| Big D |
Smash Master
Ashes ashes... GOSH DARN IT ROB
-
Welcome to Smashboards, the world's largest Super Smash Brothers community! Over 250,000 Smash Bros. fans from around the world have come to discuss these great games in over 19 million posts!
You are currently viewing our boards as a visitor. Click here to sign up right now and start on your path in the Smash community!
Canada [Jul 26, 2014] B.C. Brawl Monthlies - Back in business, now featuring Smash 64! (Burnaby, BC)
- Thread starter ~Firefly~
- Start date
Blue Yoshi
Smash Master
I had a two-part post, but the second part seemed like it would fit better if it were posted in a separate post, and it wasn't done yet, so I posted the first part, and now I'm finishing the second, and I was sure someone would post again so that I wouldn't double post, and I didn't see any posts after Arcansi's last post, so I missed that entire thing, so I messed it up, anyways, I'll head back to completing my other half of my post, which makes me >_> a lot.
Arcansi
Smash Champion
So you are saying that because of my inability to remember past situations that you say exist, and the fact that I don't assume you are automatically right is why I am treated the way I am?
Is it bad to ask for examples or to not assume someone is right immediately?
Crisis
Smash Ace
At the cost of a friendship? You can think your reasoning is superior, but if you understood him at all you would know he would get mad and that there was no reason to argue with him. This is all hypothetical of course, but there's a parallel.
And there are beliefs here too. I can believe one rule set is superior to another. Or I can believe that Brawl shouldn't be played with mods or hacks. One can out argue that Balanced Brawl is better competitively but will that change my opinion? (I know that's not your argument)
My point is, you need to understand how people think. Empathy, you lack it. There are reasons why people do things outside a logical stand point.
~
we all fall down
SinisterB
Smash Champion
Kantrip
Kantplay
Quoting for fail image tagging.
Arcansi
Smash Champion
A friendship has no value if you don't wish to be around the person. Why would I want to hang out with someone who is unable to understand when they are wrong, they should switch opinions?
And if one can logically prove X opinion to be false, then it is no longer a valid opinion.
Why wouldn't you change your opinion? What positive effect/influence/anything is there from keeping it?
Trying to understand how people think.
How do I get empathy, then?
Like what?
Perception is the key to understanding. You only see everyone fall down, you don't see them see themselves fall down.
Arcansi
Smash Champion
But you do not see them understanding they are falling.
Also, all of those are just automatic things we do when falling anyway. No conscious action required.
SinisterB
Smash Champion
Oh god we are debating song lyrics now.
At least do me a favor and make it this..
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=MKsEOAcn9ro
At least do me a favor and make it this..
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=MKsEOAcn9ro
Blue Yoshi
Smash Master
I lurked your thread Arcansi, and came to this. I feel I have to post it here in the BC thread, because you are manipulating results/data.
Anyways, the question you were supposed to ask and the question you asked were two COMPLETELY different questions. And the only person who answered your question was Kev, and he said he was going essentially to hang out with the rest of the community, and not because of your ruleset.
Had you asked the question you were supposed to ask, you would have gotten a 100% Unity over Arcansi ruleset.
Not only did you ask the wrong question, and word your results such that it implies that BC is in favour of your ruleset, you even stated that everyone who voted did vote for your ruleset. I consider this to be completely manipulating the results to make things look better for you. I am fine when people do this as a joke, but when they try and promote themselves at the expense of others, I do not respect that at all. In this case, you promote your ruleset at the expense of the entire BC brawl scene, saying we agree with your ruleset when we don't.
I do not respect people/organizations that do this for profit at the expense of others, and consider this to be completely unethical.
Anyways, on a different topic (this is me trying to help you again).
Arcansi, have you ever heard the saying "innocent until proven guilty"? Start taking that approach. Lets say I make a post. Until it is proven to be false, there is a possibility it can be true. Therefore, the onus (spelling) is on you to prove it wrong. If you are able to prove my statement wrong, then it can be considered to be false, and it is my job now to try and prove my statement to be correct again. This is how debating works. Try using this approach. Instead of asking for people to prove their statements, try proving their statements false
e.g. if I were to say 938401726557 was a prime number, instead of telling me to prove this to be true, you instead try proving it to be false. If you cannot prove it to be false, then it is possible that my statement may be true, and it cannot be rejected until proven false (it cannot be taken as absolute truth until proven true either, but my entire point is it cannot be rejected until proven false). In this example, you can prove that the number above is not a prime number, as it is a multiple of 3. Therefore, once you say that, and prove that my statement was false, we can both conclude that my statement I made was false.
I know that was a bad example, but I hope it gives the point. Instead of asking people to prove their points to be true, instead, try proving their points to be false. And when someone else is claiming your statements to be false and is giving his proof, either admit defeat, or prove his statement (or in this case proof) false.
If you do this instead of what you currently do, you will see that people will start to show more respect. Next time people say statements you disagree with, don't tell them to prove their statements to be true, instead, you try to prove their statements wrong. If you prove it wrong, then the statement can be considered false (unless he finds a flaw in your proof). If you cannot prove it wrong, then that does not necessarily mean it is true, as it could still be false. However, unless he proves it to be true, it will remain to be a plausible statement until proven either true or false. I know it takes more work and effort to do it this way, but you'll see people give you way more respect if you do this instead.
Anyways, that's it for now...
Your next post says "unfortunately, that isn't relevant", but it is unclear if that is you answering the quote above, or to someone else's post, as the rest of your post is directed to someone else.
Anyways, the question you were supposed to ask and the question you asked were two COMPLETELY different questions. And the only person who answered your question was Kev, and he said he was going essentially to hang out with the rest of the community, and not because of your ruleset.
