26 2011 04:59 tommywaaf wrote:
I opened a thread in General Discussion asking teamliquid for name suggestions for a LAN im starting up to have starcraft 2 tournaments since teamliquid is a creative community. Since its starcraft related and will help esports and is a LAN. i thought general was a good spot. It was closed and i was warned saying things about my LAN shouldnt be on teamliquid. I had like 10 responses in 5 min so people on Teamliquid seemed to want to help...
Why was it closed?
This is what i got:
"Stop making threads about your LAN center's name. This is not the kind of thing that should be on TL. Also if your threads are getting closed please don't keep reopening them."
I made 1 and it was a 1 liner, so it was closed. So i figured if i opened up another thread and typed a paragraph it wouldnt be closed. Then it was and i got that
Why do people lie? You made four threads. You put zero effort into any of them. Further, it's not our job to name your LAN center. Stop making threads about it.
I count 4 closed threads as well. Threads are supposed to contain thoughtful discussion, not people throwing out names for a LAN center. I might as well as for suggestions for what my battle.net name should be
|
not my thread, but i'd like to discuss the "will you change your race in HotS" thread.
http://www.teamliquid.net/forum/viewmessage.php?topic_id=279643
It was closed with motivation
"Poll thread. No one cares what anyone else posts, so it becomes fluffy. Theres way too many people on TL to have any sort of unified opinion. Some people will change, some wont but theres no real conclusions to be drawn."
I agree that poll threads like this one tend to not really be involved discussion, but rather people saying what they voted. Nonetheless, I feel that it should be possible to pull useful information from TLs large userbase, and in this case I dont really agree with the statement that there is no conclusion to be drawn: the poll showed that people will switch to zerg in HotS. You can go "i couldve told you that before", but i find it important, and worthy of a thread, to confirm our intuition. Otherwise we are no more than theory-crafters. 
The main reason im posting here is that I spent some time compiling the results of the poll just before it was closed:
http://www.teamliquid.net/forum/viewpost.php?post_id=12064616
and I feel a bit "aawwww  " when it was closed soon after. 
I don't suggest reopening the thread, but I would like to open a discussion on how polls like these can be done, and the results shared, in a good way on TL. And I wouldn't mind some way to give some exposure to the result of this specific poll. More votes are not really needed any longer though.
|
On October 29 2011 02:31 Cascade wrote:not my thread, but i'd like to discuss the "will you change your race in HotS" thread. http://www.teamliquid.net/forum/viewmessage.php?topic_id=279643It was closed with motivation "Poll thread. No one cares what anyone else posts, so it becomes fluffy. Theres way too many people on TL to have any sort of unified opinion. Some people will change, some wont but theres no real conclusions to be drawn." I agree that poll threads like this one tend to not really be involved discussion, but rather people saying what they voted. Nonetheless, I feel that it should be possible to pull useful information from TLs large userbase, and in this case I dont really agree with the statement that there is no conclusion to be drawn: the poll showed that people will switch to zerg in HotS. You can go "i couldve told you that before", but i find it important, and worthy of a thread, to confirm our intuition. Otherwise we are no more than theory-crafters. The main reason im posting here is that I spent some time compiling the results of the poll just before it was closed: http://www.teamliquid.net/forum/viewpost.php?post_id=12064616and I feel a bit "aawwww " when it was closed soon after. I don't suggest reopening the thread, but I would like to open a discussion on how polls like these can be done, and the results shared, in a good way on TL. And I wouldn't mind some way to give some exposure to the result of this specific poll. More votes are not really needed any longer though.
Based on the poll, I count 121 people switching to zerg and 46 people switching away from zerg. As another example,41 people are switching to protoss, I can now conclude that people will switch to protoss in HotS.
People switching to zerg is hardly a conclusion here as we all know there will be people who switch races. I'm curious to see what kind of results you were compiling besides the numbers of each poll option
|
I feel that it should be possible to pull useful information from TLs large userbase,
What kind of useful information?
|
On October 29 2011 04:05 Torte de Lini wrote:Show nested quote +I feel that it should be possible to pull useful information from TLs large userbase, What kind of useful information?
apart from trends in which races people are switching between, here are some thing from the top of my head:
- do you think that this new hots unit look cool?
- Do you have problems vs this strategy in bronze, gold, diamond?
- Did you like this new thing they did at the last tournament?
- Did you like they style of that commentator?
- Are you scared for the future of the economy?
- etc
Ofc it interesting to see what TL thinks, and to avoid the "vocal minority" effect a little bit, it can be useful to have polls rather than just see what people write in the replies.
|
I was curious as to the specific reason why my thread was closed.
Thread: http://www.teamliquid.net/forum/viewmessage.php?topic_id=280447
Empyrean commented that I should "Browse the tech support forum", which I initially did and again after he (she?) commented. But I found many different threads pertaining to people with specific rigs with specific changes they would like to make within a personally specific set of conditions. There was no thread that I could see containing the guide for a system that was built from the ground up to support Starcraft 2 in such a way as to handle its complete range of functions in the most stable and optimized way.
