Conquer Club

Owenshooter derailing suggestions in Sugs and Bugs [Noted]

All previously decided cases. Please check here before opening a new case.

Moderators: Multi Hunters, Cheating/Abuse Team

Forum rules
Please read the Community Guidelines before posting.

[These cases have been closed. If you would like to appeal the decision of the hunter please open a ticket on the help page and the case will be looked into by a second hunter.]

Re: Owenshooter derailing suggestions in Sugs and Bugs [Noted]

Postby Incandenza on Mon Feb 09, 2009 1:11 am

FarangDemon wrote:Owen, posting another outspoken player's personal opinion of me does nothing to defend the allegations that you are deliberately trolling.


Not for nothing, but I don't have a personal opinion of you. You're some dude on the internet. If you look at what I wrote, I even praised your gameplay and perceived intelligence. Just because I disagree with your argument and your presentation thereof, don't dismiss it by playing the "that's just your personal opinion of me" card.

EDIT: Oh, and owen? Carpe diem, mate. =D>
THOTA: dingdingdingdingdingdingBOOM

Te Occidere Possunt Sed Te Edere Non Possunt Nefas Est
User avatar
Colonel Incandenza
 
Posts: 4949
Joined: Thu Oct 19, 2006 5:34 pm
Location: Playing Eschaton with a bucket of old tennis balls

Re: Owenshooter derailing suggestions in Sugs and Bugs [Noted]

Postby FarangDemon on Mon Feb 09, 2009 1:13 am

King_Herpes wrote:Hey everyone, gather 'round, it's owenshooter! One of CC's most lovable facetious trolls.


I thought a little light-hearted banter might be in order after considering these serious allegations. Under a monarchy, an accusation coming down from the King himself would be enough to arrest any villainous troll.
User avatar
Brigadier FarangDemon
 
Posts: 700
Joined: Wed Apr 23, 2008 1:36 am

Re: Owenshooter is the silent majority of one...

Postby owenshooter on Mon Feb 09, 2009 2:28 am

FarangDemon wrote:
King_Herpes wrote:Hey everyone, gather 'round, it's owenshooter! One of CC's most lovable facetious trolls.


I thought a little light-hearted banter might be in order after considering these serious allegations. Under a monarchy, an accusation coming down from the King himself would be enough to arrest any villainous troll.


not my fautl i am smarter than you and realize that a number under 30 is not a 73% majority out of a number exceeding 20K... not my fault you can't handle that this is not your site and the owner of the site is dealing with YOUR NUMBER ONE ISSUE as he best sees fit... not my fault you can't handle when people mock your made up data, insufficient polls, and flat out researched lies (60 out 60, not truly being 60 straight comes to mind), and show you how skewed and obtuse your thinking is... hey, maybe you missed this!! let me post it again:
Incandenza wrote:
FarangDemon wrote:Why calculate scores and give people meaningless ranks when we could give them ranks that are a better indicator of relative skill?

I'm perplexed that so many high ranked, competitive players can't understand this.


That's an excellent question. Speaking as someone who would directly benefit from some of your proposed changes, let me try and break it down for ya:

1. You inflate, obfuscate, and otherwise commit vile injustices against data. Let's start with this statement, which has been repeated by you quite often in recent days:

FarangDemon wrote:I'm just trying to bring home the point that 73% of the CC community want the system changed so that score is more an indicator of skill than harvesting techniques.


First off, the 73% you cite comes from this thread, where indeed 73% of respondants voted yes to the poll. However, the poll question was this: "Have scoreboard display option to only show players who sometimes play peers (are not farmers)?" Not only is the question very vaguely worded, but it seems to me to imply that you are suggesting a different way to view/sort the scoreboard, rather than a full-blown revamp of the scoring system itself.

Furthermore, you extrapolate this 73% approval of an imprecisely-worded question about a topic seemingly different from your core contention across all of CC. As has been noted, there were 40 respondants to your poll. Statisticians have a term known as "small sample size", which would seem to be a perfect fit in this case. It seems disingenuous to map the opinions of a group of people that could fit comfortably in a schoolbus onto a population that would fill Madison Square Garden.

2. You claim that this isn't about you, when it clearly is about you. What you don't seem to understand is that, when someone makes a suggestion that would directly benefit him/her, people will naturally be suspicious.

3. You favor restricting the types of games that repeat customers can join. By suggesting that the map restrictions placed on new recruits be extended to cooks, you're trying to keep nearly 2000 repeat customers (many of them paying customers) from playing on roughly half of the maps on CC. You want to restrict these people from playing games because, in effect, you don't think they're good enough, all in the name of effecting "a just scoring system" that will really only affect page one of the scoreboard, if not just the top 100 or so.

