|
Post by Smithee on Jun 18, 2009 13:58:36 GMT -5
See, but what does nature really have to do with it at all? These are games. They're like sports. If you play a game, that has accidentally given you the ability to cheat you should set rules before hand. Of course in any sport you can cheat, and same as an game. Really, any reprimandations you receive when playing a game of any kind is fairly shallow, unless you are in extreme circumstances. Now, those extreme circumstances aren't worth bringing up, since they're highly unlikely to happen.
I've yet to play a video game where the player has the complete ability to cheat against another human player, and the only backlash from doing so comes from the other players. This would be an almost completely realistic game in this sense, and just like a real sport. However, most games either disallow cheating completely or have consequences against it, and this is why you cannot bring up nature in comparison to a game.
Furthermore, in nature, it really isn't cheating or using exploits, simply because these things are built these ways for a reason and it is part of the game. It isn't like playing Monopoly and cutting deals with the banker, but it is like playing Democracy and forming alliances behind the other players backs. It is part of the "game".
|
|
|
Post by kimimi on Jun 18, 2009 14:20:51 GMT -5
There are soo many beautiful things in the world - you can even see photos of them online - so why is so much effort being spent on one guys ego-massaging internet mouthpiece?
|
|
|
Post by Pitchfork on Jun 18, 2009 14:26:14 GMT -5
There are soo many beautiful things in the world - you can even see photos of them online - so why is so much effort being spent on one guys ego-massaging internet mouthpiece? And a gold star for Kimimi!
|
|
|
Post by justjustin on Jun 18, 2009 14:51:46 GMT -5
I probably have a lot more crap to say about the idea of "nature" being fair, which I'll explain one day, if times permits.lol. Besides you, who said a word about being abstract? Philosophy relies on clarity and understanding; the art of thinking. No definitions, only theories. There is no magical catchall "definition" of complex ideas like fairness, equality, etc. Philosophy does not hinge on shallowness and cheap logic tricks or whatever. Neither does common sense. Not sure how they can alter the rules of the game, but as long as the "strong" allow it, yes. Probably because it's not in your personality to insult others. Unlike that uncouth barbarian icycalm who should be able to write just like you do because, after all, it's really not that hard. Do you really want him to write like you do? Sorry to ruin your picnic, but I'm just defending my own interests. It's fine that people express their opinion about insomnia.ac, that's good. It's just disappointing to me that a majority are negative. Most criticisms against his site usually fall within the realms of it not conforming. I'm not sure where people get the idea that he doesn't give other opinions a chance. He reads criticisms against his site on a daily basis. It just so happens he rejects them, because it's his space and he doesn't agree with them. That's how I understand it, at least. We don't reject anyone here so long as they're considerate. I don't find that a problem, so why do people find his frequent banning at his forums an issue?
|
|
|
Post by Dais on Jun 18, 2009 15:35:48 GMT -5
Now that Mr. Kierkegaard has inevitably linked to this article, I'd like to clarify that he is, as a matter of established fact, a pedophile.
Whether this has anything to do with his persecution complex, I can only wonder...
|
|
|
Post by justjustin on Jun 18, 2009 15:51:49 GMT -5
So it goes. Oh well, at least this forum doesn't have a new topic about insomnia.ac every other week. I think there has only been one other, actually.
|
|
|
Post by Discoalucard on Jun 18, 2009 16:38:03 GMT -5
Guys, if you want to argue about that colossal nitwit, go ahead. Please don't link to his site, though. It appears the only respite he has in his sad little existence is checking his referrals for people linking to his site, which he then either invades or makes fun of on his own forums. I'm sure dais is right that he's over there chuckling to no one in particular. Which is funny, in its own way, however unfortunate. EDIT: too late it seems Now that Mr. Kierkegaard has inevitably linked to this article, I'd like to clarify that he is, as a matter of established fact, a pedophile. Isn't it a well known fact that he destroyed the original Insert Credit forums by flooding it with kiddie porn? Why is his site still linked on their main page? If the Internet collectively disavowed his existence, he would disappear, for the betterment of mankind.
