Post deleted by Moderator 08
I thought Geek_Boy was from Somethingawful. O.o
Anyway. All told, looking the thread over, there are some folk here who seem upset that something they like doesn't bear up to critical analysis. That's okay. There are people who critically analysing something and finding what look like lots of legitimate problems.
And then there are people who are mad at either of these two groups, both of whom are doing something reasonable. Look, if you don't like thinking about or studying your entertainment, that's okay. There are whole cavalcades of things for you. There's every film Michael Bay's ever made, the works of Jerry Bruckheimer, and so on. But there's nothing wrong with demanding intelligence from your entertainment. This arc, from what I've gathered, instead is pretentious - a cardboard shell around a potentially interesting idea, executed novelly enough to interest those who don't want to think much about it.
As far as I'm concerned, the real embarassment here is not the people who are studying the arc and providing their working and their evidence and their reasoning for why they don't like it. It's the kind of people who are making it an emotional issue, the people saying things like 'You disgust me,' and 'Why's everyone so nasty?'
It's okay to argue. It's okay to yell. If the author is a good author, they'll take what they've learned and create even better things in the future. Though I wish people would stop asking people who make it a duty to provide criticism to provide them with their criticism and then deny the criticism.
SomethingAwful, for the record, is not as unmoderated as /b/.
" I wish people would stop asking people who make it a duty to provide criticism to provide them with their criticism and then deny the criticism."
its not the message thats the problem, its the manner of its delivery.
Some call it author-coddling. I call it not behaving like a [censored].
Eco
MArcs:
The Echo, Arc ID 1688 (5mish, easy, drama)
The Audition, Arc ID 221240 (6 mish, complex mech, comedy)
Storming Citadel, Arc ID 379488 (lowbie, 1mish, 10-min timed)
Quote:
|
Originally Posted by Samuel_Tow
[The Incarnate System is] Jack Emmert all over again, only this time it's not "1 hero = 3 white minions" it's "1 hero = 3 white rocks."
|
[ QUOTE ]
SomethingAwful, for the record, is not as unmoderated as /b/.
[/ QUOTE ]
That's like saying that a volcano isn't as hot as the sun.
[ QUOTE ]
It's okay to argue. It's okay to yell. If the author is a good author, they'll take what they've learned and create even better things in the future. Though I wish people would stop asking people who make it a duty to provide criticism to provide them with their criticism and then deny the criticism.
[/ QUOTE ]
In Witch Engine's defense, he never asked anybody to review his story. The arc was posted here by another person who really enjoyed it. This brought the critical eyes upon it.
Play my MA arcs!
Tracking Down Jack Ketch - ArcID #2701
Cat War! - ArcID #2788
[ QUOTE ]
" I wish people would stop asking people who make it a duty to provide criticism to provide them with their criticism and then deny the criticism."
its not the message thats the problem, its the manner of its delivery.
Some call it author-coddling. I call it not behaving like a [censored].
Eco
[/ QUOTE ]Yes, but Venture could offer his critique in a three-part mime play performed entirely by adorable fluffy kittens and you'd still whine about it.
[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
" I wish people would stop asking people who make it a duty to provide criticism to provide them with their criticism and then deny the criticism."
its not the message thats the problem, its the manner of its delivery.
Some call it author-coddling. I call it not behaving like a [censored].
Eco
[/ QUOTE ]Yes, but Venture could offer his critique in a three-part mime play performed entirely by adorable fluffy kittens and you'd still whine about it.
[/ QUOTE ]
the mime part of tgat makes no sense in the context of what i assume you mean, which is that i'd still object if Venture offered negative critiques delivered in a warmer, less '[censored] you' manner?
I wouldn't, if that's what you mean. I also note your hackneyed use of 'whine', Talen. You'll be telling me to 'cry moar, noob' next.
Eco
MArcs:
The Echo, Arc ID 1688 (5mish, easy, drama)
The Audition, Arc ID 221240 (6 mish, complex mech, comedy)
Storming Citadel, Arc ID 379488 (lowbie, 1mish, 10-min timed)
Quote:
|
Originally Posted by Samuel_Tow
[The Incarnate System is] Jack Emmert all over again, only this time it's not "1 hero = 3 white minions" it's "1 hero = 3 white rocks."
|
[ QUOTE ]
All told, looking the thread over, there are some folk here who seem upset that something they like doesn't bear up to critical analysis. That's okay. There are people who critically analysing something and finding what look like lots of legitimate problems.
