Alright, here we go.
0rion I don't enjoy your views on ZSS
That said, you are mopping up this thread. I want to quote your post and QFT it.
I think you're mistaking me for someone else. I haven't said anything about ZSS.
I meant inside of the community. The example I gave was just how it pretty much would be. If there's a thread saying "Should we ban Meta Knight?" in the SBR, people would automatically claim that the SBR wants to ban Meta Knight.
Now, think of it, that, if there's a possibly big suggestion of change for the game which is being discussed, that the people turn it around and make it into "They WILL change". Which would cause the community to create an uproar (maybe that word is blowing this out of proportion, but don't get nitpicking on me, cause I hate nothing more than people who can't stop riding on little linguistic details if it's perfectly clear what I mean - I'm not natively English, so that's the reason why I'm wording things wrong and have failing grammar).
Think about it. You're claiming that you can't tell people outside of SBRB anything because of the rash assumptions they'd make, which
in and of itself is a rash assumption. I saw both of the Meta Knight banning poll threads, and I don't recall anyone saying that SBRB had definitively decided to ban him. And if they did, they were the exception, not the rule.
And again, the type of people that would do that would find an excuse to do it anyway. Keeping this from the public view prevents NOTHING.
Then there's no point in making the SBR view-only, anyway. If you suggest that, we should open up the SBR in general and let everyone post in there because they're the public. They sure will contribute properly and they sure know just as much as the SBR-members do. Right.
That's a "slippery slope" argument if ever I heard one. I'm not talking about letting people actively participate in SBRB. I'm asking that the unnecessary and frankly STUPID veil of secrecy be removed.
The Debate Hall is read only for non members and many of its touchier subjects are taboo outside of that forum. I don't see that causing a huge panic.
I don't want you taking what I'm saying out of context like this. There's a difference between being able to post on a forum and being able to hear what's said that could drastically affect competitive perspectives on something, so you can form your own opinions on it and attempt to influence public opinion as well.
There's a difference between trolling and having a dumb opinion.
Right. The former is already against TOS, and the latter is no crime; so it's not the SBRB's responsibility to try and regulate either one. More to the point, you could very well be
CAUSING a lot more of
both of these things of these by intentionally keeping people in the dark.
The thing is, we are strictly forbidden to leak anything. If I tell people about projects and debates going on in the SBR, I'm leaking. Even if it's nothing specific. So I took an example that went into the public, anyway. It's a bad example, but I can't give you any other thing.
I already said that.
It's no elitism. It's a matter of fact that there are people that don't know much about the game, and to prevent people who're "omg tiers r 4 queers" to look into the discussions going on in the SBR, it's hidden.
Dude, do you HEAR yourself when you say stuff like this? It's like saying "It's a well known fact that southerners have mullets and drink beer all the time."
Get this. As I said before, the people that would do those sorts of things do NOT make up more than an extremely small minority of the regular posters on this forum. And again, I find it increasingly more insulting that you keep throwing most non-SBRB members into this group.
And you still haven't brought up the point I have raised MULTIPLE TIMES. What's stopping the type of people that would think and behave this way from doing so REGARDLESS of whether SBRB is hidden? The answer:
nothing. People like that will use any excuse to have their opinions heard. You have done... let me phrase this properly for you...
NOTHING
...to stop or even slow it down by hiding the forum.
For the record, you should probably avoid adding this to the middle of your arguments from now on. It makes you look like you're not understanding the valid points being made by your opposition.
Personal vendettas are nothing you should hold at all, and they're very hindering in accepting different views.
There's a difference in having a personal vendetta and not accepting another view. On a personal level I think Stalin was absolute scum, but I'd be a fool not to recognize the fact that if it weren't for him destroying the German army in Russia, World War II would almost certainly have been completely lost.
Just because I think something is bad personally doesn't mean I don't acknowledge the things that aren't so bad about it.
You're not better than Creationists, then. They don't accept other opinions, as well.
