Well, looking at all your points, I don't think you quite grasped my statement. Then again, looking back at it, I think it was more of an in-joke with myself than anything else. I'll explain everything though, just so it doesn't look like I'm randomly spouting crap without any thought behind it. I'll start by replying to your points.
Amphetamine wrote:
Honestly, the only way this thread could work is if it were as objective as possible, and even then, it's still going to contain some subjectivity.
Well, how do you define objective? You say "as objective as possible", but how would you even measure said objectivity? Are you aware of how objective this thread is being? If so, could you explain how much that is, and how you got to that amount?
If you go for the dictionary definition
(people rarely do), which is, quote, "(of a person or their judgment) not influenced by personal feelings or opinions in considering and representing facts.", then that would be false on both accounts, because all we can do on this forum is share our personal experiences and I doubt that a majority of the users on this forum knows of the facts that drive their subjective experiences. On top of that, you wouldn't really be able to measure that. You either are objective, or you're not.
Amphetamine wrote:
You should understand that rhetorical writings do not work if it's all, "I say this is this way because it works for me so it works for everyone. I'm right, do what i say." Simply leaving it at that without backing it up with at least some kind of hypothetical or real proof is what would be unwise.
Okay, step on your breaks there, Sonic. What about my post implies that I don't understand that baseless (Not rhetorical, your example had nothing to do with rhetoric at all) statements do not work under pretty much any circumstances except for sheer luck around brainless listeners? I'm not sure where you're taking that assumption from, so, if you could elaborate, that would be much appreciated. I do see what you're saying about me not backing up my statement, but perhaps I wasn't trying to give advice with my post, and rather to spark thought and discussion. Ever considered that? If so, what would be wrong with my statement? You wrote out quite a complete post with fully formulated points that you put quite some serious thought behind, and now I'm replying to said post as maturely as I can - wouldn't that mean that I've achieved my goal? If I'm overlooking something here, I'd be glad to see it pointed out, so I can prevent it in the future.
Amphetamine wrote:
What's more important is not so much whether or not what's being said is objective, but rather, how it's presented so that the reader will subjectively take in the information in favor of the writer.
The reader always takes information in subjectively, though. However, I'm not going to be petty - I do see what you're trying to say. The thing is, it's still not a very effective approach. You can attune objective statements to the subjectivity of a listener, sure. However, the key word in that sentence is "
a". That only really, truly works in one-on-one teaching - and this is assuming that this thread contains objective statements, which it does not. Only attempted objectivity, to further complicate things. If this makes you wonder why my post says "objective advice" - I was referring to advice presented as objective, there. As in "To get better, do A, B, and C. Good luck.". That's objective. That's a tutorial, an instruction, which doesn't work for this game. That's something that works when it's "To open a door, either twist the knob, pull the handle, or blow it the fuck up.". What makes one player get better makes the other player get worse, you can't write out a tutorial on how to get better because it would only work for a select amount of people. In fact, that was the entire point of my statement.
Amphetamine wrote:
To wrap this up: statements of objectivity in an argument creates credibility for the writer because it represents them having tangible evidence(regardless of existence)
Providing evidence along with your statement makes you more credible, yes. What kind of evidence would a "GUYS THIS IS TURLY THE METHOD WITH HOW YOU GET BETTER >>>THE REAL DEAL RIGHT HERE<<<" thread OP have to provide that would not only convince the reader before they tried it for themselves, but also work for every single player that tries it? Because that's what a fact is, you know. Gravity is there for everyone. 2 is always more than 1. A feather is lighter than a truck, everywhere. If your method doesn't work for everyone, it's a subjective method, and presenting it objectively is wrong and only leads to misunderstandings, which people are quite good at causing.
Amphetamine wrote:
credibility increases the affinity for the readers to agree with the writer
But that I agree with you doesn't mean that what you said will help me~
Amphetamine wrote:
and also, increases thought on their end on what is being said on whatever topic.
This didn't make sense to me.
Amphetamine wrote:
You want to know the secret though...
This entire thread is subjective advice.
Guess it worked, eh? 
And down the drain goes your entire post, which makes me pretty sad. It was a good post, fun to reply to, yet you disagree with everything you've said with your little "secret". First you say that the only way this thread could work is if it were as objective as possible. Then you go on to say that said objective information should be presented in such a way that it can be interpreted subjectively, by everyone, so that it can work for as many people as possible.
Then you go on to say that objectivity in an argument creates credibility for the writer, and makes the reader more eager to agree with him and think about stuff.
AND THEN YOU SAY THIS ENTIRE THREAD IS SUBJECTIVEThank you for your reply, though. I can see that you put effort and thought into it and it did most certainly make me revise my statement to make sure whether I was making any sense or not. It was also fun to reply to, and I have to say that the last part did make me giggle. Time not wasted. I hope you understand my logic now.
I'm still struggling with them, and a couple of things that seemed to help were these:
