Rackir

[ QUOTE ]
some of our famous complainers will undoubtedly see this take over pvp and muo as the new reason we dont have everything already,

[/ QUOTE ]

I don't believe MUO is a valid concern anymore. Scroll down to the second article.

[ QUOTE ]

Confirmed. Females can use wings with the tuxes and males cannot.

[/ QUOTE ]

Okay, now I'm annoyed. Someone please fix this.

I am Henry the Eighth I am.

Very nice, I really like how you've made smaller private rooms for everything. Well done.

MAn, that TP room is a thing of beauty! well done!

Very nice Flash.

Here's my new control room/meeting hall. Love that AES!
As soon as I get the damn flyers to float Ill post the other views as well.

As a long time Arch/ fan let me just say..,,

WOW! Great guide! Fun to read and awe inspireing with the details. Bravo!

Sigh, I miss So Cal.

[ QUOTE ]

The person posting in the negative bears the responsibility of providing a counter-argument. Saying "no" is insufficient to this task.

[/ QUOTE ]

As is, apparently, providing a plethora of reasons why "no" can be both a valuable contribution to a discussion and a perfectly legitimate reply.

Well put, and amen brudda!

[ QUOTE ]
Should we create two threads for every idea, one for those in favor and one for those against, so that people can put "/signed" in the thread matching their opinion?

[/ QUOTE ]

You know, theres a really snide side to me that really likes this suggestion.

[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]

Has the suggestions forum always been in the "for fun" section (since they reordered the forums, I rarely read suggestions anymore - too far down in the list)? /yes and /no answers are acceptable to me on this one

Storm

[/ QUOTE ]
Nope, just recentlly got moved there, presumably for infractions of the nature being discussed here.

[/ QUOTE ]

I change which I think is particularly demeaning. Now, even the good suggestions are "just for fun."

[/ QUOTE ]
It is, but then again I'm pretty sure thats all they were ever for in the eyes of devs.

[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
OP: I want the devs to add brightly-colored unicorns to CoH.
Responder 1: /signed
Responder 2: Yes
Responder 3: No

Does Responder 3 really need to go into a detailed explanation of why he or she feels adding brightly-colored unicorns to the game would negatively impact his or her experience? I suppose Responder 3 could have said, "No, because I wouldn't like brightly-colored unicorns in CoH." But isn't that implied by the simple "no"?

[/ QUOTE ]

Or they could of said "No. They wouldn't add anything specific to the city, and if we get unicorns, we should have the classics. White, and the rarer black. The developers like to add things with a strong classical base, and colors other than white and black don't have such."

Ever other person who would of gone /no can then quote that guy and /agree

[/ QUOTE ]

Sure, they could have, but the point is that the /no contributed just as much to the conversation and the other respondents. None of them were ideal answers, as all could have provided quantifiers for thier positions. But under present guildlines only /no is being vilified.

[ QUOTE ]

Has the suggestions forum always been in the "for fun" section (since they reordered the forums, I rarely read suggestions anymore - too far down in the list)? /yes and /no answers are acceptable to me on this one

Storm

[/ QUOTE ]
Nope, just recentlly got moved there, presumably for infractions of the nature being discussed here.

Interesting example.

So the OP states that they like cats because they are furry.
The implied statement in this (by the nature of posting on a public forum) Do you agree with me, and why or why not. That implied statement is part and parcel to every single post on a forum.

Respondent #1 (hereafter referred to as R1) states:
/signed.
What has the OP or the community gained from this exchange? Well, we now know that 2 people like cats, one because they are fury, and the other one for reasons we can only assume are similar to the OP's. Or perhaps R1 likes cats for some other reason, but was responding to the topic of "cats are cool". There are any number of reasons why this poster did not elaborate, all of which we can only answer with conjecture.
Regardless to the reasons for R1's support, we know that there are 2 people who like cats. That’s the value we take away from this discourse.

R2 says:
I like cats because they purr, but not because they are fury.
Excellent, not only do we now have a tally of 3 people who like cats, but we are getting a better view of the different reason why people like cats. That is the value we take from this discourse

R3 says:
/No.
Okay, we and the OP now know that not everyone likes cats, though the reason the R3 does not like cats is open to conjecture, nonetheless R3 has answered at least part of the OP’s original question. There are any number of reasons why this poster did not elaborate, all of which we can only answer with conjecture.
We now have a tally of 3 “I like cats” and 1 “I don’t like cats (or at least not for the reasons specified). That’s the value we take away from this discourse.

R4 says:
/no. this topic is stoopid.
We now know that there are 3 people who like cats, 1 who doesn’t and one who probably doesn’t like cats but who dislikes the fact that this topic exists and 1 who needs a spell check. That’s the value we take away from this discourse.

I would like to add an R5 of
/No. Cats have too many pointy ends, dash out the door all the time and wake me up by stealing my breath.


