Project M Social Thread Gold

[Saito]

Oh god you copied my sig as well x.x. My brain can't handle this.

There's a slight difference since mine says "Follow Hylian"

 

[MonkUnit]

My uni had a crew battle with another yesterday. Five people, 20 stocks, Melee. Our like 3rd ranked player plowed through 19 stocks, we won with only 5 stocks lost. We had two teams, though (we made an A team and a B team since a bunch of people wanted to battle) and just had all the better players on A. So they john that their best player wasn't there and their hands were cold.

And then our B team beats them with 9 stocks left over.

And then they get so salty, that one of them requests I take down my Facebook post about the crew battles calling them fraudulent (obviously just playful trash talk, because who ever seriously calls someone fraudulent?). And it wasn't even in some big group, or anything, just bragging about my crew's win on my personal FB page.

Like, I guess I can get people getting salty enough to be actually offended, but my uni is bad, too, like we'd get wrecked by most other unis in Chicago. But seriously, this is Smash. Trash talk isn't a big deal, and that's the whole point of crew battles, isn't it? Trash talk and bragging rights.

As long as your trash talk is not as bad as this

 

[Hylian]

There's a slight difference since mine says "Follow Hylian"

Now I'm kind of just interested in which one of us will break first and change our avatars .

 

[Saito]

If I had premium, I'd consider changing my name to Hyilan

No one would be able to tell the difference.

But that would just be in bad taste.

Now I'm kind of just interested in which one of us will break first and change our avatars .

It would be me,

If you'd promise to change your avatar back ;-;

 

[Warchamp7]

If I had premium, I'd consider changing my name to Hyilan

Holy hell I skimmed right over it and was like "But two people can't share a name"

HELP

 

[Warsaint777]

In other news I hit up my first PM gathering last night. Was aight but our top guys were a wolf and ike I didn't have a prayer against. Tech skill for days.

My butt wouldn't hurt as much if the guy wasn't better than me at ganon than I was but. Gotta start somewhere.

Maybe I'll switch to mewtwo.

edit; #unheededconversationwithself

 

[Warchamp7]

Wait @ Saito do HyIian

 

[Gamegenie222]

Ya'll nerds need to learn how to **** talk. Or be around O.G FG players IDK lol. Or go to ATL.

 

[Warsaint777]

Hey would one of you tril muhfukkas link the ol' warsaint to his or her favorite tutorial for PM ganon OR mewtwo play, advanced or otherwise? Much love.

 

[Bazkip]

Wait @ Saito do HyIian

Into voyeurism, I see ( ͡° ͜ʖ ͡°)

 

[Saito]

Wait @ Saito do HyIian

I ain't actually name changing.

And I'm gonna drop this avatar probably around tonight, and hopefully my message has gotten through to hylian and he will reconsider his avatar changes. ;_;

 

[Binary Clone]

I ain't actually name changing.

And I'm gonna drop this avatar probably around tonight, and hopefully my message has gotten through to hylian and he will reconsider his avatar changes. ;_;

I love the fact that you also changed your sig and linked all of Hylian's stuff.

 

[mimgrim]

I ain't actually name changing.

And I'm gonna drop this avatar probably around tonight, and hopefully my message has gotten through to hylian and he will reconsider his avatar changes. ;_;

Someone need to learn to deal with change.

 

[Saito]

Someone need to learn to deal with change.

If everyone thought like that, Melee would be 10 feet under.

We probably wouldn't of had the inspiration for Project M either.

 

[mimgrim]

If everyone thought like that, Melee would be 10 feet under.

You said that to the wrong person. I don't care about Melee and I only ever play the game in friendlies where I troll with Pichu. So yea. I really wouldn't care either way if Melee was 10 feet under.

Also, Smash 4 = Project M > Brawl > 64 > Melee. Let the witch hunt begin.

 

[MechWarriorNY]

Cool story.

 

[mimgrim]

Cool story.

