So now that i got banned

Comment below rating threshold, click here to show it.

Cyklon Kra X

Member

01-22-2010

Quote:
Originally Posted by Failsause View Post
Keep at it Mr. Pendragon, wield your ban hammer well.

gg


Comment below rating threshold, click here to show it.

sqwishy

Member

01-22-2010

Quote:
Originally Posted by Maugrim Faustus View Post
Of course new ones keep appearing. Do you think Riot made a game so just a few people could enjoy it? ... the fact that they ignore it sucks, but there's a gray area between 'stop feeding them, that's stupid' and 'you're a ****ing idiot'. Things that lean towards the latter serve the same purpose as the former, except you're being a ****** about it.
Right, I wasn't stating the obvious because it was obvious, I was stating the obvious because it invalidates your point. And if noobs ignore advice and it pisses off the rest of the team, name calling should be expected. People need to vent their frustration. It's like complaining, you can't really say "stop complaining" and expect it to go away. Complaining accomplishes something for the complainer.


Quote:
Originally Posted by Maugrim Faustus View Post
Who says it needs to be a good and just decision?
Oh gee, I don't know... rational thought? I suppose if you want to argue ethics you can but I'm not sure you'll get much support having the stance that mankind should suffer for no good reason whatsoever.

Quote:
Originally Posted by Maugrim Faustus View Post
The Moderating Team sees fit to give Pendragon the power to do this and i have doubts that it's because he's prone to abuse of power. One ban doesn't constitute abuse of power.
Yes. I don't think people hand out mod status on the basis that they will abuse it. Very good point. Your contributions to this discussion are beyond compare. I think he is a developer in some way or something. But if you claim that having been given authority and having the ability and will to abuse it are mutually exclusive, I suggest you go read a god **** book. Maybe a book about history. Or grow two brain cells.

Quote:
Originally Posted by Maugrim Faustus View Post
As a secondary point, having a userbase of ******bags ruins the game for everyone, so banning one because he's clearly acting like a ****, then posts a butthurt thread about it crying 'cheating' and 'abuse of power' and hiding behind 'well it couldn't possibly be Pendragon' is stupid. Surprisingly enough, there are consequences for actions.
Yeah that's not a run-on (or at least poorly constructed) sentence or anything. Just because there are consequences for actions doesn't solely justify a consequence.

Quote:
Originally Posted by Maugrim Faustus View Post
People respond to different learning cues, and negative intensives breed hostility.
I see nothing wrong with this.

Quote:
Originally Posted by Maugrim Faustus View Post
You can achieve the same thing without the hostility, without acting out because you're mad about a single game that bears little impact on your larger score.
I don't think score has much to do with it. I think it has more to do with the stupid newbie ruining a game, lasting 30-60 minutes, for one or more people.

Quote:
Originally Posted by Maugrim Faustus View Post
Now, you're defense of acting like a **** is 'grow a pair' and that 'it's a learning mechanism'. ...we all know that that cry is another excuse to rage on people to make yourself feel better/superior.
My defense to attacks saying that name calling is too harsh is, put simply, "grow a pair". I don't think name calling makes the individual doing the name calling feel superior, I think they feel like that before, that's why they feel they have merit for name calling. And of course it makes them feel better, it's like complaining. But that doesn't make it wrong.

Quote:
Originally Posted by Maugrim Faustus View Post
The question is: Is it necessary? **** no. The consequences of people doing ****ty things is ****ty things happening to them. Generally speaking, it's a loss for the profile. As we've seen, it could be a ban. You will never get someone to do what you want by acting like a raging **** towards them.
People do unnecessary stuff all the time. If you're arguing that name calling results in consequences (such as banning) therefore consequences (such as banning) are proper and deserved, that's circular [insert name calling here]. And now you're arguing against the well established fact that negative intensives are a means for behavior modification?