|
|
|
Post by derboo on Jun 18, 2009 16:47:54 GMT -5
collectively disavowed his existence I don't know that word, but it sounds like fun.
|
|
|
Post by dooz on Jun 18, 2009 16:59:54 GMT -5
There are soo many beautiful things in the world - you can even see photos of them online - so why is so much effort being spent on one guys ego-massaging internet mouthpiece? Quoted for truth. Though I like Garamoth explanation about nature and fairness, this guy does not deserve any attention whatsoever. The thing that will hurt him most is losing the attention of "the masses", because he is a giant whore who is incapable of accepting any criticism; constructive or not. This shows an inability to grow, and growth is necessary for advancement, meaning he is indeed inferior to most. The best he can do is look to well-known philosophers and hope that name-dropping them will make him look smart. Then he'll avoid all points being made in any argument and call you a child. Also, anyone with an ego as large as his should not be trusted.s I just contradicted myself by writing about him, but fuck it; I like making fun of idiots.
|
|
|
Post by Garamoth on Jun 18, 2009 17:03:17 GMT -5
Ooops, sorry Kurt, my bad. I won't do it again, I promise. I probably have a lot more crap to say about the idea of "nature" being fair, which I'll explain one day, if times permits.lol. Well, actually I only said that because it's something he says all the time. I guess I've blurred the lines a bit too much... it's back to the light side for me. Anyway, I'm always amazed and appaled that Nietzche is so popular in geekdom (I guess it's the bit about Superman). Maybe I should write a book: "The Nietzschean Nerd: A Barabarian in Mom's Basement." What do you think? I've yet to play a video game where the player has the complete ability to cheat against another human player, and the only backlash from doing so comes from the other players. That would be a great game. You could hack the code, delete other users or ally together against other players to bully them. It would be like Calvinball, but without any childish innocence. Slander and threats against real players would be encouraged, at least until the cops got in the game. Stupid cops, always spoiling the fun (but it's another layer of game, a meta-game!).
|
|
|
Post by Dais on Jun 18, 2009 18:37:47 GMT -5
Now that Mr. Kierkegaard has inevitably linked to this article, I'd like to clarify that he is, as a matter of established fact, a pedophile. Isn't it a well known fact that he destroyed the original Insert Credit forums by flooding it with kiddie porn? Why is his site still linked on their main page? If the Internet collectively disavowed his existence, he would disappear, for the betterment of mankind. to be perfectly honest, no one except the actual person responsible knows who called in 4- and 7chan to invade (which led to the posters who put up child pornography). It could have been him, it could have been a random passerby, it could've been a poster who has long since disappeared or one who still posts at insert credit (or spinoff forum selectbutton). The things that are known are this: 1. While nothing could ever warrant posting child porn (obviously), Icycalm's admin acts were pretty much inarguably terrible - he didn't just ban people he didn't like and lock threads he didn't want, he actually responded in a hostile manner to all criticism and lorded his power over everyone, apparently taking pleasure in deliberately antagonizing the people upset he had suddenly been given power he hadn't earned 2. When the -chan trolls started flooding the site with accounts and posting child pornography, he acknowledged this was going on and decided not to remove the pictures because, and I paraphrase loosely from memory, they "showed what kind of people" that he was "up against". (eventually one of the intelligent posters contacted the hosting service to have the site temporarily shut down so the owner wouldn't get into trouble) Icycalm (Kierkegaard) was originally made an admin at IC (after having been banned for quite a while for one of his many trolling sprees) because Brandon Sheffield/exodus (IC owner) felt the forum was no longer what he had originally envisioned it as being or anywhere near as good as it had been in it's first few years. Whether this was true or not (and IC while was at it was making a definitely noticeable shift to the irrelevant, argumentative and "mainstream"), I don't believe he acted in any real malice when he