Now, R4 is rather inflammatory, but has not attacked the OP in any way, merely what the OP has chosen to post about. In answering /no we can assume that they are answering the implied question of “Do you agree with me”. Short of the slightly inflammatory nature of R4 though all of these responses have added value to the discussion by answering the OP’s implied question. Of all of these, R’s 1 and 3 give the least amount of information to the community, but also leave the most room for further discussion (not saying that is a good or a bad thing, just what is) in attempts to get these respondents to elaborate on their positions. R’s 2 and 5 contribute the most to the discussion by elaborating on their positions.

R4 is the only one who, by the tone of their post, actually discourages further analysis of the topic.

So, tell me again why R1 is okay and R3 is not. They both answer only part of the implied question of the OP, and the reasons for their positions can only be reached by conjecture. Yet according to the new rule the onus is on only those with a negative stance to justify their positions.

Since rudeness is subjective I suggest that the punishment for it also be an individual judgment call.

You are only allowed to report a person for rudeness when that person has replied to one of your own posts and only allowed to report them for the reply in question.
Any report of rudeness will result in perma-ban.

This way those with thin skins will never be responded too, thereby protecting their sensitive natures from the evils of disagreement and economy of text in replies. Those who have a reputation for tolerance of others can feel free to engage in discussions spanning the gamut from curt to verbose and others can reply to them without fear of retribution knowing that the OP has sufficiently thick skin and is unlikely to force a fellow forumite's removal due to not favoring their replies.

Everybody wins!

-R
- (to the PTB) The above post was made (mostly) in jest and should be considered fluff as it adds almost no value to the conversation at hand, due what you will with it.

Dear Ex Libris Et All.

I believe that in enacting this new rule you are making a mistake. If this new rule were presented as a suggestion to which you wanted our reaction, I would have replied with a hearty /Jranger underlined and with several exclamation points following it. I do not agree with this rule, and make no commitment to you to follow it.

Why? Because “No” is a perfectly legitimate answer. In fact I believe that just a simple “no” is in fact less rude then no reply at all.

When someone posts a suggestion on these forums (which is the main time I have seen or used the /no reply) they are not just making a statement, they are in fact asking everyone in the forums a question. They are saying “XXXXX” is my idea, do you like it?
Now a perfect reply would consist of something like “yes, I like it. Points 1,2 and 5 address concerns I have always had, point 3 would fill a whole we’ve all been complaining about and point 6 gives me warm fuzzies in my special places”, or perhaps it would consist of “No, I do not care for this proposal, points 1 and 2 would be unbalancing due to xxx and point 3 would cause the end of civilization as we know it”. Those would be the most constructive responses. However, not everyone has the time nor the inclination to write out such lucid responses to every suggestion they read. Often they will if the topic engages them sufficiently, but if the topic does not they respond with a yay or nay and move on. In doing so they have answered the posters question, provided (at least a portion of) the requested information and in short contributed to this community

Now however, we are being told that we can only follow this paradigm if we are in agreement with the suggestion. If we are in disagreement, we must now provide justification for our positions or maintain silence, while no such onus rests upon those in agreement with the suggestion. This is not only an oppressive and seemingly overtly “PC” rule, but it is also just bad data collection practice. To put stipulation upon one answer that are not present upon the other will result in a bias towards the non-stipulated answer and in so doing invalidate the results.

There are any number of reasons why a person may choose to simply answer “no” to a suggestion. Perhaps they do not have the time to write a fully formed response. Or maybe the reasons they would present have already been mentioned, or maybe they are not sure why they disagree, they simply do. In any case the reply of “no” conveys just as much information as does the reply of “yes (or /signed). They both state agreement or lack thereof, and fail to provide any basis for this opinion.

I really wonder why you felt the need to put forth this rule at this time? Is a speed trap thing? Where you enforce a rule heavily for a very short time to cull a practice in its formative period, knowing that you have no intention of enforcing the rule until the trend begins again? Or are you actually convinced that a negative reply is inherently hostile while a positive reply is always a “good thing”? Let me ask you (et all in particular) if you walk up to someone in a room and ask their opinion on something, which would you rather they do; ignore you or simply say “no”. Personally, while neither is the optimal response, I would prefer to at least be acknowledged, even if they do not share my views.


Now the vast majority of the other rules in place within this community I agree with, and so hold myself bound to (at least most of the time). Personal jabs and flames I (generally) avoid. Racial remarks I loath and inferences towards someone’s religion, gender or sexuality for purposes of insulting said individual is something I never do. These rules I agree with and so follow.

However, the next time I see a suggestion to which I do not agree but still feel compelled to respond to I shall do as I have always done. Either I will write a detailed explanation of my position, or I will just say “no” (or perhaps Nah, /unsigned or even the dreaded /Jranger). What happens next is up to you (ex and crew that is, not the et all company).

You may tell me whether or not I may speak, but you may not tell me what I can or cannot say.