Quote:
Originally Posted by Maugrim Faustus View Post
All you do is make them hostile towards you, which encourages them to continue whatever ******ed things they're doing. Growing a pair also includes - patience for people who don't know how to play the game properly, recognizing that you're acting like a ****** and stopping and taking your losses as they come and finding a better way of dealing with the situation.
I realize that they become more hostile, they realize they've done something wrong, they're embarrassed and don't have the nuts to suck it up. I could spent the first 15 minutes giving tips to the newb that I lane with, only to countlessly watch him die 10 seconds after I tell him to go back because he just stood there like a bloody idiot. And then I could just suffer for 45 minutes as their fed tyrn and twitch ravages our entire team because they are super duper fed! But it is more profitable for me if I take my rage out on the individual who's stupidity brought this upon us. In a lot of cases I will wait till after they first refuse to surrender before I starting flaming. Seriously there are so many ****ing games where we will have one or more feeders, we will have taken one or no towers and they're already up to the steps of our fortress. Loss is inevitable but the ****ing idiots won't ****ing surrender! Often I'll hear them give "I don't surrender" as a reason for why they won't surrender. And I'm the one "acting like a ******".

Quote:
Originally Posted by Maugrim Faustus View Post
It's naive to believe that people don't deliberately aggravate others for their own enjoyment. You can hide it behind 'learning mechanisms', but how often do you see results from your negative intensives?
Yeah I don't see results in a 25-60 minute game, therefore, there are no results. ****ing brilliant dude.

Quote:
Originally Posted by Maugrim Faustus View Post
I've already said that sylvio is acting butthurt by posting a poorly written thread complaining of perceived injustice.
Quote:
Originally Posted by Maugrim Faustus View Post
The reaction wasn't immature, it was justified. You mouth off to authority and there are consequences.
Yeah, peasants can fight amongst themselves but if they get too close to royalty they will have their head's chopped off because ... you know ... authority! **** yeah! Screw equality and fairness! I wonder if pendragon's eldest son will get mod status when pendragon dies?

Quote:
Originally Posted by Maugrim Faustus View Post
It is, as they say, a negative intensive.
lol ... "intensive".

Quote:
Originally Posted by Maugrim Faustus View Post
At one point, racism was a social norm. At one point, slavery was the social norm.
Right, foot-binding etc. But really that's not the only defense. And those mentioned examples had little rational support.


Quote:
Originally Posted by Maugrim Faustus View Post
The truly butthurt are those who deliberately Alt+F4 out of a game, or refuse to play because they they see others performing poorly.
Well yes when I stop playing in the middle a game I am quite butthurt. Our noob is feeding them and loss is inevitable. I stop playing because it will speed up the game and hasten their victory. I fail to see how that is relevant.

Quote:
Originally Posted by Maugrim Faustus View Post
If you're playing solo, it's luck of the draw for your team, and you have to accept that that's the case.
So if I play solo I'm pretty much asking for noobs who ignore advice because they've lodged sticks up their arses and I shouldn't be infuritaed when they ruin 25-60 minutes of my leisure time.


Comment below rating threshold, click here to show it.

doughnut

This user has referred a friend to League of Legends, click for more information

Senior Member

01-22-2010

Wall-o-text. Did not read.

You obviously have a very firm opinion. We have very firm opinions too.

/thread


Comment below rating threshold, click here to show it.

sqwishy

Member

01-22-2010

Quote:
Originally Posted by doughnut View Post
Wall-o-text. Did not read.
You obviously have a very firm opinion. We have very firm opinions too.
You're too lazy to be reasonable so you fallback on the everything-is-an-opinion-there-is-no-truth-everyone-is-correct kind of response? Thought is hard, lets go shopping!


Comment below rating threshold, click here to show it.

Maugrim Faustus

Senior Member

01-22-2010

[QUOTE=sqwishy;555076]Right, I wasn't stating the obvious because it was obvious, I was stating the obvious because it invalidates your point. And if noobs ignore advice and it pisses off the rest of the team, name calling should be expected. People need to vent their frustration. It's like complaining, you can't really say "stop complaining" and expect it to go away. Complaining accomplishes something for the complainer.