I can give another one if you want. :L

 

[MechWarriorNY]

I can give another one if you want. :L

 

[Jaedrik]

Some documentary on YouTube doesn't make it right. There's 1000s of so-called "documentaries" on YouTube that people believe whether it be something Against 9/11 or something it doesn't make it right. Net Neutrality just prohibits companies from having control over the internet whether it be by them forcing people to use their service to have internet or making smaller companies unable to have people connect to their site. The idea of companies having control is stupid. When they took over the railroad industry it wasn't great and it ceased competition and had to be broken apart and the idea that they eliminate all competition by leaving people as their only internet provider is ridiculous. Companies aren't elected they're like mini kingdoms ran by families who can do whatever they want and lobby government to get their way. With government you can actually elect people based on issues like these. And before the whole knee-jerk reaction when Obama spoke on Net Neutrality there was little opposition except companies that didn't want this for example Century Link, but now that Obama spoke on it the republicans jumped the entire train to bash obama because anything obama supports they have to go against. A supposedly bipartisan issue of transporation is now being opposed by the majority of the republican party because they all got elected to stop some really popular bill and stop everything obama.

Make no mistake, sir, this, at least personally, has nothing to do with democrat or republican. At some point it's just people using names to discredit others and their ideas, and lending themselves to pure cynicism, instead of actually thinking about the ideas. Not that you intentionally do this, but it seems to me you merely see something you think you oppose and just spout off against it rather than critically examining. And, personally, I don't vote Republican, so please don't think about putting me in with the war-mongering neocons. I've always opposed Net Neutrality. In fact, I'd argue that this is a roughly bi-partisan consensus. If I'm right, you won't see much real opposition (in the form of voting against it) from Republicans, but you might hear much hooting and hollering. Bark rather than bite, as it were.

And the 9/11 analogy is a bit ridiculous. This is no conspiracy theory.

Regardless, you have some misconceptions about what Net Neutrality exactly is. Please refer to my response to Comeback Kid. It does far more than prohibit companies from having 'control' over the internet.

I completely agree that companies having control is stupid, but I direct my, er, anger, at political control, which they're far more adept at, than market control. You seem to agree with me! Political control by companies isn't good. Yet, could it be that some companies are pushing for this particular legislation to pass as well? I know Google is. I mean, if you read below in my response to Comeback Kid, Net "Neutrality" will be an enormous regulatory apparatus which can easily be used by well-connected companies.

Regardless, companies take losses in proportion to their size, so the predatory pricing strategy falls apart quickly under simple mathematical scrutiny. By extension, its natural cousin, the idea that companies would pay sites to only show under their service, or even that the company could buy out a bunch of sites and do this thing, is without any historical precedent for success, and would incur losses in proportion to how much they're paying. Plus, if another, smaller company also wanted to pay, and the terms of the other contract allowed it, then they'd only naturally pay in proportion to their userbase, since the site owners are naturally motivated to turn a high enough profit. And the fact that said sites' reputations would suffer, and said company's reputation would suffer.

I don't suppose you'd want to talk about natural property rights theory, then, since if a person or persons own a website, they have supreme right to deny access to said website, so there's nothing morally illicit about this behavior. Even then, it would more likely hurt the company.

And let's take a peek at the railroad debacle by the government. Here's just one anecdote to shed some light on the truth of that thing from Dr. Thomas E. Woods: "We might also mention James J. Hill, who grew up in poverty but whose entrepreneurial skill helped make the Great Northern Railroad, which extended from St. Paul to Seattle, a major success without any government subsidies at all. In 1893, when the government-subsidized railroads went bankrupt (emphasis mine), Hill's line was able both to cut rates and turn a substantial profit." The government subsidized rail went bankrupt because it couldn't compete under the mechanism of capital allocation that the free market naturally undergoes.
For one thing, the government subsidized railways were before their time, and there was a lobby-motivated incentive structure that was behind the creation of the transcontinental railroad. Here's a great read on the subject: http://mises.org/library/crony-capitalism-and-transcontinental-railroads

Compared to what we had now, the improved regulation is a good thing. Not as good as the libertarian free market fantasy where cable company monopolies don't exist and people have real and cheap choices for their internet providers, but net neutrality is infinitely better than the previous reality of the situation which was to prevent upstart small businesses from competing with the big companies online due to premium fast lane fees.

