there were a lot of questions.

The shitstorm was scheduled for the 23rd... not yesterday... :3

but who gives a fuck

83% of America is Christian.

this was great.

You might not know but I have a habit of provoking the other #music hangouts with my horrible taste for bad pop music. I took no offence to the comment about Britney, I just felt like saying my opinion about her music. It was all in good fun :D

but for the record. I don't like the map.

"So Brittany Spears is better than xxx simply because she's more popular?" or something like that.

No seriously, I'm slightly emberrassed at the quality of the review. I'm seriously emberrassed at having my name stomped on this mud-throwing orgy.

Also, Britney Spears is good music and that is a purely subjective opinion. If anyone wants to discuss that with me, they can find me in #music if I haven't been kicked for listening to Britney for hours thru and thru.

@SuperStarDomX: My sincerest apologies for kindling this flamewar on one of your maps.

That Brittany comment is slightly out of focus, but you get the point if you read my comment to the end. :)

"mass-opinion is inherently the definition of "good""

So Brittany spears is good music?
So Titanic and Avatar are the best films of all time?
So McDonalds is great food?

Mass appeal is A marker, it's not THE marker. My point was that just because 10 people think something and 1 person thinks the opposite, that doesn't make the 10 people right. They could all be using broken logic, or basing their opinion on an arbitrary foundation, or countless other things.

It does not make it /right/ simply because more people believe it. I didn't say it doesn't make it /good/ if a vast amount of people enjoy a thing because that's obviously a subjective truth to that group of people and couldn't be argued.

;)

Secondly, "dick dick dick, no I'm not a dick, you are because you don't understand subjectivity, dick dick dick, dick dick dick, dick."

What. The Fuck. Firstly, everybody needs to calm their farms. Secondly, in all this arguing about who is a dick for not-accepting/being-too-rigid with subjectivity, you all seem to have forgotten that your perception of dickishness is also entirely subjective. ATOB was 100% correct when he said this community is built on double-standards, and those of you who consider yourself exempt from this generalisation need to go look at your actions. We all are doing it. All of us. Of course, this is hardly inexcusable (it's hardly uncommon in mainstream society), but what is inexcusable (and honestly rather juvenile) is the assumption that you are not, and that you are superior to another because of this.



Thirdly, I recall somebody saying that what is right is not necessarily the same as the mass belief. I just think that I should be pointing out (since nobody else did) that this argument is absolutely ridiculous. I can't even begin to understand how you can make such an audacious statement, as without some kind of divine intervention, mass-opinion is inherently the definition of "good", and even there, the existence of another god who could differ in opinion completely foils that argument, ignoring the fact that it assumes that a god is morally ideal.. "Good/Bad" is essentially the fundamental principal of subjectivity, so for you to attempt to exclude a possible definition for the term defies your entire argument.

Finally, I'd just like to point out a little funny I stumble upon:

dictator = dick-tater
= penis-potato
= testicle

Firstly, I agree with ChrisE on one of his points. I think that ultimately the author should have the decision of whether or not he desires debates on his map, and I think this re-raises an interesting, much older debate - that an author should/should-not be able to delete comments on their own maps. I think that this would be worth reconsidering, as I believe it would make for an extremely valid solution to the problem of opinion-spam.

Alternatively, a system where you check a radio button field on the type of comments you would appreciate would be effective. I know that I personally have made maps purely for the purpose of debates when I've been frustrated by something, or have had an idea, and I'm sure many of you are aware of this too. The important thing about this is that it worked. Evidence shows that a localisation of debate on NUMA actually works, and that as long as people are aware of such an event occurring, they will use it, not flaunt opinions wherever they decide is appropriate.

I can straight off the top of my head think of a site where these features are both used in tandem (DevArt), and they work very effectively. I'm sure there are more, and I think that it would be a worthwhile thing to consider.

We should tell him how much his Review sucks too and then debate the ethics of missing your Review date on a random map in his Favorites.

I was a terrible admin.

What will this community be when he leaves?

Sorry atob, but southpaw kicks your ass.

I don't /like/ a comment of "this is a bad map," but it helps a little.

My comments on your map are indeed limited to an AGD (which I almost always come up with, something you forgot to mention), and praise, because frankly, 90% of your maps are perfect, in my opinion. So a demo is the only thing I can really contribute.

Not the actions the position required. And it wasn't the only reason, nor the main reason. ;)

He missed his last spot as well, i think. Nice topic change.

Atob can be suck a dicktator sometimes.

I forget that I'm an admin a lot. I like being part of the plebes. Regardless, my status is impressed upon other people and maybe that makes my words have more weight to them.

"
In fact, one of the main reasons I stood down as admin was because I think diplomacy is needed as a standard and i don't believe diplomacy is always the most valid tactic.

