Home » General Discussions » Heated Discussions and Debates » Is Oblivion's request for a male gaming partner unfair?
| Is Oblivion's request for a male gaming partner unfair? [message #410313] |
Wed, 11 November 2009 15:36  |
 |
Dover
Messages: 2547
Registered: March 2006
Location: Monterey, California
Karma: 0
|
General (2 Stars) |
|
|
| Oblivion165 wrote on Wed, 11 November 2009 11:47 |
| Dover wrote on Wed, 11 November 2009 03:37 |
| Oblivion165 wrote on Tue, 10 November 2009 22:41 |
Females are just hard to get along with
|
No they're not. I suggest you work on the way you relate to females instead of trying to find a replacement game buddy.
|
Seriously? Have you ever played an online game with a girl?
15 out of the 16 people magically know their mic is working and proceed to small talk constantly. Then when the girl leaves the game so does about 12 of those guys because they have lost the one thing keeping their interest.
Pictured: Every online game with a female attendee
|
And so long as you (And your fellow gamers) continue to see females like this, nothing will change. I still don't see enough of a problem for you to automatically exclude 51% of the population, and the attitude you're taking in this application is contributing to the problem you're describing. It's like someone spamming up RenForums with posts complaining about why this place sucks, when their posts would be the ones contributing to the suck.
Just something that jumped out at me, that's all.
| DarkDemin wrote on Thu, 03 August 2006 19:19 |
Remember kids the internet is serious business.
|
|
|
|
|
| Re: Looking for a new gamer [message #410326 is a reply to message #410313] |
Wed, 11 November 2009 16:35  |
 |
GEORGE ZIMMER
Messages: 2605
Registered: March 2006
Karma: 0
|
General (2 Stars) |
|
|
| Dover wrote on Wed, 11 November 2009 16:36 |
And so long as you (And your fellow gamers) continue to see females like this, nothing will change. I still don't see enough of a problem for you to automatically exclude 51% of the population, and the attitude you're taking in this application is contributing to the problem you're describing. It's like someone spamming up RenForums with posts complaining about why this place sucks, when their posts would be the ones contributing to the suck.
Just something that jumped out at me, that's all.
|
Pretty sure he's referring to gamers of the female variety, not females of the human variety.
Toggle Spoiler| Scrin wrote on Sat, 24 January 2009 13:22 |
| cAmpa wrote on Sat, 24 January 2009 12:45 |
Scrin, stop pming people to get the building bars.
|
FUCK YOU AND THIS SHIT GAME WITH YOUR SCRIPTS!!! I HAVE ASKING YOU AND ANOTHER NOOBS HERE ABOUT HELP WITH THAT BUILDING ICONS FEATURES FOR YEARS, BUT YOU KEEP IGNORING ME AND KEEP WRITE SHIT, SO BURN YOU AND YOUR ASSLICKERS FRIENDS, THIS TIME I'M NOT COME BACK!!!!!!!!!   
|
|
|
|
|
| Re: Looking for a new gamer [message #410334 is a reply to message #410313] |
Wed, 11 November 2009 17:09 |
 |
JohnDoe
Messages: 1416
Registered: May 2006
Karma: 0
|
General (1 Star) |
|
|
| Dover wrote on Wed, 11 November 2009 16:36 |
| Oblivion165 wrote on Wed, 11 November 2009 11:47 |
| Dover wrote on Wed, 11 November 2009 03:37 |
| Oblivion165 wrote on Tue, 10 November 2009 22:41 |
Females are just hard to get along with
|
No they're not. I suggest you work on the way you relate to females instead of trying to find a replacement game buddy.
|
Seriously? Have you ever played an online game with a girl?
15 out of the 16 people magically know their mic is working and proceed to small talk constantly. Then when the girl leaves the game so does about 12 of those guys because they have lost the one thing keeping their interest.
Pictured: Every online game with a female attendee
|
And so long as you (And your fellow gamers) continue to see females like this, nothing will change. I still don't see enough of a problem for you to automatically exclude 51% of the population, and the attitude you're taking in this application is contributing to the problem you're describing. It's like someone spamming up RenForums with posts complaining about why this place sucks, when their posts would be the ones contributing to the suck.
