forum

A word about insufferable elitism within the osu!-community

posted
Total Posts
70
show more
Rurree
I love Wilchq.

Opinion on this: It's called the LOVED category for a reason. Whether it's an objectively bad or good map, it doesn't matter. The majority gets what it wants, and it just so happens that it's Red Like Roses that gets the votes.

Nothing to make a fuss about.
CXu
Welp.




Objectively good/bad means nothing as long as the loved category is supposed to be what it is right now. If it did matter, we would just have a ranked category with more laxed rules, aka old approved.
Topic Starter
Railey2

B1rd wrote:

Why are you making this whole thread to demonise the opinions of some people? Go takes your rants about elitism to that thread.

Any they have a point, bad and casual players just spam votes for the most popular/gimmicky map regardless of its quality. Low rank players spamming the lobby with it does not give it any more merit. The whole voting system is a stupid way to determine which maps are loved anyway.

An elitist attitude is good because it creates a standard that new players must reach rather than letting the game be dominated the lowest common denominator. You will notice what a cesspool this forum is compared to what it was half a decade ago.
We have a system in place where quality the quality map is the focal point, it's called the "ranked-system".

Interestingly enough, people were very fond of the idea of putting this map to the loved-category, based on it's general popularity. As I said, the loved-category was made to give leaderboards that were considered "unrankeable, but still loved by the community". Red like roses fits that bill better than Graces of Heaven, because it is equally unrankeable, but more loved. Within this system, merit IS determined by how many people vote for it, not by what a hand full of elitist top-players think.


The thread I took the quotes from was closed. The Blue Dragon quote was from reddit, in a thread that's already off the first 3 pages.

If you think that toxic elitism is beneficial for a community, you're delusional. Maybe you should raise your standard of what a good community looks like beyond the likes of off-topic and tuuba?
Topic Starter
Railey2

My Angel Wilchq wrote:

Can't you understand that players mentioned are also the target audience for these maps?

Do you really think that people who get 20% with nofail are equal in assessing maps as players who play them quite comfortably?

Call it eliticisim we don't care, it's the sad truth that WE THE ELITE know more and know better. Now go tell your parents that they are elitists since they always tell you what you should be doing in life only since they are more experienced. It's exactly the same situation here.

I personally don't really care what map goes there now, after some time most of the maps we want now will be included. But I have to say that I understand the people in question and agree with them.
The community is the target audience. The mentioned players are in the minority, but they act as if they were the majority or as if their opinions should outweigh the majority. If the majority wants the map to be loved, then it should be loved. That is the whole point of the loved-section, giving people maps they want to play without focus on the map's rankability.

My Angel Wilchq wrote:

It is a map with some potential but is mapped in a boring and ctrl + c ctrl + v way which should disqualify it from being loved.

go eat a dick low ranked plebs
There are many people who enjoy the patterns that are "boring" to you. It makes sense that the patterns are boring to you, because you've played the game for such a long time, but they aren't inherently boring for lower ranked players.
You are such an elitist that you can't even be bothered to think about that, you just disregard it all completely without second thought.
Incredible. What you enjoy does not override what other people enjoy. Get a grip. You can't tell low ranked players that they shouldn't enjoy playing a challenging jumpy map. I'm sure that you liked playing maps like that at an earlier stage of your progression as a player too.

The fact that you think about such a large part of the playerbase like this, is absolutely appalling. They matter too.




-Jukke- wrote:

the thing is, red like roses is a bad map no matter how you look at it. also what raiden and my angel wilchq said.
a person who cant play a certain map is not able to judge that map without a lot of mooding or mapping experience. and alot of 100ks dont have either the ability to play it nor the experience in mapping or modding. they just play it with nofail and think their cool when they hit one jump in a hundred (trust me i was like that too when i was very very low rank and someone put it in a lobby).
elitism in a case like this is very ok, since they actually are in the right and do know better
The thing is, red like roses is a map that many people enjoy playing, no matter how you look at it.
A person can tell what they enjoy playing, no matter how experienced they are with the game. A lot of 100k's spend a lot of time in the game, and the loved-featured is tailored to everyone, which renders your points invalid.
Elitism is never ok. Guiding others with superior knowledge is ok, but this is not what is happening here. What we see here, is a minority shitting on what the majority enjoys, because they themselves grew out of enjoying it. Nothing more. It's petty and despicable. The loved-section is not about "quality"-maps. It's about what people like. Your knowledge of what makes a "quality"-map, is completely irrelevant for that section. It would be valid for ranking maps, but that's not what the loved-category is about.