It's not an opinion that wins me the most friends, but then the friends I have understand me and the way I conduct myself and know it's nothing to do with anything but a strive for balance."
That's why you stepped down then, eh? I have huge trouble with diplomacy. I think in most cases a decision needs to be made and that decision requires a lot of people being content and a lot more people being upset, with a few either indifferent or unimaginably angry. If you were so concerned with always trying to reach a middle-ground decision then I can understand why you would step down as admin. I obviously have less convictions than you do over the consequences of my actions here. Whether that's for the best or not, I can't say.

A comment of "this is a bad map" is just as helpful as "this is a good map", but you wouldn't get uppity about those.

If stardom wants more from a particular author, he can request more indepth feedback. We don't always have time to write out in depth thoughts on the map, and, tbh flag, 90% of the comments you leave on my map are just as unhelpful being in the vein of:

"Great map, loved it, fav'd!"

I'm wouldn't knock you for that, you shouldn't knock the opposite.

Okay, except that that's exactly what several of you did. (Not necessarily you.)

Either way, this could've been handled better by the staff. Who's fucking day is it anyway, I wanna see a new map on the page.

Soon as his map goes up, it's a free forum of debate for whatever the consensus wants. That's how this site remains alive and vibrant and free.

As I said, these are 'comment boxes' not 'let's appease the author' boxes, nor 'let's all get agree' boxes.

At the end of the day it should be superstardom's decision as to if this argument is fine. He's going to come online, see "1 map with unread comments", go "Oooh!", click, "WHAT THE FUCK."

He shouldn't have to put up with us, and before you say anything, I know this isn't helping :P

"but doesn't address my point that criticizing a reviewer mindlessly doesn't help anything."

That's a rather trite point. We all know this. No-one in their right mind would argue against it.

That wasn't what I was calling you out on, dude.

it might be wise to consider that I wasn't the one who started this silly debate, also.

"No one ever said comments like those were constructive for the author, however, they in NO way stop other's from ignoring them and playing the map themselves."

gloomp put up a decent argument to this.

"IN fact, this kind of controversy will bring people back to the map more often than they would have usually."

Back to read, and /maybe/ to play. I played it extra because I felt bad about all my spam/whatever.

The rest is true, but doesn't address my point that criticizing a reviewer mindlessly doesn't help anything. I would've handled this by talking to DE privately about upping the standard of his reviews, and giving him tips or examples of great reviews.

The Staff and the consensus have already agreed that is is a valid place for it. The argument here was mostly with conduct and behaviour. ;)

1) A featured map is no place for an argument about the feature system/reviewers/reviews/atob. Go make a thread in the forums.

2) I didn't like the review, but the last two words made me laugh.

3) Southpaw could well be a dictator, but he chooses not to because he's nice like that.

4) The map isn't featureworthy, but i agree that I played it because it was featured.

5) Flag should think his arguments through before posting ._.

No one ever said comments like those were constructive for the author, however, they in NO way stop other's from ignoring them and playing the map themselves.

IN fact, this kind of controversy will bring people back to the map more often than they would have usually.

Even as a feature, a map will sometimes only gain a few more comments than it previously held. Even if it's up there for a full day. I can almost guarantee that, had this debate not took place, the comments about the map itself would be very close to exactly how they are now.

The feature history shows us this.

Should've refreshed. You seem to think that I talk myself into circles; I seem to think, oddly, that I'm right.

But this: "I was only saying that to Flag who persisted to defend his double standard of ok to comment on the subjectivity of map quality, but the subjectivity of review quality is pointless."

You are wrong. Why? Because SSX /can/ improve his maps based on feedback from us. However, DE /can't/ make his writing better from comments like "bad review" or (from a fucking admin) "this is horrible."

Incidentally, I have played this map exactly five times more than I would have; every time I've come back to this page, I've idly given it a few playthroughs.

Dude, I talked down to you sure, but you have to admit you made some pretty sloppy debates and fell foul to a whole heap of (I'm getting sick of typing this now) double-standards?

You tend to confuse yourself a lot like this, which makes debating with you very frustrating. It's the main reason I asked you not to continue the previous encounter, I knew it would end up with me telling you to fuck off and I didn't want that. :)

Lol southpaw you trivializing bastard.

Holy -fuck-. I go away for a few hours and when I get back there's literally too much for me to read. Even gloomp posted.

Originally, I only had a problem with southpaw and others aggressively criticizing DE. Then atob grabbed one of my peripheral points and ran with it, in the process insulting me a lot. I'm used to that, so hey.

At this point there's not much purpose in arguing whether or not this is the right place for the discussion ...

Yeah.

wheeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeee!

Wait up...

I never claimed to be human nor imperfect. Please do not disenfranchise my character.