4. You favor de facto rank segregation. If your suggestions were implemented, high ranks would stop playing low ranks immediately. Open team games would become a thing of the past. Even stripers wouldn't be able to get games against people over 2000 points, because they wouldn't fall within the 2/3rds threshold that's the centerpiece of your suggestion thread cited above.

5. You are uninterested in constructive criticism, instead defaming others like myself and owen as trolls.
You even created a whole thread about owen. You don't seem to understand that people may disagree with you for reasons that have nothing to do with trolling or farming. Speaking only for myself, I disagree because I do not like restrictions on the types of games that people can play, I do not think that any scoring system can accurately convey the variety of game types available here, and I think that lack's time would be considerably better spent on other outstanding upgrades and features.

There's more, but that's about as much effort as I'm willing to expend.

FD, if I may make a suggestion, if you want to make a positive impact on CC, then there are far more rewarding and less inflammatory ways to do so. Mentor a cook or two. Visit the foundry and become a regular commenter. Volunteer for one of the many ad-hoc groups.

The fact is, you're clearly an excellent player and an intelligent bloke. But this crusade of yours makes you look shallow, petty, and manipulative of both people and data. I strongly suggest you set it aside, confident that you've made your point (many times over, in fact), and find another way to give back to this marvelous website.

In closing, I'd like to return to your quote that I put at the top of this post. The fact that so many highly-ranked, competitive players disagree with you should give you pause in your pursuit of this issue. In theory, players like myself, who don't farm and don't play freestyle, should be strongly in favor. That they aren't is an indication of how exactly you're going about this.
Image
Thorthoth,"Cloaking one's C&A fetish with moral authority and righteous indignation
makes it ever so much more erotically thrilling"
User avatar
Sergeant 1st Class owenshooter
 
Posts: 13266
Joined: Wed Mar 07, 2007 6:01 pm
Location: Deep in the Heart of Tx

Re: Owenshooter stalked by FD in his own [noted] thread. so sad

Postby owenshooter on Mon Feb 09, 2009 2:32 am

[noted]... maybe you should contact a mod and find out what that means before you find yourself in a timeout for repeated flaming, baiting, and trolling... or wait, is this like all of your other threads where people disagree with you or you don't get your way, so you keep posting ludicrous things that nobody even bothers to read... or here is a better idea, maybe you can go post in the thread about your alleged students that are being accused of being multis.. wonder what the odds of all of you sharing an IP is... ahem... oh, and did you miss this?
Incandenza wrote:
FarangDemon wrote:Why calculate scores and give people meaningless ranks when we could give them ranks that are a better indicator of relative skill?

I'm perplexed that so many high ranked, competitive players can't understand this.


That's an excellent question. Speaking as someone who would directly benefit from some of your proposed changes, let me try and break it down for ya:

1. You inflate, obfuscate, and otherwise commit vile injustices against data. Let's start with this statement, which has been repeated by you quite often in recent days:

FarangDemon wrote:I'm just trying to bring home the point that 73% of the CC community want the system changed so that score is more an indicator of skill than harvesting techniques.


First off, the 73% you cite comes from this thread, where indeed 73% of respondants voted yes to the poll. However, the poll question was this: "Have scoreboard display option to only show players who sometimes play peers (are not farmers)?" Not only is the question very vaguely worded, but it seems to me to imply that you are suggesting a different way to view/sort the scoreboard, rather than a full-blown revamp of the scoring system itself.

Furthermore, you extrapolate this 73% approval of an imprecisely-worded question about a topic seemingly different from your core contention across all of CC. As has been noted, there were 40 respondants to your poll. Statisticians have a term known as "small sample size", which would seem to be a perfect fit in this case. It seems disingenuous to map the opinions of a group of people that could fit comfortably in a schoolbus onto a population that would fill Madison Square Garden.

2. You claim that this isn't about you, when it clearly is about you. What you don't seem to understand is that, when someone makes a suggestion that would directly benefit him/her, people will naturally be suspicious.

3. You favor restricting the types of games that repeat customers can join. By suggesting that the map restrictions placed on new recruits be extended to cooks, you're trying to keep nearly 2000 repeat customers (many of them paying customers) from playing on roughly half of the maps on CC. You want to restrict these people from playing games because, in effect, you don't think they're good enough, all in the name of effecting "a just scoring system" that will really only affect page one of the scoreboard, if not just the top 100 or so.