Just something that jumped out at me, that's all.
|
Always fighting for women's rights - in video games.
lol
[Updated on: Wed, 18 November 2009 02:37] Report message to a moderator |
|
|
|
| Re: Looking for a new gamer [message #410365 is a reply to message #410313] |
Thu, 12 November 2009 00:44 |
|
Dover
Messages: 2547
Registered: March 2006
Location: Monterey, California
Karma: 0
|
General (2 Stars) |
|
|
| Oblivion165 wrote on Wed, 11 November 2009 20:16 |
I do nothing to treat female gamers different than anyone else (except excluding them from this like you mentioned).
|
And that isn't significant?
| DarkDemin wrote on Thu, 03 August 2006 19:19 |
Remember kids the internet is serious business.
|
|
|
|
|
| Re: Looking for a new gamer [message #410366 is a reply to message #410365] |
Thu, 12 November 2009 01:54 |
 |
Oblivion165
Messages: 3468
Registered: June 2003
Location: Hendersonville, North Car...
Karma: 0
|
General (3 Stars) |
|
|
| Dover wrote on Thu, 12 November 2009 02:44 |
| Oblivion165 wrote on Wed, 11 November 2009 20:16 |
I do nothing to treat female gamers different than anyone else (except excluding them from this like you mentioned).
|
And that isn't significant?
|
0_o as if it were?
WOL: Ob165ion Skype: Oblivion165 Yahoo Instant Messenger: CaptainJohn165
|
|
|
|
| Re: Looking for a new gamer [message #410371 is a reply to message #410366] |
Thu, 12 November 2009 02:30 |
|
Dover
Messages: 2547
Registered: March 2006
Location: Monterey, California
Karma: 0
|
General (2 Stars) |
|
|
| Oblivion165 wrote on Thu, 12 November 2009 00:54 |
| Dover wrote on Thu, 12 November 2009 02:44 |
| Oblivion165 wrote on Wed, 11 November 2009 20:16 |
I do nothing to treat female gamers different than anyone else (except excluding them from this like you mentioned).
|
And that isn't significant?
|
0_o as if it were?
|
Well, yeah. You're basically saying "I don't discriminate against females! Except they're ineligible to play video games with me."
| DarkDemin wrote on Thu, 03 August 2006 19:19 |
Remember kids the internet is serious business.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
| Re: Looking for a new gamer [message #410413 is a reply to message #410373] |
Thu, 12 November 2009 15:33 |
|
Dover
Messages: 2547
Registered: March 2006
Location: Monterey, California
Karma: 0
|
General (2 Stars) |
|
|
| GEORGE ZIMMER wrote on Thu, 12 November 2009 02:53 |
right, so people should be friends with people they do not like.
perfect logic.
|
But if he doesn't like females, then he's proving my point. This is what I'm getting at.
| DarkDemin wrote on Thu, 03 August 2006 19:19 |
Remember kids the internet is serious business.
|
|
|
|
|
| Re: Looking for a new gamer [message #410414 is a reply to message #410413] |
Thu, 12 November 2009 15:40 |
|
GEORGE ZIMMER
Messages: 2605
Registered: March 2006
Karma: 0
|
General (2 Stars) |
|
|
| Dover wrote on Thu, 12 November 2009 16:33 |
| GEORGE ZIMMER wrote on Thu, 12 November 2009 02:53 |
right, so people should be friends with people they do not like.
perfect logic.
|
But if he doesn't like females, then he's proving my point. This is what I'm getting at.
|
Where did he say every single female? I'm pretty sure he just means the majority. Of female gamers. Which kinda makes your point moot.