Look, the mindset I'm operating with is "People left DotA because the userbase was *******s. Why the **** would you have the same thing happen here?" We're both essentially doing the same thing - you're finding excuses to be abusive because you enjoy it, and I'm finding reasons why that's a ****ty thing to do. Unfortunately, Captain Ethics, you overlook the harm involved in this harassment because harassing pleases you. You're immersed in a world where name calling and *******ry isn't just accepted, it's actively encouraged in certain situations.


Quote:
Oh gee, I don't know... rational thought? I suppose if you want to argue ethics you can but I'm not sure you'll get much support having the stance that mankind should suffer for no good reason whatsoever.
I'm just going to say that you're blowing this out of proportion. Look at it this way: You're playing a game. If a member of the opposing team identifies himself as administration and your first reaction is to start verbally harassing them, It doesn't matter what the justification for it is, that was the wrong thing to do. Don't twist my words and assume that you need to suck up to them - it doesn't matter who you play against. You're equating the banning of a ****** with the suffering of mankind as a whole. Next, you'll start sayign

First they came for the ******bags, but I did not speak out
Because I was not a ******
Then they came for the feeders, but I did not speak out
Because I was not a feeder
Then they came for the noobs, but I did not speak out
Because I was not a noob
Then they came for me -
And there was no one left to speak out for me

Do you see how ******ed that stance is?

Quote:
Yes. I don't think people hand out mod status on the basis that they will abuse it. Very good point. Your contributions to this discussion are beyond compare. I think he is a developer in some way or something. But if you claim that having been given authority and having the ability and will to abuse it are mutually exclusive, I suggest you go read a god **** book. Maybe a book about history. Or grow two brain cells.
I never said power and the will to abuse it are mutually exclusive. You are equating a single, justifiable ban with abuse of power as a larger whole. It's not. He got what he deserved. It's not a matter of "he didn't suck up to the tyrant, so he got banned", it's a matter of "he acted inappropriately, so he got banned". How is that abuse?


Quote:
Yeah that's not a run-on (or at least poorly constructed) sentence or anything. Just because there are consequences for actions doesn't solely justify a consequence.
You're ignoring the point and deflecting attention with an ad hominem approach. MY grammar is irrelevant to my point, and my point is still clear. Having a userbase full of ******bags is a ****ty thing. You're complaining about a guy acting like a **** being banned for it. I still don't see what's wrong with this.

Quote:
I see nothing wrong with this.
Because more often than not, it's trolling. If you're trying to get someone to stop doing something, or to do what you say, making them hostile is a stupid way of going about it.

Quote:
I don't think score has much to do with it. I think it has more to do with the stupid newbie ruining a game, lasting 30-60 minutes, for one or more people.
Grow a pair. It's a single game. Not every single one is going to be great.

Quote:
My defense to attacks saying that name calling is too harsh is, put simply, "grow a pair". I don't think name calling makes the individual doing the name calling feel superior, I think they feel like that before, that's why they feel they have merit for name calling. And of course it makes them feel better, it's like complaining. But that doesn't make it wrong.
No, that's why they do it. By putting someone else down, you attempt to bring yourself up. This is how things operate. This is why bullies do what they do. There is no justification for acting like a ****. If you want to feel better, get with a better team. If you choose to play with randoms, you'll have to accept that random means a random point on a scale of good to bad, and there's no getting around that, unless you teach people who play poorly to play defensively.

Quote:
People do unnecessary stuff all the time. If you're arguing that name calling results in consequences (such as banning) therefore consequences (such as banning) are proper and deserved, that's circular [insert name calling here]. And now you're arguing against the well established fact that negative intensives are a means for behavior modification?
It's not circular logic. The presupposition is that name-calling is not appropriate behavior, therefore punishments are required for it. Some are more extreme than others, depending on who's involved. It's justified because it ends up with the greater good - less *******s playing.