You're STILL stereotyping people unfairly, right now. And this is coming from someone that's about as anti-religion as they come. Don't phrase your arguments like this.
Because people are dumb and forgetful. There will always be again and again the same questions over and over. This is proven by only watching the General Brawl Discussion for a week. You will come across at least 1 thread that already has been opened in the past, pretty much every day one.
And so, this being the case - BY YOUR OWN ADMISSION - exactly what has keeping SBRB secret
prevented? Sure, the SUBJECTS of the repeated "dumb and forgetful" discussions might be different, but the number hasn't gone down.
I again refer you to the giant font earlier in the post to explain what SBRB's secrecy has done for the community.
We aren't keeping our knowledge to ourselves. The SBR debates things, talks about points, and then the results are presented.
Correct: the points that you CHOOSE to present are presented. And only in the way that the presenter CHOOSES to present them. That's not much better than not saying them at all.
The knowledge comes out eventually, but only after everything has been settled and all of the people who are taking part of the discussions all are more or less satisfied with the results.
...And then people argue about it and often vehemently disagree with SBRB anyway. Do you see where I'm going, here?
My beliefs and observations will not change by someone else reading them, they will change by my own research.
EXACTLY. So,
WHY ARE YOU THE ONLY ONE WITH THAT RIGHT?
So you think the SBR members are only staying inside their small forum and never read up information on other places? They never play players who aren't in the SBR? What kind of stupid accusation is that?
I never said that. I don't know where you got this impression. Don't start attacking my strawman, here.
The SBR members always are exposed to external input. If it's their own observations, or them reading and concluding from the persons aware of this topic... it doesn't matter. All an open SBR would cause is people going "omg, sbr said marth sucks, their so wrong lol" or something among the line.
Again, this happens anyway.
That doesn't change the fact that many people aren't aware of anything else but their own character. That won't help at all. If I say "I think that Marth is bad" (to stay with that example), then there's a reason for me to say so, and I don't want to explain myself all the time when I do.
If I say "Mars would make a better habitat for humans than Earth," then there's a reason for me to say so, and I don't want to explain myself all the time when I do.
Are you seeing the flaw in your argument?
You might well think that this is the case, hypothetically. But unless you have something backing it up, your rationale is still bad. You're just the only one that knows about it, and that's even WORSE because you're convinced it's
not bad.
More importantly, who the hell are YOU to say that your theories are beyond the comprehension of the general public? I'll lay THIS out on the line, as well: if your beliefs are so strong that you can't explain them, then that's even more reason to reexamine them.
So you think SBR members don't read in the Stage forums? Again, SBR members are not limited to the SBR, they have access to all public knowledge.
Good. Now, read again what I said.
I'm not saying it gets more peaceful that way. I'm saying that this way, our discussions aren't disrupted and the SBR's members aren't attacked for their opinions. That's what I'm saying.
A: your discussions wouldn't be disrupted because the forum would be read-only, and it's not like ToS would cease to exist. B: they're not exempt from being attacked for their opinions anyway. Again, see the large font earlier in this post.
Yes, but I don't want to debate every little minimal piece of my opinion and experiences just to please you. And I think I'm not the only one. Sorry, but I'm not a debating robot.
Good, because as I said earlier (in fact, it was one of my first points on the subject) is that I don't care about the credentials of the person I'm talking to. I care about the validity of their arguments.
Remember that the SBRB was until only recently consisting of several people who had no idea about Brawl, since they weren't playing it. There were many reformations in terms of users. As for your example, well, that is one of those points I mean. This SBRoomer thought that Luigi was better than you thought, and until now, the results are that he's where he is now. Well, then you were right, and they were wrong, so what?
That's exactly what I mean with "if you make a mistake, you'll be attacked".
If by "attacked" you mean "called out for saying something that doesn't make sense and then not backing it up," then you're absolutely right. And if you're afraid of this happening all the time, then I'm not sure why SBRB is held on such a pedestal.