Toggle Spoiler| Scrin wrote on Sat, 24 January 2009 13:22 |
| cAmpa wrote on Sat, 24 January 2009 12:45 |
Scrin, stop pming people to get the building bars.
|
FUCK YOU AND THIS SHIT GAME WITH YOUR SCRIPTS!!! I HAVE ASKING YOU AND ANOTHER NOOBS HERE ABOUT HELP WITH THAT BUILDING ICONS FEATURES FOR YEARS, BUT YOU KEEP IGNORING ME AND KEEP WRITE SHIT, SO BURN YOU AND YOUR ASSLICKERS FRIENDS, THIS TIME I'M NOT COME BACK!!!!!!!!!
|
|
|
|
|
| Re: Looking for a new gamer [message #410415 is a reply to message #410414] |
Thu, 12 November 2009 15:44 |
|
Dover
Messages: 2547
Registered: March 2006
Location: Monterey, California
Karma: 0
|
General (2 Stars) |
|
|
| GEORGE ZIMMER wrote on Thu, 12 November 2009 14:40 |
| Dover wrote on Thu, 12 November 2009 16:33 |
| GEORGE ZIMMER wrote on Thu, 12 November 2009 02:53 |
right, so people should be friends with people they do not like.
perfect logic.
|
But if he doesn't like females, then he's proving my point. This is what I'm getting at.
|
Where did he say every single female? I'm pretty sure he just means the majority. Of female gamers. Which kinda makes your point moot.
|
He basically said "females need not apply". It's important enough to him to be in the red-texted "Must have/be" section".
| DarkDemin wrote on Thu, 03 August 2006 19:19 |
Remember kids the internet is serious business.
|
|
|
|
|
| Re: Looking for a new gamer [message #410416 is a reply to message #410415] |
Thu, 12 November 2009 15:49 |
|
GEORGE ZIMMER
Messages: 2605
Registered: March 2006
Karma: 0
|
General (2 Stars) |
|
|
| Dover wrote on Thu, 12 November 2009 16:44 |
| GEORGE ZIMMER wrote on Thu, 12 November 2009 14:40 |
| Dover wrote on Thu, 12 November 2009 16:33 |
| GEORGE ZIMMER wrote on Thu, 12 November 2009 02:53 |
right, so people should be friends with people they do not like.
perfect logic.
|
But if he doesn't like females, then he's proving my point. This is what I'm getting at.
|
Where did he say every single female? I'm pretty sure he just means the majority. Of female gamers. Which kinda makes your point moot.
|
He basically said "females need not apply". It's important enough to him to be in the red-texted "Must have/be" section".
|
Because the majority of females who would be interested in this sort of thing (thus, female gamers) are rather difficult to actually do that kinda thing without having to disrupt the flow of gaming.
Let's think about it this way: if I were to own a fairly large company, and on my job applications I put "mentally handicapped people need not apply", would that be wrong? I'd say no, because I wouldn't want someone mentally handicapped in charge of something in my company.
Just because something exists does not mean every goddamn person has to accept them into everything they do.
Toggle Spoiler| Scrin wrote on Sat, 24 January 2009 13:22 |
| cAmpa wrote on Sat, 24 January 2009 12:45 |
Scrin, stop pming people to get the building bars.
|
FUCK YOU AND THIS SHIT GAME WITH YOUR SCRIPTS!!! I HAVE ASKING YOU AND ANOTHER NOOBS HERE ABOUT HELP WITH THAT BUILDING ICONS FEATURES FOR YEARS, BUT YOU KEEP IGNORING ME AND KEEP WRITE SHIT, SO BURN YOU AND YOUR ASSLICKERS FRIENDS, THIS TIME I'M NOT COME BACK!!!!!!!!!
|
|
|
|
|
| Re: Looking for a new gamer [message #410419 is a reply to message #410416] |
Thu, 12 November 2009 16:01 |
|
Dover
Messages: 2547
Registered: March 2006
Location: Monterey, California
Karma: 0
|
General (2 Stars) |
|
|
| GEORGE ZIMMER wrote on Thu, 12 November 2009 14:49 |
Because the majority of females who would be interested in this sort of thing (thus, female gamers) are rather difficult to actually do that kinda thing without having to disrupt the flow of gaming.
|
Arguable. That's like me saying black people steal, or Russians love bloom. It could be true, but not necessarily all the time (Or even most of the time). What you're doing is known as "Inductive reasoning". You're taking your experience with some specific cases and applying that to the general as a rule (As opposed to deductive reasoning when you apply a general rule to a specific case). This is faulty logic.