In a sense it would be a kind of objective build that anyone could look to and for ideally the lowest possible cost, obtain a machine that was designed to handle the complete range of SC2's needs.
Not a dream machine supercomputer, but a standardized rig. The cost of which obviously goes down over time as parts get older, but never less provides the peak hardware experience for SC2 with anymore just being "extra".
Having a Standard Rig I thought would be helpful to a lot of new people who aren't techy or are coming from the convenience of consoles. A fun creative project with a helpful outcome.
If there is a logistical problem that I am not aware of, then I apologize and withdraw my request for re-opening. Otherwise I am not 100% of the reasoning behind the closing.
|
On October 29 2011 17:14 Torpedo.Vegas wrote:I was curious as to the specific reason why my thread was closed. Thread: http://www.teamliquid.net/forum/viewmessage.php?topic_id=280447Empyrean commented that I should "Browse the tech support forum", which I initially did and again after he (she?) commented. But I found many different threads pertaining to people with specific rigs with specific changes they would like to make within a personally specific set of conditions. There was no thread that I could see containing the guide for a system that was built from the ground up to support Starcraft 2 in such a way as to handle its complete range of functions in the most stable and optimized way. In a sense it would be a kind of objective build that anyone could look to and for ideally the lowest possible cost, obtain a machine that was designed to handle the complete range of SC2's needs. Not a dream machine supercomputer, but a standardized rig. The cost of which obviously goes down over time as parts get older, but never less provides the peak hardware experience for SC2 with anymore just being "extra". Having a Standard Rig I thought would be helpful to a lot of new people who aren't techy or are coming from the convenience of consoles. A fun creative project with a helpful outcome. If there is a logistical problem that I am not aware of, then I apologize and withdraw my request for re-opening. Otherwise I am not 100% of the reasoning behind the closing.
I think it's hard to define what you mean with "standard sc2 rig". Would that be a rig that can run a 200/200 1on1 battle in 40 frames per second with highest graphics settings? Are you fine with 20 frames? Is it ok if you cant run everything on ultra? What about 4on4? You want a cpu that can handle 8x 200/200 a move battles at 30 FPS? And that is not even talking about things like acceptable noise levels on the fan and gpu and other things. (edit: not to mention your budget!) Depending on how you answer those questions, you would get very different rigs.
My point is that there is no objective correct answer to those questions, and whichever requirements you would set, the thread would be no different than "help me build a computer that can run sc2 with these requirements". Which there are plenty of (I assume) and is not very helpful for others, because they will probably have different requirements.
|
On October 29 2011 17:14 Torpedo.Vegas wrote:I was curious as to the specific reason why my thread was closed. Thread: http://www.teamliquid.net/forum/viewmessage.php?topic_id=280447Empyrean commented that I should "Browse the tech support forum", which I initially did and again after he (she?) commented. But I found many different threads pertaining to people with specific rigs with specific changes they would like to make within a personally specific set of conditions. There was no thread that I could see containing the guide for a system that was built from the ground up to support Starcraft 2 in such a way as to handle its complete range of functions in the most stable and optimized way. In a sense it would be a kind of objective build that anyone could look to and for ideally the lowest possible cost, obtain a machine that was designed to handle the complete range of SC2's needs. Not a dream machine supercomputer, but a standardized rig. The cost of which obviously goes down over time as parts get older, but never less provides the peak hardware experience for SC2 with anymore just being "extra". Having a Standard Rig I thought would be helpful to a lot of new people who aren't techy or are coming from the convenience of consoles. A fun creative project with a helpful outcome. If there is a logistical problem that I am not aware of, then I apologize and withdraw my request for re-opening. Otherwise I am not 100% of the reasoning behind the closing.
That's because the standard rig in everyone else's thread will apply 100% to you. SC2 is not a computer intensive game. Also there's a HUGE resource thread for people like you.
|
Hi guys, I know the forum is busy and you want to keep it clear...
But this was a discussion generating much contrasting points of view, with many people interested in it. (they said so). Pretty annoying that it was closed without any reasoning behind it.
this is the link to the thread.
http://www.teamliquid.net/forum/viewmessage.php?topic_id=294479
Seems rather unreasonable that it was closed
|
On December 14 2011 11:24 picklezz wrote:Hi guys, I know the forum is busy and you want to keep it clear... But this was a discussion generating much contrasting points of view, with many people interested in it. (they said so). Pretty annoying that it was closed without any reasoning behind it. this is the link to the thread. http://www.teamliquid.net/forum/viewmessage.php?topic_id=294479Seems rather unreasonable that it was closed
I believe that was closed because this community has a general policy of taking action rather than talking. For instance, rather than saying "I'd like to see this", they would prefer you work behind the scenes to make it happen. Contact GM players, find some lower league players, find a commentator (or do it yourself) and then say "I did this!" and have people discuss what happened.