Raiden wrote:

You call it elitism? I like to call it common sense. Not like I'm in favour of any aristocracy or dictatorship, though.

This happens everywhere, not everyone is allowed to vote (not until the age 18 in most countries) and I haven't seen you calling all democratic government elitists because they don't let a 10 year old kid vote.

Same applies here, in my opinion. At age 10 you don't have enough maturity to discern what politics mean and how life works overall (hell not even at 18, but we still vote). See the relation now?
It depends on what you vote on.

A vote that could affect an entire country? Probably good to not let children vote.
A vote on what you like for breakfast? Why should the parents opinion matter more than the opinion of a 16 year old? The vote casted here, is more akin to the breakfast-vote. If the adult thinks their own opinion should override the 16 year olds opinion, then that's just pure egoism and entitlement, because he doesn't want to eat spaghetti.
Endaris
It is lame if you only quote people you have counterarguments for and ignore the others.

Having a map loved or not, its target audience is always the community anyway. Adding whatever maps (by mysterious preselectors[tm]) to loved is as good as adding all or as adding none.

Also consider this: The feature request that was considered "fulfilled" with this novelty actually specifically called for a "New beatmap category for good unrankable mapsets".
Let's read that again.
good
Or even in the OP itself. Now I don't know what the OP edited in the last couple days but:

TL;DR: The best unrankable maps could be moved to a special category where they would have scoreboards while giving no pp
→AFTER BEING SELECTED AND PASSING A MODDING PROCCESS←
This'd encourage the creation of quality gimmick maps (as they'd get more attention) and reward players with unique skills.
We read words like "best" and "quality" here.

Assuming that the "Loved" category is supposed to be for the "best quality unrankable" mapsets then I think the question as to why Red Like Roses was even considered for the vote is very valid.

Rabbitjump maps were always popular because they are indeed fun for scrub players. That is why they don't need this category.

I expected better research from you, Railey.
Topic Starter
Railey2
@endaris

The players i quoted at the start acted like only they were the target audience.

They clearly altered some of the ideas from the feature request thread, so I don't know why you are quoting a section from there. This is where you should be quoting from: https://osu.ppy.sh/news/152109048933 The fact that they added "Anti You" right off the bat, should speak for itself, right? It's about popularity, not "best quality unrankeable". To quote the announcement "it's all about the love"

I don't see how the preselector point is relevant to the discussion. This thread is a condemnation of the elitists that flipped their shit because they almost didn't get their way.

When i don't respond, it's usually because i agree with the point/didn't get to it yet/find that the poster is missing the point completely/am too lazy/don't understand the point being made. But not because i ran out of arguments. In this case I simply didn't get to it yet. Please don't jump to conclusions.
winber1

B1rd wrote:

An elitist attitude is good because it creates a standard that new players must reach rather than letting the game be dominated the lowest common denominator. You will notice what a cesspool this forum is compared to what it was half a decade ago.
Elitist groups are not what makes the standards. Elitist groups are literally what brings communities down.

People who are actually good at something are generally extremely humble about their skill, and it's almost always the "lesser" people that complain and feel as though they are the "elite" group. I feel a classic example is feminism. We all know the bullshit and trigger memes out there with regards to feminism, and tons of them feel entitled and elitist, but there are legitimate feminists out there that understand there position in society. They condemn the elitist attitudes of cancer tumblr feminazis, but believe in certain values that are core to a more properly societal wave of feminism and express them in less autistic ways. You can be non-gendered or identify as some other random non-binary gender and I would not give half a shit, but the moment you start feeling entitled to belittle people just for misgendering you or assuming your identity is when you cross the line. You are a human being, so act courteous and understanding to others who live in the same society as you do.

Sure, it's slightly different in this case, but it's still usually the "elitist" few that complain and make drama over what is right and what is wrong. When it comes down to it, things that are truly just "bad" get gutted out of the system almost immediately primarily by popular belief that it is bad, and we can see that with basically most of the maps made by "new mappers." Obviously, some maps are a little more dubious. Standards are created by the community; they are literally the norms and customs of the community. . Most people are like "this" so this is what usually should happen, etc. That is literally how the mapping ranking and criteria was created. Standards created by the community on what is "proper" technique. Once we delve into the nitty gritty, opinions arise, but no one is completely entitled to say I am 100% right. I mean I had exact same problem with the first Aspire mapping contest, where Bonzi got second. His map triggered the fuck out of me because it was literally unplayable in many regards, and I spoke out about it, but my opinion is not an objective truth. Let's be real here, the world is not decided by a few "elite people" who understand how the world works best. We get shitty rulers or leaders all the time, and when their ideals don't match the community's, he/she just gets gutted The world is just a shifting statistical norm.