I'm not arguing that negative intensives are a means for behavior modification, I'm arguing that they're not as effective as you say they are, and I've listed the reasons why already. They are, as you seem to gloss over, one of many ways that people learn. People respond positively to positive stimulation and negatively to negative stimulation. Why aren't you encouraging people with 'gj' or 'nice one' or 'you did pretty good with what you had available'? Why, instead, is it better to say 'you ****ing suck'? Which do you think will be more effective in improving the game?


Quote:
I realize that they become more hostile, they realizae they've done something wrong, they're embarrassed and don't have the nuts to suck it up. I could spent the first 15 minutes giving tips to the newb that I lane with, only to countlessly watch him die 10 seconds after I tell him to go back because he just stood there like a bloody idiot. And then I could just suffer for 45 minutes as their fed tyrn and twitch ravages our entire team because they are super duper fed! But it is more profitable for me if I take my rage out on the individual who's stupidity brought this upon us. In a lot of cases I will wait till after they first refuse to surrender before I starting flaming. Seriously there are so many ****ing games where we will have one or more feeders, we will have taken one or no towers and they're already up to the steps of our fortress. Loss is inevitable but the ****ing idiots won't ****ing surrender! Often I'll hear them give "I don't surrender" as a reason for why they won't surrender. And I'm the one "acting like a ******".
You assume that nobody will listen. I'm assuming, from this, that you've never really done this. Why wouldn't you instruct your teammate in some strategy? That's just begging for a situation like that to happen. Even moderately fed opponents can be overcome with good teamwork and good strategy. I've won a few games because of that. I'll agree with you, though, that those who don't listen and play poorly give the other team an unfair advantage and it sucks to be on the losing team because of that. Have you ever calmly and rationally explained why they should surrender? You'd be surprised at how many people listen to reason, especially when you can provide examples from the game you're playing. This assumes that you have at least 2 proud players who refuse to surrender when the game is clearly lost. You lose your head and harass them about it. Do you think they'll agree to surrender then? They won't, because you're acting like just as much of a ****** as they are.

Quote:
Yeah I don't see results in a 25-60 minute game, therefore, there are no results. ****ing brilliant dude.
This is how you prove things. Collect evidence, link it with analysis, present it. You're invalidating the second step and assuming that it proves itself. This isn't how things work.



Quote:
Yeah, peasants can fight amongst themselves but if they get too close to royalty they will have their head's chopped off because ... you know ... authority! **** yeah! Screw equality and fairness! I wonder if pendragon's eldest son will get mod status when pendragon dies?
Your strawman tactics aren't the case here. You can't set up a dummy who matches your exaggerated points to beat down and assume it proves anything. You're not talking about the situation or what it represents, you're dealing with your own presupposed abstracts. For the record, no ruler wants peasants to fight amongst themselves, they want them to work and be profitable. Killing them doesn't accomplish this. Moderating is by no means royalty, and drawing these parallels confuses the issue, because you're presenting red herrings.

And now you're arguing fairness. Listen, there are three points on the power scale here. At the bottom are the noobs, because they have no knowledge (of the game) and no power. Next comes the vets, people who don't have the power, but they have the knowledge. Finally, the mods, who have both knowledge of the game and power over other players. It's not fair when you, who has knowledge of the game, refuses to share it ("I could spent the first 15 minutes giving tips to the newb" strongly implies you don't) and then proceeds to bash the noob with no knowledge for not having it and for being new. You justify this with 'it's a learning mechanism'. Where is the equality here? Where is the fairness? When someone else, in this case the mods, does the same thing to you (uses something you don't have against you), and you cry about it, but you conveniently ignore the fact that you do the same all the time. This is hypocrisy at it's finest.

Quote:
lol ... "intensive".
I know what you're talking about, but I won't lie, I've forgotten the exact terminology. Again, making fun of unrelated ignorance doesn't prove your point; you're attempting to make yourself look better by embarassing your opponent. It's called an ad hominem approach, where you don't attack the arguments, you attack the person. It can work in some debates, but please realize that it doesn't prove anything. You can still be wrong and win a debate by undermining the other side. How do you think politicians get elected?

If you want to prove something, argue the facts, not the person (unless they have a PhD in Truthology from Christian Tech).

Quote:
Right, foot-binding etc. But really that's not the only defense. And those mentioned examples had little rational support.
This has little rational support, and you still tried to use this as a defense and don't admit that it isn't one. I can list other social norms that were accepted by the people and argued ferociously for. How about human sacrifice in the Aztec society (we must appease the gods!)? How about witch burning in the middle ages (burn the witch to ensure the safety of our town!)? They have little rational support to our perspective, but to the people doing these things, it was perfectly rational. We cut out a slaves heart to appease the gods and bring us favour. We burn the witch because she'll destroy our community. We make fun of newbies without explaining why because it teaches them. All of these groups blind themselves to any other perspective, assuming only that what they do is right. Probably because 'Hey, everyone else does it.'


Quote:
Well yes when I stop playing in the middle a game I am quite butthurt. Our noob is feeding them and loss is inevitable. I stop playing because it will speed up the game and hasten their victory. I fail to see how that is relevant.
You could play. As long as it's one, maybe two champs that are fed a little better than the rest, good teamwork can still win the game. I don't have much experience, but I've seen it happen before. Anecdotal evidence doesn't, of course, prove anything, but I've won 2 games now that I should have lost because either myself or someone else unintentionally fed a much more skilled opponent. The rest of my team came together - we ganked the weakest ones as much as we could, we pushed where their champs weren't to draw them away, taking a tower and sometimes a weaker champ in the process. We jungled like madmen until we had the items we needed and our advantage until the tables were turned. Their team had someone who hit 18 much mroe quickly than anyone else (It wasn't for another 10 minutes until anyone on my team hit 18), but we still won in spite of the feeding.

If you quit, you ensure your own loss. If you band together, you can still win.

Now, I'm not saying that every situation is winnable, because not all teams can work together, which means those early advantages your opponents get are exploited even more for not being combatted effectively, and surrender is sometimes the best option when it's clear you're outclassed. Anyone who doesn't do this is foolish. The best thing to do here is type 'gg' and grab a book, or alt-tab into something else for the next 10 minutes until your game is done, or explain to those who won't surrender that there's no point in continuing playing.

Quote:
So if I play solo I'm pretty much asking for noobs who ignore advice because they've lodged sticks up their arses and I shouldn't be infuritaed when they ruin 25-60 minutes of my leisure time.
Yep. Believe it or not, you are no more or less important than they are. Why is your leisure time more valuable than theirs? You can be mad that you lost, but that's because you're not playing to win the right way. Teamwork, mon ami, and teamwork doesn't work with constant infighting, such as namecalling and ******baggery.


Comment below rating threshold, click here to show it.

Ak47

This user has referred a friend to League of Legends, click for more information

Senior Member

01-23-2010

Quote:
Originally Posted by Adonis View Post
So you cussed out and made fun of the 1 guy who has unchecked authority to ban anyone at will? good job. your judgment is impeccable.
I'm sure there is more than 1.


Comment below rating threshold, click here to show it.

sqwishy

Member

01-23-2010

Quote:
Originally Posted by Maugrim Faustus View Post
We're both essentially doing the same thing - you're finding excuses to be abusive because you enjoy it, and I'm finding reasons why that's a ****ty thing to do. Unfortunately, Captain Ethics, you overlook the harm involved in this harassment because harassing pleases you. You're immersed in a world where name calling and *******ry isn't just accepted, it's actively encouraged in certain situations.
We're both essentially doing the same thing - you're finding excuses for why people should be stupid, and I'm finding reasons why stupid people ruining the game is a ****ty thing to do. Unfortunately, Captain Ethics, you overlook the harm involved in this tolerance of stubborn newbs because pretending you're doing the universe a favour pleases you.


Quote:
Originally Posted by Maugrim Faustus View Post
If a member of the opposing team identifies himself as administration and your first reaction is to start verbally harassing them, It doesn't matter what the justification for it is, that was the wrong thing to do.
The "offending" individual was challenging the authority of the other individual who claimed to be pendragon because the former individual doubted that the latter individual was telling the truth. So you are building a strawman by looking at the situation from the wrong perceptive. If your paragraph was accurate you would read something more like. "If a member of the opposing team was lying your first reaction is to start verbally harassing them, It doesn't matter what the justification for it is, that was the wrong thing to do."

Quote:
Originally Posted by Maugrim Faustus View Post
Next, you'll start sayign

First they came for the ******bags, but I did not speak out
Because I was not a ******
Then they came for the feeders, but I did not speak out
Because I was not a feeder
Then they came for the noobs, but I did not speak out
Because I was not a noob
Then they came for me -
And there was no one left to speak out for me

Do you see how ******ed that stance is?
Ok you just went from kitty-is-equal-to-bowling-ball without explaining how you got there. Honestly, that isn't an analogy or anything. Who is "they"? What the **** are you talking about?

Quote:
Originally Posted by Maugrim Faustus View Post
I never said power and the will to abuse it are mutually exclusive.
Your dumb ass said that they wouldn't give pendragon mod on the basis that he was going to make poor decisions, therefore, he wasn't going to make poor decisions. If your conclusion wasn't that he was going to make poor decisions then your statement was meaningless spam. You never really stated how you got to your conclusion from the premise. So, if it isn't that the two properties (having power and being able to abuse it) are not mutually exclusive, it would be beneficial to your argument to explain the logical connection between your conclusion and your premise.

Quote:
Originally Posted by Maugrim Faustus View Post
You are equating a single, justifiable ban with abuse of power as a larger whole.
A larger whole? What the **** is that? Are you kidding me? So abusing one's power isn't "abuse of power" unless it's on a larger magnitude? Until then it is morally just? Are you even reading what you are writing?

Quote:
Originally Posted by Maugrim Faustus View Post
...it's a matter of "he acted inappropriately, so he got banned". How is that abuse?
What is considered inappropriate is dependent on the context and given OP's case and the LoL community I think it was a short sighted decision on the part of pendragon. He is basically banning someone because it appeared they were being malicious for the sake of being malicious. Whereas the the actual motive would have been that the individual offending pendragon was under the impression that the individual who claimed to be pendragon wasn't really pendragon.


Quote:
Originally Posted by Maugrim Faustus View Post
You're ignoring the point and deflecting attention with an ad hominem approach. MY grammar is irrelevant to my point, and my point is still clear. Having a userbase full of ******bags is a ****ty thing. You're complaining about a guy acting like a **** being banned for it. I still don't see what's wrong with this.
No I was pointing out that the poorly constructed sentence was annoying. That wasn't my argument. Your argument was that OP was stupid for complaining about pendragon's decision because "Surprisingly enough, there are consequences for actions". Firstly, justifying a consequence for OP's action by saying there are consequences for actions is circular. Second, It doesn't actually justify it. Like it doesn't mean that every consequences is just, fair, and well-placed. So it's still possible that in this instance pendragon was being unjust and he shouldn't have banned OP.

Quote:
Originally Posted by Maugrim Faustus View Post
Because more often than not, it's trolling. If you're trying to get someone to stop doing something, or to do what you say, making them hostile is a stupid way of going about it.
Why is it stupid? Because it hurts your feelings? Negative insensitive are bad because they hurt?

Quote:
Originally Posted by Maugrim Faustus View Post
Grow a pair. It's a single game. Not every single one is going to be great.
That's like using the excuse that "life is not fair" to make life unfair. I really hope that someone with sense will read this and understand what I'm going through, this is like talking to ... this is unbelievable.