I've seen a few other threads closed for this reason, so I assume the same happened here. But I'm not KwarK and can't say for sure.
|
|
|
United States41931 Posts
On December 14 2011 11:24 picklezz wrote:Hi guys, I know the forum is busy and you want to keep it clear... But this was a discussion generating much contrasting points of view, with many people interested in it. (they said so). Pretty annoying that it was closed without any reasoning behind it. this is the link to the thread. http://www.teamliquid.net/forum/viewmessage.php?topic_id=294479Seems rather unreasonable that it was closed
General forum is for big general topics of general interest. Looking at it now we've got Anime Discussion, [TV] Dexter, some crap about death row, more crap about korean skyscrapers, the kind of stuff that random people may want to discuss.
Now, your topic provided no content and was basically you saying "hey guys, who would win in a fight between X and Y, ps charity may be involved somehow in a purely hypothetical way". This is a topic often discussed by 8 year olds, generally on subjects such as a t-rex and some guys from the film 300. It wasn't based on any real situation, big question, important subject or anything else. It was just some thought that occurred to you that you had a desperate urge to post in our general forum. The only possibly relevant aspect of it was that you picked starcraft 2 as the subject which would make it relevant to a different subforum to the one you put it in.
So, to sum up.
It was shit.
It had no content, either intellectual or debatewise
It was in the wrong forum (although if it was in SC2 it'd still be shit)
Maybe you're 8?
|
Zurich15310 Posts
The title said Sexual Health, but the OPis a personal help thread regarding erectile dysfunction and anal sex, which if anything should have been in your blog.
While there is the odd decent post in the thread, most of it turned out to be complete crap, which is enough reason to close it.
|
Not my thread.
http://www.teamliquid.net/forum/viewmessage.php?topic_id=295264
I'm pretty confused by the closure of this thread. To me, it seems like if the OP had simply changed his thread title to "My response to general criticism of Naniwa" and thrown in a few random quotes supporting Gom's decision from other people it would have been fine. The post was fantastic and the OP put a lot of effort into it. I've PMd him to look at this thread for whether he can reopen it with a changed title and a little more content that isn't a direct response to EGAlex (Although this seems unnecessary to me since EGAlex has done a good job summarizing the majority opinion for those who are pro-Gom decision, perhaps it is important for the site's integrity)
Edit: I somehow didn't comprehend Nazgul's post that he shouldn't have a direct reply outside of the thread. Question still stands, though. Could he simply change the title and throw in a response to some other netizens?
|
Well he took Nazgul's advice and http://www.teamliquid.net/blogs/viewblog.php?topic_id=295222¤tpage=5#95
EGAlex replied to him and then he had another reply to EGAlex, so it all worked out in the end.
He also opened this up in his reply to EGAlex.
On December 15 2011 23:29 kmpow wrote:
Firstly, my first post was something I seldom do, a long rant. I wanted to save it as a blog post. However, I misunderstood that TL uses blog as synonym to forum post. I wished to save my own post in a personal blog, not as a new discussion thread. The “blog post” is locked and might as well be deleted since I was confused by the structure of TL and apologize for clogging the forums.
It was probably closed because I am sure the TL mods and staff do not want the forums to become a @soandso's thread haven. Also Chill usually closes them because people's opinions are not better than everyone elses for the most part and shouldn't open their own thread so it is read, while other people have to follow the original thread and discuss their opinions in there.
|
On December 16 2011 03:52 Risen wrote:Not my thread. http://www.teamliquid.net/forum/viewmessage.php?topic_id=295264I'm pretty confused by the closure of this thread. To me, it seems like if the OP had simply changed his thread title to "My response to general criticism of Naniwa" and thrown in a few random quotes supporting Gom's decision from other people it would have been fine. The post was fantastic and the OP put a lot of effort into it + Show Spoiler +. I've PMd him to look at this thread for whether he can reopen it with a changed title and a little more content that isn't a direct response to EGAlex (Although this seems unnecessary to me since EGAlex has done a good job summarizing the majority opinion for those who are pro-Gom decision, perhaps it is important for the site's integrity)
Edit: I somehow didn't comprehend Nazgul's post that he shouldn't have a direct reply outside of the thread. Question still stands, though. Could he simply change the title and throw in a response to some other netizens?
Thanks for the support, but as stated in here, I actually thought that the blog section was for blogs and not treated as a forum. The general idea might be this intent but in consideration of the current shit storm of events same practice was applied.
Your concern made my day, truly impressed that someone actually looks over this stuff. So thank you! I have my posts in offline format, so I can upload this to another site or at a later time. Once again, thank you and keep make TL a better place.
Sincerely,
Kim
|
|
|
I just wanted to mention that I thought the rules on OPs should maybe have been bent a little bit for [Giveaway] Signed progamer stuff / D3 key. I am aware that self-promotion is discouraged on this website, but I felt that, since Moletrap has been a long time contributor to the Starcraft community since the Brood War days, he ought to have been given more latitude, especially since he's going out of his way to buy and send stuff to members of the community (and it's not like he's been making lots of money off his youtube account or stream either).
Thank you for listening to my two cents.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
EPT![[image loading]](http://i.imgur.com/bZVAB.png)