In the end quality is still up to the community to decide, whether you like it or not. It's not like red like roses just bypasses the whole ranking and modding process anyway.

People like Graces of Heaven and people like Red like Roses. It may very well be the case that even the community as a whole believes Graces of Heaven is "better" mapped with more technical skill and such, but in the end, the question boils down to did you have fun playing it? And the answer is yes for both for most of the community apparently, and there is nothing wrong with that.
Endaris
Agreeing on points is vital part of a discussion, so don't skip it.
I do recall the old OP of the feature request being much shorter indeed. Not going to search that up but I guess we can call the second part of my previous post void.
Iirc the old title clearly targetted gimmicky maps though. It had the keyword "gimmicky" in its title at least.

What you're criticising in this thread is the reaction of players on what the mysterious preselector-dude aka Ephemeral+pals made out of that idea.
As I mentioned at the start of my second post:
There is no particular value in loving those maps when there's nothing special about them. If they're neither special nor good then the entire section holds no particular value. It's just a section of maps that randomly happen to have a scoreboard.
I think a lot of the salt being spread roots in the idea of having a category for gimmicky maps being compromised by the preselector and by holding community votes.
Sure, it's what the preselector-dudes make out of it but I think it's short-sighted to call it insufferable elitism if people like BD just wanted that section to highlight and encourage unrankable quality mapping as probably intended with the initial feature request. The idea was just compromised and even though the reaction is certainly not mature I think someone else is to blame - for compromising the idea while ignoring the arguments against it.
winber1

Endaris wrote:

I think a lot of the salt being spread roots in the idea of having a category for gimmicky maps being compromised by the preselector and by holding community votes.
May very well be the case, but seeing as Loved is still in a beta/alpha testing phase, those details should be figured out decided sooner or later. Whether for gimmicky maps only or just "popular" ones, it is what it is. Certain maps won't make it, certain maps will. Nothing you can do about it. If you really cared, you can promote the map and/or express your thoughts about it, but there's not reason to condemn people for being dumb for not realizing what a "masterpiece" it is.

People just need to open their minds a little more man
chainpullz
The loved maps list sucks. There is a distinct lacking of W1 maps. :? :? :? :? :?
winber1
tru, i make only the top quality maps for only autistic morons like me
Fxjlk

My Angel Wilchq wrote:

Can't you understand that players mentioned are also the target audience for these maps?

Do you really think that people who get 20% with nofail are equal in assessing maps as players who play them quite comfortably?
Good point, I agree that higher ranked players are better at assessing higher ranked maps and this should be catered for somehow.

However, the target audience of the loved section is the entire community not just the higher ranked players as railey said. The majority of players are bad and may not get high ranks or anything but im sure there are groups of shitty players that compete with their friends on these maps and they could be subjectively just as important as high ranked players for the health of the game.

The question is do you give higher ranked players more power to boost the competitive side of the game or rank maps that the community likes to boost the fun casual players have? I think there should be a balance between the two, both are important.

My Angel Wilchq wrote:

go eat a dick low ranked plebs
You know you can make a point without being condescending

Railey2 wrote:

You are such an elitist
Even if he is, its best to focus on the arguments rather than a persons character if you want this thread to be actual discussion rather than drama.
buny

CXu wrote:

Welp.




Objectively good/bad means nothing as long as the loved category is supposed to be what it is right now. If it did matter, we would just have a ranked category with more laxed rules, aka old approved.
Very underrated post, there are always going to be people that think their opinion leans more to objectiveness than subjectivity.

In a group of equals, there's always going to be at least one person that thinks they're superior. Welcome to humanity.


This thread is all in vain. At the end of the day the only people that would agree are people that are sick of such personalities already, and the elitists that existed in the communities aren't going to have a sudden change in perspective.
N0thingSpecial
The thing is that I highly doubt people who vote for the maps they say they love actually plays the map extensively, the more I look at the list the more I think "this is just a list of maps for people who wants to see cookiezi playing it", which leads to the question "do these people actually like the map for the right reason?".

Why would you love something that less than 0.5% of the community is actually going to enjoy it, it becomes more questionable when a map is regarded as low quality getting loved, such as maps like red like roses, especially when there's another red like roses which is imo higher quality, but just because it doesn't have jumps as big as the popular one it was completely disregarded. Do we really want to discourage quality by attacking people who just simply have a better understanding in mapping?