[ QUOTE ]
So, I was thinking today (*the audience gasps!!*) that for those of us in the NW should get together and pay our little kitty a visit.

Sometime in June? July? I can get the time off for any month as long as I have a couple weeks notice.

If anyone else is interested, let me know when you would be able to make it up there.

[/ QUOTE ]

I havent been to cat talkes in a few years now, make it on a weekend and Ill definitlly try to be there.

[ QUOTE ]

And in no way did i say it was guarenteed. What I did say is that if you street sweep large mobs of lower level foes

YOU WILL GET LOTS OF RECIPE DROP AND SALVAGE!...

People keep telling me that it is Luck.

Its not Luck if I know how to play the game to optimise my drop rate.

[/ QUOTE ]

I dont think anybody is discounting the above statement.

What people are taking some exception to is what you said in a follow up post;
[ QUOTE ]

Then I, we wont have to read many posts about "Im not getting what I want". When they could just as easily go street sweep for a few hours.. and get what they are looking for.


[/ QUOTE ]

That is the statement that was so misleading. Since what most people want is one of the costume drops, or one of the proc IO recipes the actual time it takes to bend the odds into favor of one of those dropping is substantially more than a "few hours" .

Again, using the 1:approx 5000 numbers to reach a 95% chance of a costume drop.
If you spend all your time street sweeping in the hazard zones, (mob in those zones equaling between 8-15 critters for a median # of 11.5 and that’s being VERY generous) that's still 435 mobs you need to cut down.
Lets say it takes you on average of 1 minute to destroy that mob (I think that would be reasonable, taking into account the time for initial volley of AOE's, then time to finish off the boss and hunt down the runners) and then 30 seconds to locate the next mob of 10+'s and let your end/attack cycle recharge.
That’s still a total time of 10.875 hours (435 mobs*90 sec *1min/60 sec *1hour/60 min).

And that’s if you are ONLY farming for any one of the costume drops (note, ANY one, not a specific one). If you are using the time to hunt for drops and Inf. then you need to factor in the time to hit the store after every 10 or so mobs to sell off your recipes and salvage drops, and time to max out your debt load for extended farming time with that toon.

So generally a player is looking at 11+ hours of nothing street sweeping an area like PP to get a costume drop. Of course many will be lucky and get it sooner than that, but then many will also be unlucky and get it much later than that (or get piston boots which are selling for I think 2.5 mil right now).

So again, I don’t think anyone has said that you plan for maximizing drop potential is inaccurate, just misleading in the degree of success you have said people will see.

[ QUOTE ]

8 guys per firebreath/fireball = 2 hours.

[/ QUOTE ]

And that’s assuming you can find a situation in which the ideal lvl baddies just keep funneling into your aoe zone o' death. Generally I’ve found that I spend equally or slightly more time locating the mobs as I decimating them (with a lvl 12 pb, hunting lvl 10-12 mobs to maximize the kill rate). Granted the rate will go up as I get up in lvls, but you still cannot discount travel and hunting time. And that’s just to receive A costume drop, not necessarily the one you want. Hopefully whichever one you get will pay for the you want. If you plan to hunt for one specific piece the time required to guarantee a drop will go up exponentially.

[ QUOTE ]
When they could just as easily go street sweep for a few hours.. and get what they are looking for.

[/ QUOTE ]

While I totally agree with your ideas for maximizing the drop potential, I think the above statement is VERY misleading.

There’s a great thread in the training room forum that breaks down the actual odds for receiving one of the costume drops. It breaks down to roughly 1:1600 (per minion killed) when hunting in the sweet spot of 10-14 (mob lvl, not yours). To achieve a 95% likelihood of getting one of those drops you need to kill roughly 5000 minions (mad props to Morgenstern and Generic_villian for thier crazy math skills).

This represents slightly more than "a few hours" of play time to get one of the coveted pieces. Personally (and this is not a complaint, I LOVE it) I've made a new char expressly for this purpose and have so far spent about 6 hours destroying mob after mob of lvl 10 hellions in PP and have yet to receive a costume drop. I should be catching onto the probability curve within the next 4-6 hours of farming though.

If you have gotten 20+ costume drops so far, you may want to seriously consider taking all your saving and hitting Vegas, cause you definitely have Lady Luck on your side.

[ QUOTE ]

Sigh. Please, if there is a higher power, don't let me ever turn into that.....
-mb

[/ QUOTE ]

No worries MB. As long as you continue to be ashamed of the thing you enjoy because it is not yet socially acceptable enough, you'll never be that free. So smile, relax and go about your completely conventional day (we won’t tell anyone you’re a gamer)!

* Supergroup Name: Innocent Wrath
* Website (if any): www.innocentwrath.net
* Global Chat Channel (if any):innocentwrath
* Leader or Recruiting Officers:Leaders, Nunyo and Rackir. Recruiting officers, any members above Lt rank
* Preferred Method of contact: ingame, prefereably in team, We only recruit those we have played with and like.