Welcome to the Forum Archive!

Years of conversation fill a ton of digital pages, and we've kept all of it accessible to browse or copy over. Whether you're looking for reveal articles for older champions, or the first time that Rammus rolled into an "OK" thread, or anything in between, you can find it here. When you're finished, check out the boards to join in the latest League of Legends discussions.

GO TO BOARDS


@Community; You guys are rusty at persuasion and social politics.

123
Comment below rating threshold, click here to show it.

AdorableSatan

Senior Member

07-29-2010

My stance is that your post contains excessive use of the word "stance".

Quote:
Oneironaut:
question your stances


Quote:
Oneironaut:
are their stances


Quote:
Oneironaut:
voicing the stances


Quote:
Oneironaut:
in your stance


Quote:
Oneironaut:
have any stance


Quote:
Oneironaut:
If your stance


Quote:
Oneironaut:
dominant in your stance


Quote:
Oneironaut:
thinking you are dominant in your stance.


Quote:
Oneironaut:
flaws to my stance


Quote:
Oneironaut:
good enough stance


I believe that you should have used the word "opinion" instead of "stance" because:1) It sounds and reads much nicer; and 2) "Opinion" was used in the beginning thus causing you to use both which is essentially pointless.

As to the point you were making, I don't think it matters how one constructs ones post. It's all about what's popular. Whether ones opinion or observations are correct is irrelevant. Whether one backs their opinion or observations up with statistics, numbers, or facts is irrelevant. It's all about what's popular among the community, a majority of which don't care about anything intelligent or solid. A majority of the community acts out of instinct and impulse, not fact. What people want to see is quick action as a result of a very demanding and forceful post, not a slow, quiet, corporate-like diplomacy. Not saying that what the majority wants is the best way, but from what I've observed it seems as if that's the way people want it. Hard and fast.

Additionally, if we somehow made it to the point where issues were discussed civilly and intelligently, it would more than likely be nothing more than people who are good with words and reason trying to outsmart each other in order to massage their egos and make their ePeens grow.


Comment below rating threshold, click here to show it.

CTHDRL

Senior Member

07-29-2010

Quote:
AdorableSatan:
My stance is that your post contains excessive use of the word "stance".



I believe that you should have used the word "opinion" instead of "stance" because:1) It sounds and reads much nicer; and 2) "Opinion" was used in the beginning thus causing you to use both which is essentially pointless.

As to the point you were making, I don't think it matters how one constructs ones post. It's all about what's popular. Whether ones opinion or observations are correct is irrelevant. Whether one backs their opinion or observations up with statistics, numbers, or facts is irrelevant. It's all about what's popular among the community, a majority of which don't care about anything intelligent or solid. A majority of the community acts out of instinct and impulse, not fact. What people want to see is quick action as a result of a very demanding and forceful post, not a slow, quiet, corporate-like diplomacy. Not saying that what the majority wants is the best way, but from what I've observed it seems as if that's the way people want it. Hard and fast.

Additionally, if we somehow made it to the point where issues were discussed civilly and intelligently, it would more than likely be nothing more than people who are good with words and reason trying to outsmart each other in order to massage their egos and make their ePeens grow.



Perhaps you are correct.

But if something is broken and people make no move to repair it; then nothing is really gained now is it?

You may very well be accurate but I'm sure if persistent, setting higher standards would be advantageous for all of us forum-goers.


Comment below rating threshold, click here to show it.

Miltrivd

Senior Member

07-29-2010

I have to congratulate you, very good post. In my opinion it is a waste of time, because what you are trying to point out is learnt from childhood, but it is a very nice try. It was a good read, not to expected from this forums. A good change.

What you said about making bad written post stay negatively in people's minds is so true. I remember so far just 1 post about baning foreign countries' IPs, in which the OP even changed his stance due all the discussion it generated and a good proposition grew from that post. After that, about 10 more posts (bad ones) came saying the same in a QQish fashion, making the good idea, in the end, dissappear.

Anyway, good try, and keep that spirit.


Comment below rating threshold, click here to show it.

ZenithZephyr

Senior Member

07-29-2010

Quote:
Oneironaut:
  • Source-able authority. Riot is more likely to listen to a person who is qualified to criticize the dilemma in question. Even if you and the head of marketing at Blizzard were say the exact same thing about Riot's business model; by default they will listen more attentively (regardless as to whether or not Riot agrees with Blizzard or you; Blizzard might have a poor business model for all I know, it is simply an example) to the Bliz guy simply because he has credibility.


This is probably why I didn't read much further than this paragraph.


123