[/ QUOTE ]
I'm just upset about the *quality* of the critical analysis. The arc does have legitimate problems, but none of the critics notice them because they're too busy harping on the things that offended them personally, which are entirely a matter of taste. The gist of Venture's arguments, for example, is "You touched my character! *Nobody* touches my character! Waaah!" and "Nemesis Plots are overdone and rarely done well, so nothing with a Nemesis Plot in it can possibly be good".
[ QUOTE ]
Look, if you don't like thinking about or studying your entertainment, that's okay. There are whole cavalcades of things for you. There's every film Michael Bay's ever made, the works of Jerry Bruckheimer, and so on. But there's nothing wrong with demanding intelligence from your entertainment.
[/ QUOTE ]
So if you gave Hearts on Fire five stars and Venture gave it one (and found in it a host of problems that he finds in every other Architect arc), does that mean you demand less intelligence from your entertainment than he does?
[ QUOTE ]
This arc, from what I've gathered,
[/ QUOTE ]
You could just play the damn arc so you know what you're talking about.
[ QUOTE ]
Though I wish people would stop asking people who make it a duty to provide criticism to provide them with their criticism and then deny the criticism.
[/ QUOTE ]
The author never went out of their way to ask for criticism (except in the general way that putting an arc you made into public view invites criticism of it). Also, if the only criticism an author gets is "you should never write this sort of story", they are *well* within their rights to deny it.
Character index
And this is why, in my opinion, MA will ultimately be nothing more than a PLing tool. Some people really need to take a step back and think about what CoH is. It's a game first and foremost so, the focus for each individual player is what is fun for them and them alone. To be honest, given how much time it takes to write a non-farm MA I'm surprised that any players write them at all. From a purely "in game" economic perspective there is really no reason to do so because you can earn tickets much faster from an MA farm anyway. Given this, the only reason a player would write one is for their friends and, hopefully, other players to enjoy. So, since CoH is about having fun, I would hazard a guess that most players would find negative reviews to fall pretty strongly into the "not fun" category. As a result, getting such negative reinforcement will probably stop your average player from bothering to write another MA in the future. This is why I believe that harsh and unconstructive reviewers (and threads like this) ultimately aren't doing MA any favors and, will ultimately just reduce the number of MA attempts at storytelling, leaving it a farmer's paradise.
The bottom line for me is that if you are looking for the next great American story, joining a writer's group is the way to go about it. Searching for it in a video game is like looking for tickets to the bus at the train station.
Jail.Bird
Jail.Bird
[ QUOTE ]
I wouldn't, if that's what you mean.
[/ QUOTE ]Yeah you would. It doesn't matter how gently the negativity is offered, you react to it very childishly. Except when it's you complaining about people doing things differently to you, of course.
[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
SomethingAwful, for the record, is not as unmoderated as /b/.
[/ QUOTE ]
That's like saying that a volcano isn't as hot as the sun.
[/ QUOTE ]
Well for the record, Magma ranges from 700 to 1300 degrees C while the surface of the sun is 6000 to 11000 on the surface.
[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
I wouldn't, if that's what you mean.
[/ QUOTE ]Yeah you would. It doesn't matter how gently the negativity is offered, you react to it very childishly. Except when it's you complaining about people doing things differently to you, of course.
[/ QUOTE ]
hang on, are you changing the subject or Are we still talking about Venture's delivery of negative criticism? If you can give me an example of Venture being nice i'll happily stand corrected.
Eco
MArcs:
The Echo, Arc ID 1688 (5mish, easy, drama)
The Audition, Arc ID 221240 (6 mish, complex mech, comedy)
Storming Citadel, Arc ID 379488 (lowbie, 1mish, 10-min timed)
Quote:
|
Originally Posted by Samuel_Tow
[The Incarnate System is] Jack Emmert all over again, only this time it's not "1 hero = 3 white minions" it's "1 hero = 3 white rocks."
|
[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
It's okay to argue. It's okay to yell. If the author is a good author, they'll take what they've learned and create even better things in the future. Though I wish people would stop asking people who make it a duty to provide criticism to provide them with their criticism and then deny the criticism.