Had you asked the question you were supposed to ask, you would have gotten a 100% Unity over Arcansi ruleset.
Not only did you ask the wrong question, and word your results such that it implies that BC is in favour of your ruleset, you even stated that everyone who voted did vote for your ruleset. I consider this to be completely manipulating the results to make things look better for you. I am fine when people do this as a joke, but when they try and promote themselves at the expense of others, I do not respect that at all. In this case, you promote your ruleset at the expense of the entire BC brawl scene, saying we agree with your ruleset when we don't.
I do not respect people/organizations that do this for profit at the expense of others, and consider this to be completely unethical.
Anyways, on a different topic (this is me trying to help you again).
Arcansi, have you ever heard the saying "innocent until proven guilty"? Start taking that approach. Lets say I make a post. Until it is proven to be false, there is a possibility it can be true. Therefore, the onus (spelling) is on you to prove it wrong. If you are able to prove my statement wrong, then it can be considered to be false, and it is my job now to try and prove my statement to be correct again. This is how debating works. Try using this approach. Instead of asking for people to prove their statements, try proving their statements false
e.g. if I were to say 938401726557 was a prime number, instead of telling me to prove this to be true, you instead try proving it to be false. If you cannot prove it to be false, then it is possible that my statement may be true, and it cannot be rejected until proven false (it cannot be taken as absolute truth until proven true either, but my entire point is it cannot be rejected until proven false). In this example, you can prove that the number above is not a prime number, as it is a multiple of 3. Therefore, once you say that, and prove that my statement was false, we can both conclude that my statement I made was false.
I know that was a bad example, but I hope it gives the point. Instead of asking people to prove their points to be true, instead, try proving their points to be false. And when someone else is claiming your statements to be false and is giving his proof, either admit defeat, or prove his statement (or in this case proof) false.
If you do this instead of what you currently do, you will see that people will start to show more respect. Next time people say statements you disagree with, don't tell them to prove their statements to be true, instead, you try to prove their statements wrong. If you prove it wrong, then the statement can be considered false (unless he finds a flaw in your proof). If you cannot prove it wrong, then that does not necessarily mean it is true, as it could still be false. However, unless he proves it to be true, it will remain to be a plausible statement until proven either true or false. I know it takes more work and effort to do it this way, but you'll see people give you way more respect if you do this instead.
Anyways, that's it for now...
Are you serious? You are debating nursery rhymes now? LOL
Crisis
Smash Ace
I would have responded but I fail at breaking quotes into segments haha... one sec
Kantrip
Kantplay
Arcansi, how do you expect London Bridge to perceive itself falling down?
wtf bro party fowl
Jason!
Smash Lord
HAHAHAHAHAAAAAAAA i lold
Kantrip
Kantplay
Yeah Blue Yoshi what you brought up is known as "Burden of Proof" in debates.
Blue Yoshi
Smash Master
I knew it had a name, I forgot what the name was, so I just said "innocent until proven guilty" since it is essentially the same idea.
SinisterB
Smash Champion
Arcansi
Smash Champion
No I'm not...
It was 100% aimed at the quote. The rest of my post was me talking about how it isn't relevant.
Courier, Kantrip, and Jason all had answered my question at time of posting, thank you.
Unfortunately, that question isn't relevant.
I in no way lied. I don't know what you expect me to do, predict how people will take what I'm saying and act accordingly?
I did not lie.
I find lieng unethical too. But I didn't.
Burden of Proof is BoP. Responsibility is on the person questioning the status quo, and in situations where there is no status quo, the person bringing it up.
I'm not trying to resist your help, it's just that this is already defined.
Kantrip
Kantplay
No Arcansi. "How many people would still show up" is irrelevant.
Why? Because that question will show you who is committed enough to the scene, and says NOTHING about their opinion of the ruleset.
The relevant question is "who would prefer the ruleset?", which, I can assure you, is 0% of us.
Why? Because that question will show you who is committed enough to the scene, and says NOTHING about their opinion of the ruleset.
The relevant question is "who would prefer the ruleset?", which, I can assure you, is 0% of us.
Arcansi
Smash Champion
If this is true, why was this not asked when LGL was implemented? I am saying the irrelevancy lies in the fact that if the URC decided to put up my rule, it wouldn't go through you guys.
SinisterB
Smash Champion
Of course you didn't lie, you only included which information you wanted to include.
Not to mention what Kannyboy said.
Seriously why are even discussing this, we need to post useless stuff that doesn't get us anywhere like how free asa and his hanglider playstyle is.
Not to mention what Kannyboy said.
Seriously why are even discussing this, we need to post useless stuff that doesn't get us anywhere like how free asa and his hanglider playstyle is.
Arcansi
Smash Champion
I mentioned that it wasn't conclusive (early results).
What did I miss out on, exact number of people that voted? Is this enough to constitute me lying when I never said the outcome was definitive?
Kantrip
Kantplay
I'm sure it was discussed with the LGL.
Prove it wasn't. I'm almost certain there was discussion involved with its implementation.
Besides, you're strawmanning.
Prove it wasn't. I'm almost certain there was discussion involved with its implementation.
Besides, you're strawmanning.
Arcansi
Smash Champion
Okay.
What you are saying is irrelevant because the answer of that question is irrelevant due to the intended information wanting to be gained from the question that would be asked.
Guys stop arguing. If we ignore Arcansi's arguments enough, he'll stop.
Jason!
Smash Lord
Arcansi
Smash Champion
Are you asking that we stop the discussion on how I can become a better person?
Arcansi
Smash Champion
Hey guys my thread is super popular.
Heck yeah.
Heck yeah.
SinisterB
Smash Champion
all i got from this was Amber Doll