appointed Icycalm as admin, just....well, pretty blatant shortsightedness and foolishness. You could argue that he kind of got what he wanted (a reboot of the forums) out of the deal, but the forums are only a pale shadow of any of their former selves and the community was pretty badly fractured. Icycalm's site is still linked because he still technically has interesting things to say sometimes, he's just horrible about saying them and he has no intention of ever accepting criticism or engaging in fair debate. As noted elsewhere, he's been banned from pretty much every forum he's ever posted on (I don't think he's banned at the current IC, but he was cautioned and then left after proclaiming his disgust). Part of this seems to be attempting to build up his own mythos/brandname, but part of it also seems to be something pathological on his part. The same goes for his sometimes companion Recap, a 2D fetishist who can give loving and tender care to neglected subjects like scanlines but who thinks 3D is the worst thing to ever happen and who constantly insults everyone he even remotely disagrees with (he was even recently banned from icy's forum for a while). Sometimes I really do wonder what he gets out of it all. A lot of game writers who show up in multiple communities try to make an investment in the "culture" of discussing games online, but all he does is burn bridges and accumulate one or two new forumn posters who never challenge what he says about every six months (with about a dozen posters banned in the same time for engaging him in a critical manner, which he considers unacceptable). So he's not around to further the debate. He's talked about writing a book, but I know he's intelligent enough to realize that no amount of trolling in his current methods is going to attract any attention (commercially lucrative or not) to him. I wouldn't think he gets noticed consistently enough to really feed his attention the way he seems to demand it, and the level of control and abuse he enacts on his forum doesn't seem like it would be sufficiently enjoyable if he was truly as sociopathic as he acts.
|
|
|
Post by zzz on Jun 18, 2009 20:21:41 GMT -5
Part of this seems to be attempting to build up his own mythos/brandname, but part of it also seems to be something pathological on his part. You defined mythos wrong. [/ironic nitpicking] The same goes for his sometimes companion Recap, a 2D fetishist who can give loving and tender care to neglected subjects like scanlines but who thinks 3D is the worst thing to ever happen and who constantly insults everyone he even remotely disagrees with (he was even recently banned from icy's forum for a while). Long time HG101 forum regulars should be familiar with Recap. He's also known for being a huge douche on Shmups.com's forums.
|
|
|
Post by Garamoth on Jun 18, 2009 20:34:23 GMT -5
I find Dais's post very informative, it always pays to know the man behind the legend, so to speak.
But... I just can't stop myself from quoting his crap! Urge... too hard to resist:
I always thought that deriding stuff without saying why is bad manners, but do I really need to bother?
|
|
|
Post by Dais on Jun 18, 2009 21:06:40 GMT -5
Part of this seems to be attempting to build up his own mythos/brandname, but part of it also seems to be something pathological on his part. You defined mythos wrong. [/ironic nitpicking] Oops, yeah. Lately my once passable grip on my vocabulary has begun to loosen.
|
|
|
Post by Garamoth on Jun 19, 2009 10:51:35 GMT -5
Ooooh yess! I got recognition! Shallow self-esteem +3! Well, "opinion" is saying a bit much... and where did I say anything about equal rights? I think he's getting his battles confused. Here's what I was referring to: That's hardly an opinion or an article: it's a mindless temper tantrum on his board with a bit of profanity added in. In other words, a rant. But I shan't judge the master anymore. The burden of genius weighs heavily upon him. Anyway, I'd love to keep the fire burning, but I don't think it's in this website's mission statement to start petty battles. Garmy the Monkey, over and out. PS: Being called a monkey was pretty sweet. Is anybody up for a poo-flinging contest? Although, I'm a bit disappointed with the Great Master... it's always either monkey or child these days. For someone who insults so many people on a daily basis, a little originality would really spice things up. How about "depraved coprolite" or "scraggish sycophant"? Ah well, I'm satisfied with monkey.
|
|