| GEORGE ZIMMER wrote on Thu, 12 November 2009 14:49 |
Let's think about it this way: if I were to own a fairly large company, and on my job applications I put "mentally handicapped people need not apply", would that be wrong? I'd say no, because I wouldn't want someone mentally handicapped in charge of something in my company.
|
Not because of their mental handicap, but because chances are they wouldn't be the most qualified person for the job. I can think of several cases where you WOULD want someone mentally handicap in charge of something in your company. For example, I would want that retard from the movie Rain Man to help me run a poker team.
| GEORGE ZIMMER wrote on Thu, 12 November 2009 14:49 |
Just because something exists does not mean every goddamn person has to accept them into everything they do.
|
Sure, because there would be some kind of valid reason to do otherwise, and there isn't in this case.
| DarkDemin wrote on Thu, 03 August 2006 19:19 |
Remember kids the internet is serious business.
|
|
|
|
|
| Re: Looking for a new gamer [message #410421 is a reply to message #410419] |
Thu, 12 November 2009 16:37 |
|
GEORGE ZIMMER
Messages: 2605
Registered: March 2006
Karma: 0
|
General (2 Stars) |
|
|
| Dover wrote on Thu, 12 November 2009 17:01 |
Arguable. That's like me saying black people steal, or Russians love bloom. It could be true, but not necessarily all the time (Or even most of the time). What you're doing is known as "Inductive reasoning". You're taking your experience with some specific cases and applying that to the general as a rule (As opposed to deductive reasoning when you apply a general rule to a specific case). This is faulty logic.
|
No society takes on the characteristics of its exceptions; the same is true for groups of people, specifically girl gamers in this case. Yes, I am sure there are exceptions, but if you're going to spout that off to me, read my first sentence. It's very easy for people to judge a group based on a few specific occurances , sure. But this isn't just one person here, MANY people would agree with me.
Quite the opposite of what you're implying, I'm taking a general rule (that girl gamers tend to be attention whores, and seem to make getting along with them an overcomplicated and unnecessarily long journey) and applying it to this situation. Yes, I do have my experiences, but I'm not basing my opinions SOLELY on that, believe it or not. I'm basing it off of my experiences and other people's experiences as well. Yeah, sure, I should be basing it off of a fully scientific study rather than that, but really, I highly doubt a study of "women who play games are attention seeking whores" would be acceptable, lol. In this day and age, trying to point anyone in a negative light unless it's Republicans, white men, and/or Americans in general is generally frowned upon.
Besides, Oblivion clearly games a good lot- I highly doubt him not wanting to have to deal with female gamers is unwarranted.
| Dover wrote on Thu, 12 November 2009 17:01 |
Not because of their mental handicap, but because chances are they wouldn't be the most qualified person for the job. I can think of several cases where you WOULD want someone mentally handicap in charge of something in your company. For example, I would want that retard from the movie Rain Man to help me run a poker team.
|
Exactly, and in this case, a female gamer is not what he wants. Because the majority of female gamers are annoying attention whores. And I don't think someone who purposely makes it difficult to try and casually play games with is what Oblivion wants. And my point was, you make the qualifications, it's your company/whatever, why do you have to change your qualifications because of others?
| Dover wrote on Thu, 12 November 2009 17:01 |
Sure, because there would be some kind of valid reason to do otherwise, and there isn't in this case.
|
I heavily beg to differ. There are many reasons to not want to have to go through the hassle of having to play with a female gamer. Once again, I'm speaking GENERALLY. Just because there are exceptions to this rule does not mean the rule should be changed to match that exception; that's just as bad as using inductive reasoning 
Toggle Spoiler| Scrin wrote on Sat, 24 January 2009 13:22 |
| cAmpa wrote on Sat, 24 January 2009 12:45 |
Scrin, stop pming people to get the building bars.
