GameBanshee Forums

Ahh yes, it always makes it seem that bit more sophisticated to use words/terms from other languages.

As an Aussie, our nation works on tall poppy syndrome, so I can't help but want to comment on that.

dj_venom wrote:Ahh yes, it always makes it seem that bit more sophisticated to use words/terms from other languages.

As an Aussie, our nation works on tall poppy syndrome, so I can't help but want to comment on that.

The only latin one would ever need is "Rando Conjurum Es"

(I've been playing Dungeon Siege 2 with it's "correct" latin )

What's it mean?

Luis Antonio wrote:<snip>I mean the post of the decision and the closure of the trheads with no warning, no request to start another thread, just a closure and a deep smile. <snip>

Again you lie, with a deep smile.

Have you looked at the closing post of the threads which got closed? In case you haven't I have - because it was me closing them.

Me wrote: This thread is closed, as per the newly implemented thread limit of 1.500 post.

Feel free to continue in a new thread.

Only the HC didn't get such a post, because it was bumped as a protest towards the new policy.

dj_venom wrote:What's it mean?

Hell if I know. I have to "look" that one up

dj_venom wrote:What's it mean?

Hey, I wrote you a PM

I know for sure though, that you can dismiss any thing with that phrase

Xandax wrote:Well - it has to stop somewhere. So might as well start here?
As I said - if people didn't have all the facts, then it is bad to jump to conclusions. Why is that a bad thing...?

Xandax, I agree with you up to a point. Rushing to judgment and acting as if you know everything when you don't have all of the facts is indeed "A BAD THING". However, some people deserve more credit than you're giving them when you dismiss their "conlcusion jumping" as "a people-thing" (or however you phrased it earlier). Even though we're basically hairless, hardheaded apes, some of us actually use the scientific method in our daily lives. We see things happen (i.e., we make observations). We know we don't have a full explanation, but we develop a hypothesis (which is to be distinguished from a conclusion) to give ourselves some way to understand what has happened. If we are truly rational and openminded, we will test our hypothesis and subject it to scrutiny and debate to see if it holds up. Sometimes, that is what discussion is all about--we're not just stating our preformed opinions; we are actively searching for answers by airing our own ideas and listening to other people. Sometimes there is no good way to acquire (experimental) data, so all we're left with is a hypothesis and possibly a consensus regarding that hypothesis. But in my opinion that is better than saying, "We don't know anything, so let's forget all about it."

Luis Antonio wrote:Xandax, by the Gods, have you not noticed this aint only about the policy? It is about the attitude. Look around, open your eyes wide. This is despotism, I had pointed you that.

Luis, I do not know why you were demoted. But given the fact that it happened, it's only natural for us to speculate why it happened. My hypothesis is that Buck's reflex is to demote any moderators who do not support his policies wholeheartedly. You can call it "despotic" or call it a "strong arm tactic", but it is certainly something I can understand (which is exactly why I formed that particular hypothesis). Personally, I wouldn't have demoted you myself because I would have been afraid to hurt your feelings; but that does not rule out the possibility that Buck is a much more pragmatic and effective leader than I could ever be. Like it or not, I think he did the right thing. He did what a leader has to do.

We could test my hypothesis, you know. All we need to do is get a few of the other moderators to rebel, and then observe how Buck reacts. Then we would have scientific evidence to prove or disprove my hypothesis. Of course, it wouldn't be a pretty sight, and I don't recommend it. In this case, ignorance is preferable to certainty.

@Xandax: You see, that is the logical alternative to "jumping to conclusions". Be careful what you wish for.

Vicsun wrote:Hi, VonDondu.

Hello, Vicsun. How have you been?

Cor, Buck quadruple-posted, he's an inspiration to spammers everywhere!

Right, that chapter is now closed, As it should be as requested by the Administrator himself so I'll be going back to MLM and Nexus now.

Considering the context of your post and in light of the recent events that have transpired and announcement made by Buck, I find it out of taste of baiting members reading in THIS forum to continue such discussion in another private forum by giving direct links. If you wish to invite friends over you may do so, but please not through this forum.

A touch of delicadeza or sense of propriety is warranted here.

Thank you.

- Maharlika -

Luis Antonio wrote:Xandax, by the Gods, have you not noticed this aint only about the policy? It is about the attitude. Look around, open your eyes wide. This is despotism, I had pointed you that.

If I had a penny for every time someone made an analogy between internet forums and a country, I'd have a lot of pennies.

Though honestly, why would you expect anything other than "despotism", and how much say do you think the members should have? Should we be able to decide how the front page should look like? Or what games are covered? Or who's interviewed? Buck has spent hundreds of hours on this website and if I remember correctly the forum is actually bleeding him money - i.e. he's paying for our entertainment. In that light, I don't really think calling him a fascist or a despot because he won't run the forum according to your whims is justified.

Well, that's my view anyway. If you find a democratic forum with elected moderators and administrators, let me know

edit: I'm doing pretty good, Von. I'm starting college in a few weeks so that's pretty exiting. Until then, I'm soaking up the last rays of the summer, so to speak.

Case closed moving on ---->

Masa wrote:Case closed moving on ---->

You're right, I posted before I saw Buck closed the other thread.

Anyway, I'm off. Goodbye, spam-thread.

Masa wrote:Case closed moving on ---->

Went longer than I had thought.

It was a series of unfortunate events

Maybe it was only good that the thread was closed...
It was getting pretty nasty accusating on blaming...

And please, maybe we should quit the topic here too, since there is no point to try to continue the conversation which doesn't lead anywhere anymore...

I think I'm going to hit the bed, good night!

Vicsun wrote:Hey, I wrote you a PM

Sorry Vic, I was replying to your thread last night, but the internet cut out. I would have gone and fixed it, but it was 1 in the morning, so I didn't want to wake my parents.

Hello VonDondu,
When I see you I remember that I should have replied to you about the "female" stuff! I even asked around some more among the native English speakers I know, but I forgot to post because a series of chaotic events occurred.

VonDondu wrote:We know we don't have a full explanation, but we develop a hypothesis (which is to be distinguished from a conclusion) to give ourselves some way to understand what has happened. If we are truly rational and openminded, we will test our hypothesis and subject it to scrutiny and debate to see if it holds up.
(SNIP)
Sometimes there is no good way to acquire (experimental) data, so all we're left with is a hypothesis and possibly a consensus regarding that hypothesis.

I think you are correctly describing how the human minds approaches a situation it does not fully understand. The problem starts when people
1. do not know how to test for a hypothesis and/or
2. do not know how to differ between what is possible to test and not.
Of course some people may actually just dislike the idea of testing and may for instance view a magical signs or an inner mystical feeling as "proof", but that I believe is actually not very common in everyday life.

Not knowing how to test for a hypothesis, often causes such jumps to conclusions as Xandax mentions, simply because people replace hypothesis testing with for instance how they feel about things or what they hear from somebody else, etc.

Hi Curdis, I can see you lurking.

I think Neo Seeker has a democratic process to some extent. Election of either mods or super mods.