It would be like if the government finally put their mass surveillance program of the entire internet under Constitutional court supervision and actually needed warrants and probable cause for spying on people. Some libertarian nut on Youtube would say this was also a bad regulation because the government shouldn't be doing anything to curtail freedom unless an imminent terrorist attack was suspected.

Perfect is the enemy of the good.

"Net Neutrality" reaches far more than you anticipate, sir. It's actually 300 pages of mystery, the bill itself that the FCC is considering, but we do know a few things about it.
From: http://mises.org/library/net-neutrality-scam (check out the rest of the link too if you're interested, it's very relevant!)

"Currently, ISPs are regulated by the FCC, but as an “information service” under the less restrictive rules of so-called Title I. But now, the FCC wants to regulate ISPs as utilities under the far more restrictive Title II restrictions. For a clue as to how cutting edge this idea is, remember this switch to Title II regulation would put ISPs into the same regulatory regime as Ma Bell under the Communications Act of 1934.

So what does this mean for the FCC in practice? According to FCC Commissioner Ajit Pai, “It gives the FCC the power to micromanage virtually every aspect of how the Internet works.” More specifically, Gordon Crovitz at the Wall Street Journal writes:

[With Net Netruality,] bureaucrats can review the fairness of Google’s search results, Facebook’s news feeds and news sites’ links to one another and to advertisers. BlackBerry is already lobbying the FCC to force Apple and Netflix to offer apps for BlackBerry’s unpopular phones. Bureaucrats will oversee peering, content-delivery networks and other parts of the interconnected network that enables everything from Netflix and YouTube to security drones and online surgery."

The administration insists these measures are necessary because — even though there is no evidence that this has actually happened — it is possible that at some point in the future, internet service providers could restrict some content and apps on the internet. Thus, we are told, control of content should be handed over to the federal government to ensure that internet service providers are “neutral” when it comes to deciding what is on the internet and what is not.

That aside, the concept of a 'natural monopoly' is an economic myth, even in the areas of so-called utilities.
The FCC wants to regulate the internet as a utility.
Let's look at some historical examples of so-called 'utilities' and their 'monopolies'.
http://mises.org/library/myth-natural-monopoly

There are a few objections that come to mind at the line "prevent upstart small businesses from competing", I point to my response to Ansossy. Bigger companies have to take losses in proportion to their size when they try to engage in predatory pricing. That being said, this isn't the strategy that you propose they might do. Ignoring the fact that not one company has engaged in this strategy yet, wouldn't it make sense that people would pay more for faster internet? My brother ran a small, home-town wireless internet business with his friend (who now owns the whole joint: Intelligent Computing Solutions based in Illinois), and they're weren't (and he isn't now) being forced out of the market or anything ridiculous like that. I'm also quite happy with the service they provide us with. In fact, Mike is doing great for himself, regardless of all the infrastructure that goes into it.

And to your personal insults to "libertarian nuts", please don't pidgeonhole us into categories and shoo us away as nuts. Besides, the Mises Institute isn't some libertarian nut on Youtube, and it would say that government shouldn't curtail this freedom even if there was an imminent terrorist attack absolutely assured to happen.

"Perfect is the enemy of good." I agree with you. All the Mises Institute would agree with you too. I myself am a perfectionist in real life, so struggling to accept that my work in school isn't going to be perfect and doing it anyways is real to me. I'm no utopianist, nor is anyone who follows Austrian Economics. We acknowledge that this world is an imperfect place, and perfection can never be attained, but we do know what the best system is, and we do know that anything that goes in the direction of that system will always benefit the economy and her constituent parts (aka, the people).

Now, I know this kinda looks lime me throwing links at you guys and expecting you to read them, but I can hardly conceive of a more effective deliverance than what these gentlemen have written, much of which pertains directly to what you, Comeback Kid, have stated. I'd go so far as to say that neither of you even watched the video wholly through, much less thought about its words in any serious way.
So, forgive me, I really don't mean to offend either of you by any of this, or discredit you to any observers, but it seems to me there is a small measure of intellectual dishonesty here. I like any chance I get to talk about stuff like this: it's my passion.