The love section is indeed community base but if the community is not aware that the maps that they want to get loved are low quality, then you're gonna end up with maps that are low quality in the loved section. I mean just look at how democracy worked out for UK when they voted to leave EU.

By no means I'm saying the maps in the loved section are shit, something indeed can be fun despite being low quality, but it bugs me to hell that mappers who actually deserve the publicity for putting in the effort to improve their mapping, never got the chance cause their maps aren't hard enough.
KtkC
(For what it's worth, a division between the good and bad players would happen in pretty much any community-driven game with skill/rank being a distinguishing factor, don't get too caught up on it)
(And I have no opinion on which map should've won, note how new I am anyways)

Given the literal definition of this LOVED category the quality of the map isn't grounds for appeal; it's purely community driven.
Also, you should expect more "objectively worse" maps to win out in the future in this category too, and pay no attention to it if you're a top player, honestly. lol

If you want to split up LOVED, that's a fine idea as well.
1. (Experienced Choice - top x000 players' votes only, or from a designated panel of users)
2. (Community - anyone can vote)

The top-tier players have good reason to be upset that their favorite didn't win, though.
It's not really an example of elitism to be upset about the results, but some of the histrionics I just read might approach that.
Jukkii
preach n0thingspecial. you said what i wanted to try and say in a really good way.
i think that red like roses shouldnt be loved, because that would be kinda pointless, it hold no value. basically what endaris said but id like to add a little to it.
the map getting loved just gets like leaderboards...
who do you think is gonna fill those leaderboards? definitely not the 100ks that voted for it.
the "elitists" will play it to show that they are superior to the 100ks, not cause they love it. and even if a 100k gets like 5000/6000 rank on the map its definitely not as important as the ones in top 50. it would cause even worse elitism.
Stefan
Guys, it's about to click

the

circles.

What the fuck, the category has been added to give maps which are unsuitable for the rank status an own leaderboard and to give the attention to the public audience they deserve. If someone dislikes the beatmap because <put any random reason> then let them be, holy crap. The category is dedicated is widely dedicated for the high tier players and for a little part of the other gimmick-related beatmaps (such as Fake It).

If you can't accept people calling said beatmap as shit, you're not better than the guys complaining about the choices. But go ahead and destroy the purpose of the category.
N0thingSpecial
Oh yea and I think that the voting system itself is flawed. Having a larger percentage doesn't always mean it's more popular, it's just the larger minority liking the map there's still several other groups of minority who indirectly oppose that 1 larger minority. So calling it communities choice was kinda misleading

But hey forum voting system is limited ¯\_(ツ)_/¯
winber1
umm, its either yes or no, so there is a majority and a minority. whether or not that majority is the "acitve" population of forum posters/"good players" is another question, but technically speaking they are still part of the "community"

it's not like you can just exclude them for being new
Yuudachi-kun
Haha look another useless railey thread intended to make argue for 10 pages
N0thingSpecial

winber1 wrote:

umm, its either yes or no, so there is a majority and a minority. whether or not that majority is the "acitve" population of forum posters/"good players" is another question, but technically speaking they are still part of the "community"

it's not like you can just exclude them for being new
OK extreme situation but my point is that lets say there's 3 maps for loved and you can only cast on vote, and he results are two maps with 33%, and one map with 34%, in the current system the map with 34% would be in the love section, but technically there's 66% of the voters oppose that one map being loved, so despite being the "majority" it's not an accurate representation of what the community wants
Caput Mortuum
Well, the voting system is temporary anyways. It will be replaced with a better system in the future.
winber1

Yuudachi-kun wrote:

Haha look another useless railey thread intended to make argue for 10 pages
arguably more worthwhile than browsing classic G&R shitposts and repeated questions

man idk why i still browse this shit

fuck
Flimsy

N0thingSpecial wrote:

I mean just look at how democracy worked out for UK when they voted to leave EU.
Lol? Looks like it turned out pretty well.

It's not suddenly bad when you don't get it your way. Not even making a stance on Brexit, but this example is actually just silly.