Quote:
Originally Posted by Maugrim Faustus View Post
No, that's why they do it. By putting someone else down, you attempt to bring yourself up. This is how things operate.
That's essentially what complaining is, and lawsuits, repercussions. Three examples of things that operate on the same principle that operate. Therefore, that is how things operate.

Quote:
Originally Posted by Maugrim Faustus View Post
This is why bullies do what they do. There is no justification for acting like a ****.
Is sending people to jail "acting like a ****"? Is banning people "acting like a ****"? You should have a valid explanation for how you came to the conclusion that OP was a ***** and pendragon wasn't.

Quote:
Originally Posted by Maugrim Faustus View Post
If you want to feel better, get with a better team. If you choose to play with randoms, you'll have to accept that random means a random point on a scale of good to bad, and there's no getting around that, unless you teach people who play poorly to play defensively.
omfg! I accept that sometimes I will be on the losing team! As long as the ****ers that don't listen to advice and feed and cause our doom will accept that they will be the butt of the insults!

Quote:
Originally Posted by Maugrim Faustus View Post
It's not circular logic.
Read what I wrote. Read what you wrote. You said "The consequences of people doing ****ty things is ****ty things happening to them". So you were trying to justify consequences by saying that consequences occur.

Quote:
Originally Posted by Maugrim Faustus View Post
Why aren't you encouraging people with 'gj' or 'nice one' or 'you did pretty good with what you had available'?
I do, when they don't feed. But the problem isn't that they aren't feeding, the problem is that they do feed. The problem is that they do stupid things, and when the more experienced players give them advice they ignore it and cause the downfall of our team. I am not going to give a positive incentive to bad ****ing behavior.

Quote:
Originally Posted by Maugrim Faustus View Post
Why, instead, is it better to say 'you ****ing suck'? Which do you think will be more effective in improving the game?
Sometimes I do say "gj" or "nice one", when they do some jackass maneuver and get everyone killed. But that's sarcasm due to the nature of the situation. If they do bad thing and they know it was a stupid decision, any sort of positive response will be taken as sarcasm. Please for the love of everything _think_ before you offer solutions.

Quote:
Originally Posted by Maugrim Faustus View Post
You assume that nobody will listen. I'm assuming, from this, that you've never really done this.
WTF? Did you even read the thread? http://www.leagueoflegends.com/board...e=2#post553353 I didn't assume nobody would listen I have done this countless times and seen the same thing. And dumbass people in the same game, who think they're the manifestation of everything "good" and need to make peace in the world, will even attack me, because I'm flaming the noob, saying that I should have given him tips. So much ignorance!

Quote:
Originally Posted by Maugrim Faustus View Post
You'd be surprised at how many people listen to reason...
Seriously? On the internet? You're ****ing kidding me, right?


Quote:
Originally Posted by Maugrim Faustus View Post
This is how you prove things. Collect evidence, link it with analysis, present it. You're invalidating the second step and assuming that it proves itself. This isn't how things work.
Yes but you have a limited sample size. Negative incentives must be repeated over a long period of time for behavior modification. Not in a 25-60 minute game.

Quote:
Originally Posted by Maugrim Faustus View Post
Your strawman tactics aren't the case here. ... You're not talking about the situation or what it represents, you're dealing with your own presupposed abstracts.
But you said "You mouth off to authority and there are consequences". As if to justify consequences of mouthing off to authority. Which is where my peasant royalty analogy became relevant.

Quote:
Originally Posted by Maugrim Faustus View Post
I know what you're talking about...
I wasn't connecting this to any part of my argument. I just wanted to lol at it. It's not like, I'm right because here he used the wrong word. In politics when they attack their opponents using this sort of thing a connection is drawn to indicate that a particular idea is flawed because of a particular personality trait or some unrelated thing he had done. But whatever, you had some merit in your observation.

