ItsJustJake

[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
I don't know that much about economics and markets. It's nearly impossible to lose money in CoH. . . if I was that smart I might be rich f'real.

[/ QUOTE ]
To be rich f'real you need to be smart and extremely driven. I'm far too lazy for that, unfortunately. I'm great at dropping buy/sell orders overnight and profiting when I'm not looking though!

[/ QUOTE ]

Well, glad I'm not alone in that boat.

[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
I just hate trying to build up my nest egg and seeing profit going *poof* because the game needs a money sink

[/ QUOTE ]
I just hate bad English.

Fees - Plural
Fee's - Possessive

Come on, this is 2nd grade stuff

[/ QUOTE ]

Fee's - Contraction of "Fee is". Not that that makes it make any more sense than your definition did...

[/ QUOTE ]

Ahh, our Tricky friend the Apostrophe.

[ QUOTE ]
It's not "more" seller-friendly.

It's just plain seller-friendly. Sellers in CoX can often expect to get far more currency than they list their items for. Sure, regular auctions can work that way too, but in an auction you know what the floor is as the buyer. In EVE you know exactly what you need to pay. In CoX, it's a guess. It's often an educated guess, but it's still a shot in the dark. As the buyer you can always overpay, because you don't know the list price.

That's not friendly to buyers, in my book anyway. It's friendly to sellers.

[/ QUOTE ]

Buyers can also Underpay. It's their choice to overpay if they want it "Now", as opposed to waiting for someone to sell it at the price they have set.

Buyers can bid low, and creep up at no cost. Sellers pay each time when they post an item, so they have to set it and forget it, or lose even more. If they fail to post a reasonable price, their item(s) could sit for a long time. That forces the seller to either do a little work, and find out what is 'reasonable', or to pick a number of their own and just put it up for that.

Split it with ya?

[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
what more do you want from me here?

[/ QUOTE ] Clearly, only your first born will suffice.

[/ QUOTE ]

They can't have L'il Tiny. She's Way Too Cute.

[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
If you make a statement, and try to validate that with an example, and your example is shown to be incorrect, then yes, it does - to many people - invalidate your whole argument

[/ QUOTE ]

[ QUOTE ]
Yes .. and that, to me, says that it COULD invalidate it, not that it automatically does. I should have made that clearer, and that was my mistake.

[/ QUOTE ]

Your statement indicates that the use of incorrect stats DOES invalidate the whole argument to many people, and based on your comments in this thread a reader could quite reasonably infer that you are one of those people.


[/ QUOTE ]

Your Point? I often DO decide on things just like that for those reasons, as do, I feel, many people. It was incorrect of me to word it the way I did, as I stated, but it invalidates that not at all.

You are just inferring far more into the staement then needs to be there. I'm not saying it happens all of the time, or with every person which is why I qualified it with "many people".

I already said "I should have made that clearer, and that was my mistake." - what more do you want from me here?

[ QUOTE ]
That's why I have Laser Beam Eyes.

[/ QUOTE ]

Must be heck on your monitor.

Started two, ran into crashing problems, have not finished them.

[ QUOTE ]
Yes .... "Smack my Niche Up"

[/ QUOTE ]

WINNER.

[ QUOTE ]
I just hate trying to build up my nest egg and seeing profit going *poof* because the game needs a money sink

[/ QUOTE ]

I'm sure you'd hate to see people Posting items for sale at Insane High Prices and nickel and diming their way down to the high bidder's price. Or maybe you wouldn't hate it - but it would still make bidders bid higher, effectively causing the seller to set the price, which they want to avoid.

[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
If you make a statement, and try to validate that with an example, and your example is shown to be incorrect, then yes, it does - to many people - invalidate your whole argument ..

[/ QUOTE ] This was what I was directly responding to. If that doesn't describe you, then I'm talking about you.

[/ QUOTE ]

Yes .. and that, to me, says that it COULD invalidate it, not that it automatically does. I should have made that clearer, and that was my mistake.

Curious about the pics, but I can't see them from work.

Meh. They are A neccesary ebil.

[ QUOTE ]
Saying his entire argument is invalid because he got Rush's numbers wrong is stupid.

[/ QUOTE ]

Then the stupid lies on your side, because I wasn't saying that.

I said it COULD invalidate what he was saying, not that it DID, and that accurate numbers make your argument more believeable than Invented ones.

Not once did I say "his entire argument is invalid because he got Rush's numbers wrong". You, and I guess he READ that into it - but that's the Reader's Fault for adding unstated information.