You still hold a grudge against this SBRoomer because he was wrong, and you still keep throwing that at others for an example because this SBRoomer's opinion was not completely right, respectively they weren't perfect in their knowledge (meaning the one guy now).
NO.
You couldn't have missed the point any harder if you'd
tried to.
You're right. I STILL feel the sting of that discussion, and I'm still very resentful of it. But I'm resentful of it not because he was wrong, or because he made a mistake, but
because he didn't feel the need to justify his arguments or explain his rationale for arriving at his conclusions.
He thought of me - as you seem to think for others - that I was somehow "beneath" his higher plateau of thinking; an ignorant, unwashed neophyte that had no clue what he was talking about and couldn't possibly offer anything constructive to his own world view. It wasn't the fact that he was wrong that galls me. It was the fact that - because he was allowed to wallow in his own idiocy for so long - it's taken this long for it to be acknowledged.
THAT'S what bothers me.
It's not because they'd be "looked down on", it's because the SBR is meant to represent the Brawl community.
Another thing I don't much care for. "Representatives" that are appointed by a select group.
So there are mainly members who are experienced and knowledgeable enough to discuss important matters such as rulesets, tier lists or other projects benefitting the competitive community. If people can see SBRoomers being not perfect or omnipotent as you name it, then they will cast doubts on the SBR, and some might even try to force these members to leave the SBR.[.quote]
Allow me to summarize this last argument with a quote from The Wizard of Oz:
"IGNORE THAT LITTLE MAN BEHIND THE CURTAIN."
It's not the "shame". I am willing to admit mistakes, but if I'm getting eaten alive for it, I don't really want to talk about it in the first place. I'd rather leave the discussion, or even the group, before getting supressed by the public.
I want to discuss, not to be treated like a criminal.
It sounds like you're really struggling to separate the concept of "criticism" from "persecution." There is a HUGE difference.
More to the point, the fact that SBRB doesn't want their beliefs called into question makes me
that much more convinced that they SHOULD be, and as soon as possible.
Having a wrong opinion or wrong information on some matter. For example, Luigi's potential as a character. Which a certain user is still bringing up and attacking with. I won't tell names, though.
"Attacking,"? I haven't seen any "attacks" on SBRB. Again, I see disagreement, but that's healthy.
Counter question: What would be my reason to lie about it?
To rationalize SBRB's secrecy.
Maybe for you, but you have your mindset of not ever accepting any other argument or opinion on this matter, you think only you are right and everything else is heresy, thus you will never be satisfied with any other explanation and POV than yours.
Well, this certainly came out of left field.
I'll clue you in on something, because you're obviously having difficulty following, here. I'm not interested in my own opinions. I KNOW what I think, and why I think that way. I'm discussing this matter because I feel I'm right, yes... but more importantly, I'm discussing this in case I'm WRONG.
There's a fundamental principle in philosophy that if you've proven yourself right, you've gained nothing. You've only broke even. If you prove yourself WRONG, however, then your world view is improved, and you benefit for it.
I'm discussion this matter with you right now because I feel - STRONGLY feel - that if there is some flaw in the way I think, it should be brought to light. And if there's not, then it should be expressed openly so people can consider and internalize it.
In this case, the only justifications for your view that you've given is that you don't want to be held accountable for what you say or think (in which case, it's a sign of abject irresponsibility), and that you don't think people are capable of understanding it (which is transparent bigotry).
People should quit holding the SBR on some high platform that'll be chopped down the moment they give a general consensus on something.
For one thing, I for one have never held SBRB on a higher platform ( the subjects raised during this conversation being some of the specific reasons why). And if their consensus doesn't make sense and can't be explained, then I feel it SHOULD be criticized.
The SBR is no exception: moderators of many forums, judges, committees, every group of this nature... they are formed not to hold something above the heads of everyone else, but instead to create an environment where ignorance, idiocy, and inanity can be limited as much as possible.
And don't you feel that keeping the discussions private only serves to reinforce these ideas?