What's with forums mostly composed of anime fans / weeaboos and making really out-of-touch with reality comparisons to voting on a game where the end result still means nothing? Hitler, ISIS, Drugs, Brexit. It's really something. Tune into next time where we compare low ranked players voting on a fun-intended category to eugenics and who is and isn't allowed to do something based on some subjective stance.
Fxjlk

N0thingSpecial wrote:

OK extreme situation but my point is that lets say there's 3 maps for loved and you can only cast on vote, and he results are two maps with 33%, and one map with 34%, in the current system the map with 34% would be in the love section, but technically there's 66% of the voters oppose that one map being loved, so despite being the "majority" it's not an accurate representation of what the community wants
They don't always oppose the map being loved, they usually just prefer it over another. If the community could instead rated the maps by 1-10 rather than there being a binary vote or not vote you would see a different story.

KtkC wrote:

If you want to split up LOVED, that's a fine idea as well.
1. (Experienced Choice - top x000 players' votes only, or from a designated panel of users)
2. (Community - anyone can vote)
I like this idea

-Jukke- wrote:

who do you think is gonna fill those leaderboards?
They may not fill the top of the boards but that doesn't mean they don't use them to compete with their friends. Though I agree that the better players probably use the boards more.

Stefan wrote:

What the fuck, the category has been added to give maps which are unsuitable for the rank status an own leaderboard and to give the attention to the public audience they deserve
Good point, public attention is the other important purpose of the loved category that more competitive players probably forget. This loved category isn't ranked and is more about maps the community likes rather than competitive maps that are unable to be ranked.

N0thingSpecial wrote:

do these people actually like the map for the right reason?
Then the follow up question is how can you tell? I think this aspect of voting is ignored because there is no real way to factor this into the system without it losing its democraticness.

Yuudachi-kun wrote:

Haha look another useless railey thread intended to make argue for 10 pages
Oh look another khelly post adding nothing to the discussion.
Backfire
Yall wild 😂👌🏻
Yuudachi-kun

M3ATL0V3R wrote:

Yuudachi-kun wrote:

Haha look another useless railey thread intended to make argue for 10 pages
Oh look another khelly post adding nothing to the discussion.
You think I care about whether or not I'm adding to this meaningless discussion whose only purpose is to just incite meaningless G&R shit

I'm just here to point out that: This is like the 4th time Railey feels like he has to do this
Fxjlk

Yuudachi-kun wrote:

You think I care about whether or not I'm adding to this meaningless discussion whose only purpose is to just incite meaningless G&R shit

I'm just here to point out that: This is like the 4th time Railey feels like he has to do this
Fair enough, I understand if you don't want to get involved. Though the actual points discussed is interesting if the drama is disregarded.
Full Tablet

M3ATL0V3R wrote:

N0thingSpecial wrote:

OK extreme situation but my point is that lets say there's 3 maps for loved and you can only cast on vote, and he results are two maps with 33%, and one map with 34%, in the current system the map with 34% would be in the love section, but technically there's 66% of the voters oppose that one map being loved, so despite being the "majority" it's not an accurate representation of what the community wants
They don't always oppose the map being loved, they usually just prefer it over another. If the community could instead rated the maps by 1-10 rather than there being a binary vote or not vote you would see a different story.
The problem with a system where people people rate maps by 1-10 is that different people have different standards for which value means what (some people would consider "5" average, "7" outstanding, and "10" incredibly good; while some people consider "9" average, and "10" good).

Also, it is prone to abuse: people when they vote, want to maximize their own voting power, so if they think a map deserves a rating of "8", for example, they vote "10" instead to make sure the rating is pushed up (voting "8" would just be a weaker vote).

Instead of a rating system for votes, a better system would make each vote consist of a ranking of candidates from best to worst. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Single_tr ... te#Example
Fxjlk

Full Tablet wrote:

The problem with a system where people people rate maps by 1-10 is that different people have different standards for which value means what (some people would consider "5" average, "7" outstanding, and "10" incredibly good; while some people consider "9" average, and "10" good).

Also, it is prone to abuse: people when they vote, want to maximize their own voting power, so if they think a map deserves a rating of "8", for example, they vote "10" instead to make sure the rating is pushed up (voting "8" would just be a weaker vote).

Instead of a rating system for votes, a better system would make each vote consist of a ranking of candidates from best to worst. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Single_tr ... te#Example
That is a good system for a small candidate pool but when many maps are considered 1-10 is best. If every person had do list their preference for every map over each other it would be exhausting for the participants. That's why they use the 1-10 system on myanimelist, imdb, etc
Full Tablet

M3ATL0V3R wrote:

Full Tablet wrote:

The problem with a system where people people rate maps by 1-10 is that different people have different standards for which value means what (some people would consider "5" average, "7" outstanding, and "10" incredibly good; while some people consider "9" average, and "10" good).