[/ QUOTE ]
In Witch Engine's defense, he never asked anybody to review his story. The arc was posted here by another person who really enjoyed it. This brought the critical eyes upon it.
[/ QUOTE ]
This is why some of the venomous responses here bother me. He never asked for a critique from any of the forum heavyweights, hell he never advertised his arc here. The only thing this demonstrates to me is that if you put a lot of time and effort into an arc, and its popularity grows beyond your own SG, prepare to be raked over the coals.
[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
All told, looking the thread over, there are some folk here who seem upset that something they like doesn't bear up to critical analysis. That's okay. There are people who critically analysing something and finding what look like lots of legitimate problems.
[/ QUOTE ]
I'm just upset about the *quality* of the critical analysis.
[/ QUOTE ]Quite a fair criticism. Having not done the arc myself, I'm not offering any critique of the arc. I don't think the thread needs yet another opinion cluttering it up (though I've reacted to the criticism and the spoilers I've willingly read - specifically, by determining that the arc doesn't touch on anything I think I'd enjoy, so I don't run it).
[ QUOTE ]
The arc does have legitimate problems, but none of the critics notice them because they're too busy harping on the things that offended them personally, which are entirely a matter of taste. The gist of Venture's arguments, for example, is "You touched my character! *Nobody* touches my character! Waaah!" and "Nemesis Plots are overdone and rarely done well, so nothing with a Nemesis Plot in it can possibly be good".
[/ QUOTE ]Venture's opinion is worth as much weight as you'll give it. While I do sigh heavily when someone says 'A reviewer gave me one star, but a dozen faceless, unnamed people gave me five, so it doesn't matter what the reviewer says,' it is a fair and reasonable reaction. It's showing what the author values, and it shows how the author reacts to the various forms of reaction they get. Most people would rather a dozen faceless praises than one hard critic.
As far as personal bugbears go, I try to control for them - I mean, I have so far actually stopped reviewing comedy arcs because I know I'm not going to enjoy them. I have so far, run a dozen or more arcs and simply chosen not to review them because I think my review will be meaningless. The result of dealing with some authors, I know. The problem remains, however, that regardless of the intent, Venture has cited criticisms.
Now, I think one of his criticisms is wholly unreasonable - the idea of his character being sacrosanct is not 'bad writing' it's 'writing he dislikes.' I myself also dislike it - I'm sick of authors trying to 'play with my perceptions' because I think the AE is at this point too undeveloped in content that actually is just well-executed punch-the-nazis style of fun. I think there are too many people trying to crawl into flying. Still - it's there, it's a criticism.
Just to provide an alternative perspective, I think the author citing dev writing as precedent is hogwash (the devs have many bad writers amongst their number, and they have done much writing that is bad), and I also think that the argument that the presence of farms and the like means that an arc that's spelled all its words right is not, somehow, just as fair a candidate for 1-starring as any other arc is also hogwash. I don't think either side is blameless, and I don't actually have a dog in this fight.
I mean, I agree with Venture's point that 'And then I woke up' or 'It was all a dream' conclusions to stories are very simplistic and often used to write a person out of a corner. But that's not to say they're bad. Douglas Adams did them all the time, but he did them with a flair and a style that meant it was surprisingly hard to notice at times and yet at the same time, enjoyable regardless.
[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
Look, if you don't like thinking about or studying your entertainment, that's okay. There are whole cavalcades of things for you. There's every film Michael Bay's ever made, the works of Jerry Bruckheimer, and so on. But there's nothing wrong with demanding intelligence from your entertainment.
[/ QUOTE ]
So if you gave Hearts on Fire five stars and Venture gave it one (and found in it a host of problems that he finds in every other Architect arc), does that mean you demand less intelligence from your entertainment than he does?
[/ QUOTE ]Different situation, and a meaningless comparison. I'm not saying that people who enjoyed this arc don't demand intelligence from their entertainment, I'm saying that there's nothing wrong with demanding intelligence from your entertainment at all. There are problems with the arc. Some people care about them, some don't, but it seems the people that don't think that those that do are doing something wrong, or even immoral.
[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
This arc, from what I've gathered,
[/ QUOTE ]
You could just play the damn arc so you know what you're talking about.