 

[MechWarriorNY]

Benevolent tyranny when?

 

[Oracle]

Doing an AMA on reddit! Ask me questions and stuff http://www.reddit.com/r/SSBPM/comments/2xe7kr/amfridays_week_155_oracle/

 

[Ramz289]

Hey would one of you tril muh****as link the ol' warsaint to his or her favorite tutorial for PM ganon OR mewtwo play, advanced or otherwise? Much love.

IDK about tutorials, but there's this cool showcase thing for maylay

..And if you've (for some reason) never seen Ganon on Ice...

If you have seen it watch it again and again and again and again
I don't know if the're any writen guides

For m2 there's Emukiller's guide

 

[PMS | Tink-er]

I refuse to start up an AMA series without first giving it an awful name.

 

[Nixie]

don't mind me i just feel a strong urge to post on this page in particular

 

[mimgrim]

You know you want it.

 

[Strong Badam]

My flight to Shots Fired was canceled.... I'm so sad =(

 

[Hylian]

I ain't actually name changing.

And I'm gonna drop this avatar probably around tonight, and hopefully my message has gotten through to hylian and he will reconsider his avatar changes. ;_;

Why don't you like my new avatar? ;_;

 

[Jaedrik]

My flight to Shots Fired was canceled.... I'm so sad =(

pls don be sad strenth bad
we're here for you and in stream chat for you

Edit:

Why don't you like my new avatar? ;_;

I'm also confused as to why @ Saito doesn't want you to change your avatar. It feels like you're someone else, yeah, because we're all so used to you being that awesome Link portrait, but I'm not upset or anything :O

 

[Saito]

Why don't you like my new avatar? ;_;

I do like it.

But this one has been with you for 9 years and running. Why give it up now? It's gone with you through almost all of your smash history and I feel earnestly like it's something that probably should stay with you.

Trust me though, I know the beauty of switching an avatar, and I couldn't hold onto the same one for 9 years.
I respect you for that dedication.

It's honestly up to you, but I'm not sure if you changed avatars because you found something better or just to change after those 9 years.

If it's the former, then I'd say keep the new one.
If it's the latter, you still could, but I don't know if it's worth it.

 

[Jolteon]

Greetings, gentlemen.

 

[Saito]

God damnit jolteon, how am I supposed to be serious at such a crucial moment with you looming overhead. LOL

 

[Warsaint777]

IDK about tutorials, but there's this cool showcase thing for maylay

..And if you've (for some reason) never seen Ganon on Ice...

If you have seen it watch it again and again and again and again
I don't know if the're any writen guides

For m2 there's Emukiller's guide

awesome thanks guy-with-my-pretty-face watching now

 

[Empyrean]

LOL I lost my **** thinking hylian triple posted

 

[Warchamp7]

don't mind me i just feel a strong urge to post on this page in particular

Lorelei tho

 

[MechWarriorNY]

10/10. LOL

 

[Warsaint777]

@ Ramz289 you think the tech in that combo vid translates pretty well into PM yeah?

 

[Smooth Criminal]

You said that to the wrong person. I don't care about Melee and I only ever play the game in friendlies where I troll with Pichu. So yea. I really wouldn't care either way if Melee was 10 feet under.

Also, Smash 4 = Project M > Brawl > 64 > Melee. Let the witch hunt begin.

There's a sob story attached to this kind of attitude, I just know it.

Smooth Criminal

 

[Hylian]

Lorelei tho

Oh my god your avatar. I'm done LOL.

 

[Warchamp7]

Oh my god your avatar. I'm done LOL.

 

[Hylian]

I do like it.

But this one has been with you for 9 years and running. Why give it up now? It's gone with you through almost all of your smash history and I feel earnestly like it's something that probably should stay with you.

Trust me though, I know the beauty of switching an avatar, and I couldn't hold onto the same one for 9 years.
I respect you for that dedication.

It's honestly up to you, but I'm not sure if you changed avatars because you found something better or just to change after those 9 years.

If it's the former, then I'd say keep the new one.
If it's the latter, you still could, but I don't know if it's worth it.

I will dwell on this at work today.