Have a Pleasant day, try to cheer up a bit, and stop tossing terms like "Stupid" around like you do. It has no impact on me, but just shows your lack of understanding. Translation, since you seem to need it: "I'm Rubber, You're Glue".

[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
Logic and facts are always the issue. If you make a statement, and try to validate that with an example, and your example is shown to be incorrect, then yes, it does - to many people - invalidate your whole argument .. especially if you try to stick to your guns and maintain your position, facts or no.

The fact is that you didn't know something, so you made up some numbers. If you did it with Rush's statistics, you could be doing that with ANY numbers that you put up, thereby potentially invalidating anything you say.

You don't 'get' that, this much is pretty clear. I'm certainly not trying to argue that you should. Just trying to point out why people are responding as they are.

You: "A is B because C."
Them: "C isn't true, so B might not be A."
You: "Stop harping on C, it was just an example!"

[/ QUOTE ] No, the issue very clearly is some people don't like him, so you and others will pick apart any little thing. Don't be stupid, his point about Rush being successful is just as correct if he had 14 million listeners or 14 billion listeners.

[/ QUOTE ]

I have no personal bias against the man, not do I know him enough to hold a grudge. And I'm certainly not "Stupid", thanks for adding the insult where it's not needed.

Want, Can't afford. Next Thread?

[ QUOTE ]
You did the Deed That Dare Not Speak Its Name, I guess.

[/ QUOTE ]

WhotheWhatnow?

Logic and facts are always the issue. If you make a statement, and try to validate that with an example, and your example is shown to be incorrect, then yes, it does - to many people - invalidate your whole argument .. especially if you try to stick to your guns and maintain your position, facts or no.

The fact is that you didn't know something, so you made up some numbers. If you did it with Rush's statistics, you could be doing that with ANY numbers that you put up, thereby potentially invalidating anything you say.

You don't 'get' that, this much is pretty clear. I'm certainly not trying to argue that you should. Just trying to point out why people are responding as they are.

You: "A is B because C."
Them: "C isn't true, so B might not be A."
You: "Stop harping on C, it was just an example!"

It never damages me - but I do see it damage foes now and then. It's especially easy to see In Atlas or Perez .. just walk into a group and see 1 or 2 faint just on the sight of you.

Mine was good for 60 million the other day. I could have held out for more, but that was enough for me. ;-)

And my point - which he also continuously ignores - is that regardless of how accurate his point is (Yes, Rush is very popular and Successful), he brings the believability of his statement down by using invalid numbers.

That just leads me (and possibly others) to discredit his entire statement, once we see that part of it was a Falsehood - regardless of how factual the other data was.

My Meaningless Analogy:

"Here is the Worlds Tastiest Cookie Recipe. The final ingredient is 1/2 cup of Fresh Cat poop."

"There's no WAY that recipe tastes good, adding Poop to it can't make it taste better"

"Stop arguing about the ingredients! It's the Recipe that matters!".

At least, that's how I see the discussion. If he wants to use numers as an example, then they should be real - or when called on them just say "Oops, my bad - here are the right numbers".

[ QUOTE ]
Hey_Tiny: I like the idea of Chance for Psi Damage in Invince ... I might have to try and squeeze that in thanks!

[/ QUOTE ]

Keep in mind - It might not be slottable in it anymore. They did remove Taunt sets from Invinc ... But I was still able to slot it in a few months ago, and have not tried to slot it since ... so I'm not sure if they have ever fixed it.

I feel bad when I play my Peacebringer, too. But I know how to use my knockback .. knock things toward the Tanker if possible, or just away from a Squishie. I use my 'nuke' when almost everything damaged already, so I'm just knocking away the bodies.

When I'm on as my Earth, Ice or Inv tanks, I WANT crowds around me. When half or more get blown away it just makes things feel like they make fights last longer, not shorter. That to me is 'Less Fun'.

I won't insult the player though. I might ask if they could try knocking things toward me, but if they aren't receptive to that, I'll just leave after the mission with no Fuss. The same if they complain about my KB on my Peacebringer. I'd just much rather find a new team, and not deal with any Drama.

You can use my base if you like .. we created the SG long ago, but almost all the members are inactive now. I just keep it out of Nostalgia.

You can have your own section if you want. ;-)

SG Name is Last Line of Defense in game I'm @HeyTiny

[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
Yes, his numbers are impressive .. But overstating his rating numbers to make your point does not validate your argument - in fact, that you exaggerate them (whether intentionally or not) shows us the opposite - that you are either not paying attention to the actual 'numbers', or that you are twisting them for your purposes.


[/ QUOTE ]

Thats insane. I mean completely bonkers.

[/ QUOTE ]

The fact that you think that just proves my point further. Thanks.