[/ QUOTE ]Why? I don't think I'd like it. There are all these reviews discussing it and talking about the type of story it is. Playing it so I can form my own opinion about something I'd probably dislike seems like just asking me to kick sand in an author's face. It certainly, certainly wouldn't do anything to have the arc improved. I've learned a lot about arc authors in my time and I will say there is almost no point giving advice for changing arcs in any but the most incremental of ways. There are some authors who will listen to more sweeping changes, or more conceptual or stylistic ones, but for the most part, there really isn't a point.
[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
Though I wish people would stop asking people who make it a duty to provide criticism to provide them with their criticism and then deny the criticism.
[/ QUOTE ]
The author never went out of their way to ask for criticism (except in the general way that putting an arc you made into public view invites criticism of it). Also, if the only criticism an author gets is "you should never write this sort of story", they are *well* within their rights to deny it.
[/ QUOTE ]It's not the only type they got - and at least according to this thread, Venture reviewed the arc before this thread came about, and the author complained that they got a one-star. The last time I spent time reading Venture's review threads, he wasn't doing anything but submissions. Forgive me for assuming that they'd submitted for Venture's opinion.
Either way, I see no real reason to be sympathetic for either side. I especially dislike the implication from the author that it's only the result of Venture's complaints that the rating for their arc went down. I had an arc that was 5-starred, and now as its rating numbers climb, its rating has dipped down to 4 stars. That's not the forum cartel manipulating things, that's not sheeple voting as Venture tells them to - that's just the natural reaction of the law of averages.
[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
I wouldn't, if that's what you mean.
[/ QUOTE ]Yeah you would. It doesn't matter how gently the negativity is offered, you react to it very childishly. Except when it's you complaining about people doing things differently to you, of course.
[/ QUOTE ]
hang on, are you changing the subject or Are we still talking about Venture's delivery of negative criticism? If you can give me an example of Venture being nice i'll happily stand corrected.
Eco
[/ QUOTE ]I'm talking about you, as an individual poster, reacting to anyone who states their opinion firmly. If an opinion is negative, you natively rail against it or run from it. It's something I've noticed observing your posting habits - people who disagree with you are mean, people who agree with you are good. It left me, at first, wondering if there was a reason to bother trying to convince you of anything you did not already agree with, then I figured it just wasn't worth the bother.
I'm bringing it to your attention here, because if you've given me this impression, there might be a reason for it - that you might well be too inclined to think badly of people who disagree. Perhaps you just fear conflict, perhaps you're right and everyone in the world is a jerk. Maybe you're too sensitive. Either way, I don't think there's any hope of Venture modifying himself to suit your standards - ever.
All this crazyness is the main reason why I waited to post my arcs here and then with trepidation. Nothing good comes from a critique of, "I don't like it. Remake it to my own liking." A previos post said it best; this is a game. Why can't we just be stoked that someone did something new and unique is stead of all this unnecessary negativity. This is absolute madness.
It has already been posted that no one asked venture to give his critique but after seeing all the positive posts, he felt he had to post.
Witch Engine didn't half [censored] this arc. He has a well writen, polished arc that has a unique plot twist that offends the sensibilities of some of the forum elite. Get over yourselves and let the guy have his 15 minutes for gods sake.
I think there's lots of valid stuff being said, lots of hyperbolae, and I will only say that I think AE has potential to provide fun, and writing and critiquing offers an avenue for people to improve some of their story-telling skills, if done sensitively. This thread is something else.
I found this Blight arc to be very creative, and I am all for that. I withheld any comment because of the vitriol in this thread, which I want nothing to do with.
I just happened to also review and 5-star a Venture arc, an arc on my todo list for a while now, despite the fact that I find Venture's posts are often insensitive, which makes them unconstructive (maybe it's personal, he looked at one of my arcs, didn't like it, found one mission "horrible" without explanation, but on the other hand it wasn't a formal review). But I played his arc, and it was okay. I figured, being objective might even soften his approach! Well, not now, since I just spelled it out. Anyway, I disclosed this because...
My arc that has been played just 29 times since April, and not for some time now, just scored a 1- or 2-star. For real? Check my review thread. I'm not a "heavyweight".
Maybe I'm overreacting, the rating of my arc comes from a sincere effort to consider the arc's merits, and a constructive review is about to be posted. That'd be great.
Arc: 379017: Outbroken See all your old friends in the Outbreak Tutorial sequel!