Also, it is prone to abuse: people when they vote, want to maximize their own voting power, so if they think a map deserves a rating of "8", for example, they vote "10" instead to make sure the rating is pushed up (voting "8" would just be a weaker vote).

Instead of a rating system for votes, a better system would make each vote consist of a ranking of candidates from best to worst. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Single_tr ... te#Example
That is a good system for a small candidate pool but when many maps are considered 1-10 is best. If every person had do list their preference for every map over each other it would be exhausting for the participants. That's why they use the 1-10 system on myanimelist, imdb, etc
Including everyone on the list in each vote is not mandatory
Fxjlk

Full Tablet wrote:

Including everyone on the list in each vote is not mandatory
Ok i guess its better then, my bad.
repr1se
Let's be real. There's going to be drama (read: cancer) where Internet users are allowed to disagree.
Fxjlk

Full Tablet wrote:

The problem with a system where people people rate maps by 1-10 is that different people have different standards for which value means what (some people would consider "5" average, "7" outstanding, and "10" incredibly good; while some people consider "9" average, and "10" good).

Also, it is prone to abuse: people when they vote, want to maximize their own voting power, so if they think a map deserves a rating of "8", for example, they vote "10" instead to make sure the rating is pushed up (voting "8" would just be a weaker vote).

Instead of a rating system for votes, a better system would make each vote consist of a ranking of candidates from best to worst. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Single_tr ... te#Example
Maybe a better system would be a combination of both systems. 1-10 is simpler for the voters but gives unequal power in some situations. If however the 1-10 rating list of each user was converted into an equivalent STV preference list this system would have the advantages of both systems. Simple and fair.
N0thingSpecial
M3ATL0V3R you're solo carrying this thread to 10 pages
Fxjlk

N0thingSpecial wrote:

M3ATL0V3R you're solo carrying this thread to 10 pages
Threads are a team effort but ill try my best not to post ;)
Xyrus_old_1

M3ATL0V3R wrote:

N0thingSpecial wrote:

M3ATL0V3R you're solo carrying this thread to 10 pages
Threads are a team effort but ill try my best not to post ;)
Don't give up!
winber1

N0thingSpecial wrote:

M3ATL0V3R you're solo carrying this thread to 10 pages
or maybe he's solo-throwing it
Sayorie
don't worry Railey2, I'm doing this for the meme
Finally done with this piece of worthless thread. Crap, Railey2, when you started making threads like "The reason why tablet is (probably) better than mouse." and <and some other posts>, I actually started getting my hopes up that you were finally going to break out of your terrible "The reason you can (probably) never become a pro at osu" stage and start cranking out truly admirable posts. Even though some of your recent posts raised a red flag or two, I still had high hopes. And then this self-indulgent pretentious abomination gets vomitted onto G&R. This is not only your worst thread, but possibly the worst thread I have ever seen. Why? Others were bad as satire, ignorance, age, or inexperience. You qualify for none of these categories, you have no excuse.
Believe me, I have nothing against insight, be it criticism, haphazard analyses, or speculative writing. And I have no problem with someone in the osu community bringing out a healthy discussion as a flagship of broadening horizons. What I do have a problem with is that you, the person bringing it, have absolutely no respect for the community or its structure. At the slightest hint of frustration or annoyance, you are more than happy to start disregarding the the mantra of "play more" and just throwing ugly and pointless posts where you just criticize the topic or concept to anything you feel like, no matter how awful the end thread becomes.
This vulgar excuse for a thread reeks of every stupid and arrogant Raileyism the community has had to bear witness to: Extreme fallacies with no logical reasoning, sky high cynicism at random times, ideas that just decide to jump to some random irrelevant topic with no warning, buckshot spread theory with no cohesive structure, giving examples that space out to absurd degrees, rampant abuse of "please don't get me wrong" to cover up lazy writing, scientific hodgepodge that clearly are just cases of Ctrl+C and Ctrl+V abuse, and worst of all, using online disinhibition as your own little shield to justify every little moment of "I can write this because fuck you, you don't know me in real life" you can stuff in your pathetic and self-subservient posts.
Stop using this board as canvases for your abhorrent "insight", stop using your cult of personality to force your offensive ideas on others, and stop thinking that everyone is not good just because we don't have the talent to supplement our hard work.
Fxjlk

N0thingSpecial wrote:

M3ATL0V3R you're solo carrying this thread to 10 pages

Xyrus wrote:

Don't give up!
show more
Please sign in to reply.

New reply