This is not to say that they are all sagacious and perfect, as I am sure some of us have had run-ins with these type of members where a clear poor judgment was made. However, we are still all human in the end, and the best way to grow is to recognize and accept mistakes, and by accepting mistakes, I mean not holding it over a particular person's head. It happens to everyone, and proving someone to be wrong and then treating them more negatively of it (assuming they aren't continuously doing it) is never the way to bridge a community.
Very true. The problem is that, if you keep others from hearing your mistakes, it takes you that much longer to realize you made them.
I've made mistakes here, too. The difference being that when I make a mistake, I'm immediately called to task for it, and have to acknowledge my mistakes. That doesn't mean that people take every opportunity to rub my nose in it, because that would just make them look vindictive and petty. They'd get nothing out of it.
I used to be a moderator at IGN, but I retired. I started posting on the Fire Emblem board back in 2003, and in 2007, I was made a moderator because the board lacked one. Now, for the first four years of my posting career there, I was treated like everyone else. I would debate with people, and barring the obvious ignorami you come across, there were people who refuted things I said effectively, and I accepted their argument. No grudges of any kind were held between us.
I get moderated, and we're discussing a tier list. Mind you, there's no "SBR" here. I posted an argument as to why I believed Rhys to be a better character than Soren, and somewhere I made an error. Something about Rhys having 17 Speed and 17 AS with Shine or something of the nature (FE players will understand). A complete mishap that I could've easily fixed had I noticed it. Users were coming at me left and right, picking apart that one detail and deeming everything else I said as horribly wrong or just ignoring it. I said "Sorry, I wasn't paying attention", and then people started to have this notion that I never paid attention to anything and that it somehow tied into my moderating skills. This went on for about a year (random examples), and eventually I got tired of it and left.
If it went on for a year, exactly how many "minor, random" mistakes were you making to get people up in arms? You'll forgive me, but somehow I
seriously doubt that they would harass you for one year over one single typo.
The point of this is that people can and likely will hold stupid mistakes over your head because you are viewed as an authoritative figure, and because you are viewed as such, any sign of error will bring out ignorami from the bushes to comment on your mistake, while often saying things far worse than what they're trying to call out. This WILL happen with thousands of active, registered, and posting users on a site where people can't handle their character being criticized, rules being suggested, and stages being banned.
I pose the exact same question to you as to SpadeFox: exactly what has keeping discussion secret done to prevent this from happening anyway?
We both know the answer.
The SBR has always presented guidelines for a lot of things, NOT a law.
I'll give you this. It's one of the things that I actually like about SBRB.
Having said that, their guidelines have become a sort of de facto law for a lot of people. And not by accident. For example, SBRB went out of its way to give the impression that if its ruleset wasn't followed by tournaent directors, then it was not "SBRB approved," which in tern would make it somehow less official and therefore less of a tournament. Whether this is actually the case is another matter for another day, but the main point being that SBRB hasn't exactly tried to fight this impression.
The tier list is based off of what the SBR believes to be appropriate, which is based off of what they know about the characters, their metagame, and their results. It is never "perfect" because everyone, even the people who made the game, does not know every single detail when it comes to every single character on every single stage It can be, however, extremely accurate for everything that we DO know about the game. Stage legality, the rules for how matches should be played (3-stock, 8 minutes, etc.), and other similar things are simply more suggestions, not laws, yet people will fight them so badly when they don't even have to follow them. This is stuff that everyone knows with the SBR being hidden from more than 99% of this site.
I am not convinced that we should open the SBR up to everyone for the possibility of hitting a major epiphany while we know what the definite negative consequences will be. This is simply my opinion.
Every decision has the potential for negative consequences. We both know that. Saying "bad things will happen if we do this," in no way negates the fact that not only are those EXACT SAME BAD THINGS happening regardless, but even WORSE things happen as a result of keeping things ignorant. It's just an easy way to wash your hands of it and not take any of the flack.
OMG. I love you so much. <3
Was this necessary? It was already implied that you agreed with him.
, but I admit I was surprised.