Arc: Coming Soon: The Incarnate Shadow Shard of Fire and Ice Mender Rednem needs you!
Massively.com opinion poll: Please Help Save CoH!
[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
You could just play the damn arc so you know what you're talking about.
[/ QUOTE ]Why? I don't think I'd like it. There are all these reviews discussing it and talking about the type of story it is. Playing it so I can form my own opinion about something I'd probably dislike seems like just asking me to kick sand in an author's face. It certainly, certainly wouldn't do anything to have the arc improved. I've learned a lot about arc authors in my time and I will say there is almost no point giving advice for changing arcs in any but the most incremental of ways. There are some authors who will listen to more sweeping changes, or more conceptual or stylistic ones, but for the most part, there really isn't a point.
[/ QUOTE ]
If you played the arc you could actually take part in the discussion about its relative merits or lack thereof, instead of being relegated to the meta-discussion of the relative merits of the people discussing the arc. But since you just want to talk about what people in this thread sound like, I think *you* sound like a reviewer who is bitter that authors don't take your every word as gospel and re-write their arcs to suit you.
Character index
[ QUOTE ]
And this is why, in my opinion, MA will ultimately be nothing more than a PLing tool. Some people really need to take a step back and think about what CoH is. It's a game first and foremost so, the focus for each individual player is what is fun for them and them alone.
[/ QUOTE ]
I agree with most of what this poster said, except for MA being a PLing tool primarily. That's just how many players are using it. For me, and my friends, the MA remains, first and foremost, a way to make stories for just friends to play.
That's what Blight was. Witch Engine made it when the MA launched, sent a message to all of us in the SG, saying "You guys might like this one!" He made it for us, primarily.
IMO, the ratings system as it is happens to be the worst thing about the MA.
Witch Engine never advertised the arc and never asked the forums for the critiques. He only asked his friends. So just keep that in mind when you're deconstructing his work as if you're some famous literary or film critic, and then posting personal attacks on him.
(All "you" are a generalized you, not directed at the poster I quoted.))
Live arcs: 517377 and 517381
Virtue: Quickshot. Swiftwind. Aliuneidis. Gizmodeus. Dasher. Fiver. Inuit Acer. Daniel Darke. Cerebral Flame. El Halcon.
Intel Core2Duo 2.4 Ghz 4 GB RAM**NVIDIA Geforce 9600 GT set to 1280 x 1024**Windows Vista 32 bit
[ QUOTE ]
I just happened to also review and 5-star a Venture arc, an arc on my todo list for a while now, despite the fact that I find Venture's posts are often insensitive, which makes them unconstructive (maybe it's personal, he looked at one of my arcs, didn't like it, found one mission "horrible" without explanation, but on the other hand it wasn't a formal review). But I played his arc, and it was okay. I figured, being objective might even soften his approach! Well, not now, since I just spelled it out. Anyway, I disclosed this because...
[/ QUOTE ]
The author's reviewing style has nothing to do with the merits of their arcs. People who low-rate Venture's arcs because they don't like him or his reviews are right up there with people who 1-star other people's arcs because they want theirs to be on the front page.
It's good to know some people are more mature than that.
Eva Destruction AR/Fire/Munitions Blaster
Darkfire Avenger DM/SD/Body Scrapper
Arc ID#161629 Freaks, Geeks, and Men in Black
Arc ID#431270 Until the End of the World
[ QUOTE ]
I'm talking about you, as an individual poster, reacting to anyone who states their opinion firmly. If an opinion is negative, you natively rail against it or run from it.
[/ QUOTE ]
there are different ways of presenting a negative opinion. I have no problem with negative opinions being presented, as long as they're presented in a civil, pleasant, polite way. What's happened in this thread is bullying. That';s what I have a problem with.
[ QUOTE ]
It's something I've noticed observing your posting habits - people who disagree with you are mean, people who agree with you are good.
[/ QUOTE ]
Not at all. People who behave like arrogant [censored] are mean. [ QUOTE ]
It left me, at first, wondering if there was a reason to bother trying to convince you of anything you did not already agree with, then I figured it just wasn't worth the bother.
[/ QUOTE ]
It's funny; I just typed out a long explanation to support my previous sentence, and then realised that it was pointless trying to convince you of where exactly I think you've got me wrong, so i deleted it.