Quote:
Originally Posted by Maugrim Faustus View Post
How about human sacrifice in the Aztec society (we must appease the gods!)?
Can you argue that their culture is inferior to yours? If you can, can you argue that a culture of name-calling is inferior to whatever you think the culture should be like? Usually it's considered bad to walk into some other culture and change it as how you see fit. So mods banning random people for culturally accepted behavior would be, basically, the same thing as they are forcing their perception of reality onto others. That was why I considered the norm to be relevant.



Quote:
Originally Posted by Maugrim Faustus View Post
You could play. As long as it's one, maybe two champs that are fed a little better than the rest, good teamwork can still win the game. I don't have much experience, but I've seen it happen before.
There are some games that are doomed before a comeback can happen. There are some cases when sitting out is foolish. You mentioned hitting level 18, I believe it is extremely important for a comeback. But if you haven't hit it by a certain point, failure is, in most cases, certain. Without actual instances for examples there is no point in continuing this tangent since there isn't a good way to decide when it is right and wrong to give up. And, as previously stated, I still fail to see the relevance of this particular matter.

Quote:
Originally Posted by Maugrim Faustus View Post
The best thing to do here is type 'gg' and grab a book, or alt-tab into something else for the next 10 minutes until your game is done, or explain to those who won't surrender that there's no point in continuing playing.
For the former, inactivity will result in you being disconnected and the game will count as a loss. For the latter, have you actually tried that? For me, that works only a very small fraction of the time. I said this before last post. "Often I'll hear them give "I don't surrender" as a reason for why they won't surrender."


Quote:
Originally Posted by Maugrim Faustus View Post
Believe it or not, you are no more or less important than they are. ... Why is your leisure time more valuable than theirs?
How do you know? Honestly I think that's one of the more odd things I've heard here. Building upon your reality, why don't you equally distribute the time you have to live serving the needs of others. You should get about 0.3454 second per person. If you don't, you're being unfair. I think I will be unfair as well.


Comment below rating threshold, click here to show it.

dorimus

Junior Member

01-27-2010

yeah after reading all these post I was at 1st feeling this was over use of power. Now that I know this sqwishy guy i'm glad your gone. Instead of taking this issue through the proper chains of command youve decided to grace us with your filth. Poor sportsmen ship brah, dont let the door hit your ass on the way out! later.


Comment below rating threshold, click here to show it.

clumbsythumbs

Junior Member

01-27-2010

i agree with silvio on a few things
1. quit spending time making skins when we can't even mic yet.....
2. if you are going to waste your 40 hour work week on skins, make skins for all the heroes and not a select few.....
3. balance the characters. several characters, like yi, are OP when poorly played
4. do we really need to ban players who curse? i thought that was a risk gamers accept when playing online. if you are trying to shelter children, don't. they have parents for that or have two sets of games. one for myself well you need to tell people where to stick their keyboard on occasion and another for the righteous and wholesome.....


Comment below rating threshold, click here to show it.

DeanKeaton259

This user has referred a friend to League of Legends, click for more information

Senior Member

01-27-2010

Quote:
Originally Posted by Failsause View Post
I wish Pendragon played more, there are a lot of foul mouthed trash talking idiots to ban. Sounds like this kid is pulling the old 'well i didn't want to be in your stupid club anyways' bit. Also, who really expects developers to be the best players out there? they have jobs :-P

Keep at it Mr. Pendragon, wield your ban hammer well.
I agree 100%. A bit of swearing or cursing is normal and acceptable during games. Everyone does it. Calling people out and defaming/disrespecting them endlessly is unacceptable. Most of the time it goes on unchecked. However, I'm sure Pendragon realizes that banning power is a very very harsh punishment under any circumstances.

This being said, I'm sure the OP was so flagrantly defaming Pendragon - literally begging to be banned. I applaud Pendragon for his actions.

The way I see it, he was just taking out the trash. And we all know that there's a large heap of garbage to be dealt with. :P

@Pendragon, I think you should consider adding bright red lettering to your name in the loading/champion select screens. This way, your authority would be unquestionably obvious. Just something to think about. =D