4. You favor de facto rank segregation. If your suggestions were implemented, high ranks would stop playing low ranks immediately. Open team games would become a thing of the past. Even stripers wouldn't be able to get games against people over 2000 points, because they wouldn't fall within the 2/3rds threshold that's the centerpiece of your suggestion thread cited above.

5. You are uninterested in constructive criticism, instead defaming others like myself and owen as trolls.
You even created a whole thread about owen. You don't seem to understand that people may disagree with you for reasons that have nothing to do with trolling or farming. Speaking only for myself, I disagree because I do not like restrictions on the types of games that people can play, I do not think that any scoring system can accurately convey the variety of game types available here, and I think that lack's time would be considerably better spent on other outstanding upgrades and features.

There's more, but that's about as much effort as I'm willing to expend.

FD, if I may make a suggestion, if you want to make a positive impact on CC, then there are far more rewarding and less inflammatory ways to do so. Mentor a cook or two. Visit the foundry and become a regular commenter. Volunteer for one of the many ad-hoc groups.

The fact is, you're clearly an excellent player and an intelligent bloke. But this crusade of yours makes you look shallow, petty, and manipulative of both people and data. I strongly suggest you set it aside, confident that you've made your point (many times over, in fact), and find another way to give back to this marvelous website.

In closing, I'd like to return to your quote that I put at the top of this post. The fact that so many highly-ranked, competitive players disagree with you should give you pause in your pursuit of this issue. In theory, players like myself, who don't farm and don't play freestyle, should be strongly in favor. That they aren't is an indication of how exactly you're going about this.


it just feels so good every time i read that post!!! makes me shiver!!!-0
Image
Thorthoth,"Cloaking one's C&A fetish with moral authority and righteous indignation
makes it ever so much more erotically thrilling"
User avatar
Sergeant 1st Class owenshooter
 
Posts: 13266
Joined: Wed Mar 07, 2007 6:01 pm
Location: Deep in the Heart of Tx

Re: Owenshooter posts more great rebuttal material

Postby owenshooter on Mon Feb 09, 2009 4:02 am

oh, this is a good one.. i like where chipv rips apart your bogus 60 game win streak claim, and then
flat out calls you a troll for your activities in numerous threads. THEN he says the exact things people
are saying in this thread!! you can't handle when people refuse to follow/believe you without question...
oh, this post is good stuff...
chipv wrote:
FarangDemon wrote:I wanted to collect stats on low ranked teams playing high ranked ones on difficult map settings. I found it expedient to search on lt.pie's quads Waterloo games. This is not an attack on lt.pie, I just found it easier to restrict my data collection in this manner.

I counted that out of 60 games where he played against teams containing at least one cook and no opponent below lieutenant, he won all 60. This indicates that higher ranked players, if they are able to target teams like this, will be able to gain risk-free points.
(This is not an allegation that he targeted/targets teams like this.)

I don't have the time to count every game by hand including people of x, y and z rank, but I think you would find that many maps currently restricted to new recruits would produce similar results.



I'm not getting into a full blown discussion but you are seriously damaging your own credibility by posting incorrect maths.

This one example can be contradicted trivially with Map Ranking lt.pie + quads + Waterloo.

Looking at the win/loss chart (NO missing logs so this is accurate) the maximum winning streak is 39, not 60. Therefore there cannot be a 60-0 win/loss vs anyone let alone cooks.
In addition even if you were to trawl through the games, there is no way of telling what rank the "cooks" you are referring to actually were when the game was finished even if it is most likely.

The problem also appears to be your complete lack of acceptance of your posts being challenged, so I may expect some sort of rebuttal, but , again, not interested in a full blown discussion - the point is that the mods are not as incompetent as you seem to suggest. Should you come up with a suggestion which has a good mathematical foundation to work on, then it will be taken seriously but so far this has not happened. Instead your frustration at not being taken seriously has yielded a number of posts virtually trolling any thread that goes near the point system.

Please take some time to carefully consider the maths and source of statistics in future before trying to manipulate the data. This is advice which you can take or leave.
Image
Thorthoth,"Cloaking one's C&A fetish with moral authority and righteous indignation
makes it ever so much more erotically thrilling"
User avatar
Sergeant 1st Class owenshooter
 
Posts: 13266
Joined: Wed Mar 07, 2007 6:01 pm
Location: Deep in the Heart of Tx

Previous

Return to Closed C&A Reports

Who is online

Users browsing this forum: No registered users