[ QUOTE ]
I'm bringing it to your attention here, because if you've given me this impression, there might be a reason for it - that you might well be too inclined to think badly of people who disagree.
[/ QUOTE ]
I don't think badly of people who disagree. I think badly of people who constantly state as fact that the opinions they hold are the only correct ones and that refuse to admit that their opinions are just that, subjective and personal.
[ QUOTE ]
Perhaps you just fear conflict,
[/ QUOTE ] 'Fear'? lol. You trying to put me down, again, Talen, using that word, instead of 'dislike'?
[ QUOTE ]
perhaps you're right and everyone in the world is a jerk.
[/ QUOTE ]
Please don't put words in my mouth. I have never said that everyone in the world is a jerk, or even that a lot of people in the world, or in the game, or in these forums, are jerks. There's only a very small number of people in this thread, for example, who i think are jerks.
[ QUOTE ]
Maybe you're too sensitive. Either way, I don't think there's any hope of Venture modifying himself to suit your standards - ever.
[/ QUOTE ]
I don't either.
It's a beautiful evening, and i'm going out to my local restaurant in a minute for a glass of Rioja and some good food, and I don't want to argue with any of you heavy boys any more. You've described here the 'impression' I apparently give you. The impression you give me of yourself is of an arrogant, patronising teenager. I may very well be as mistaken about your age and character as you are about me.
Eco.
MArcs:
The Echo, Arc ID 1688 (5mish, easy, drama)
The Audition, Arc ID 221240 (6 mish, complex mech, comedy)
Storming Citadel, Arc ID 379488 (lowbie, 1mish, 10-min timed)
Quote:
|
Originally Posted by Samuel_Tow
[The Incarnate System is] Jack Emmert all over again, only this time it's not "1 hero = 3 white minions" it's "1 hero = 3 white rocks."
|
[ QUOTE ]
I don't want to argue with any of you heavy boys any more
[/ QUOTE ]'Heavy boys'? Are you serious?
[ QUOTE ]
Witch Engine never advertised the arc and never asked the forums for the critiques. He only asked his friends. So just keep that in mind when you're deconstructing his work as if you're some famous literary or film critic, and then posting personal attacks on him.
(All "you" are a generalized you, not directed at the poster I quoted.))
[/ QUOTE ]
I'm glad Witch Engine created this thread, else I might never have played the arc. And I enjoyed it very much.
Someone said that responding to some criticism with, "it's a simulation" was a dodge, but it's not at all (depending on the criticism, of course) It is considered a simulation. It's not really happening to my character, it's my character going on a carnival ride, or acting in a play. It's role-playing for a character in a role-playing game.
I have run arcs where the author constantly told my character how he felt about certain things, and I agree with most, that's something to be avoided. But it's also different than what Witch Engine did here, as I see it anyway. The whole point of this story is disorientation and mystery.
I mean...I've run my main hero through several villainous arcs. How is that any different than running him through this one? I role-play a villain in the villainous simulations, and I role-play a possibly deranged weirdo in this one. Yes there might be a couple of problems with it (primarily that nobody notices for 24 hours that AP is under assault), but again, that can be explained as part of the delusion (although that means the ending isn't as mysterious as it might appear, you really ARE nuts).
Is destroying the canisters by blasting them, instead of clicking on blinkies, really that big a problem? I don't think so. The text says you're incinerating the stuff, and he can't very well give you a temp power with the perfext sfx.
The problem with doing this kind of story in the MA is that it's best told about a third person. Making it into a first-person story in this medium is a challenge, and I admire people taking on challenges, even if they don't completely pull them off.
I understand mocking really horrible, sloppy, stupid arcs. Arcs that treat your character like he's an idiot. I don't understand calling an arc horrible just because it places your character into a 'non-canon' position or mind-set. Many villain arcs assume that your character kills with wild abandon. Well, some of mine don't, should I post about how wretched the arc is because it doesn't take that into account?
I wasn't going to comment on this thread, but I just thought that some of the criticism of the arc itself was missing the point, IMO.
[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
I have always thought these forums were absolutely terrible
[/ QUOTE ]
Not getting involved in any of the other stuff or this "discussion"... but man, you must be new to the internet.
[/ QUOTE ]
I'm picky about my internets and tend to gravitate towards websites that would ban about half of the people here before they racked up a dozen posts.