|
FUCK YOU AND THIS SHIT GAME WITH YOUR SCRIPTS!!! I HAVE ASKING YOU AND ANOTHER NOOBS HERE ABOUT HELP WITH THAT BUILDING ICONS FEATURES FOR YEARS, BUT YOU KEEP IGNORING ME AND KEEP WRITE SHIT, SO BURN YOU AND YOUR ASSLICKERS FRIENDS, THIS TIME I'M NOT COME BACK!!!!!!!!!
|
|
|
|
|
| Re: Looking for a new gamer [message #410422 is a reply to message #410421] |
Thu, 12 November 2009 16:52 |
|
Dover
Messages: 2547
Registered: March 2006
Location: Monterey, California
Karma: 0
|
General (2 Stars) |
|
|
| GEORGE ZIMMER wrote on Thu, 12 November 2009 15:37 |
| Dover wrote on Thu, 12 November 2009 17:01 |
Arguable. That's like me saying black people steal, or Russians love bloom. It could be true, but not necessarily all the time (Or even most of the time). What you're doing is known as "Inductive reasoning". You're taking your experience with some specific cases and applying that to the general as a rule (As opposed to deductive reasoning when you apply a general rule to a specific case). This is faulty logic.
|
No society takes on the characteristics of its exceptions; the same is true for groups of people, specifically girl gamers in this case. Yes, I am sure there are exceptions, but if you're going to spout that off to me, read my first sentence. It's very easy for people to judge a group based on a few specific occurances , sure. But this isn't just one person here, MANY people would agree with me.
Quite the opposite of what you're implying, I'm taking a general rule (that girl gamers tend to be attention whores, and seem to make getting along with them an overcomplicated and unnecessarily long journey) and applying it to this situation. Yes, I do have my experiences, but I'm not basing my opinions SOLELY on that, believe it or not. I'm basing it off of my experiences and other people's experiences as well. Yeah, sure, I should be basing it off of a fully scientific study rather than that, but really, I highly doubt a study of "women who play games are attention seeking whores" would be acceptable, lol. In this day and age, trying to point anyone in a negative light unless it's Republicans, white men, and/or Americans in general is generally frowned upon.
Besides, Oblivion clearly games a good lot- I highly doubt him not wanting to have to deal with female gamers is unwarranted.
| Dover wrote on Thu, 12 November 2009 17:01 |
Not because of their mental handicap, but because chances are they wouldn't be the most qualified person for the job. I can think of several cases where you WOULD want someone mentally handicap in charge of something in your company. For example, I would want that retard from the movie Rain Man to help me run a poker team.
|
Exactly, and in this case, a female gamer is not what he wants. Because the majority of female gamers are annoying attention whores. And I don't think someone who purposely makes it difficult to try and casually play games with is what Oblivion wants. And my point was, you make the qualifications, it's your company/whatever, why do you have to change your qualifications because of others?
| Dover wrote on Thu, 12 November 2009 17:01 |
Sure, because there would be some kind of valid reason to do otherwise, and there isn't in this case.
|
I heavily beg to differ. There are many reasons to not want to have to go through the hassle of having to play with a female gamer. Once again, I'm speaking GENERALLY. Just because there are exceptions to this rule does not mean the rule should be changed to match that exception; that's just as bad as using inductive reasoning
|
What you seem to be implying across this entire post is that female gamer = attention whore (With. We probably disagree as to the truth of in this, and who is the exception and who isn't, but can't we agree that instead of saying "No females" it would be better (Both morally and from an efficiency standpoint) to say "No attention whores"? In this way, female non-attention whores aren't excluded, male attention whores (Who can be just as bad if not worse) are, and it gives a clear direction as to what kind of personality he's looking for. Like if I'm hiring for my gambling I could say "No retards", or I could say "Must be skilled at counting cards". Which is better, and which is actually done in the "real world"?
| DarkDemin wrote on Thu, 03 August 2006 19:19 |
Remember kids the internet is serious business.
|
|
|
|
|
| Re: Looking for a new gamer [message #410423 is a reply to message #410313] |
Thu, 12 November 2009 16:56 |
|
GEORGE ZIMMER
Messages: 2605
Registered: March 2006
Karma: 0
|
General (2 Stars) |
|
|
I suppose you're right in that it would be better to say "no attention whores", but most male gamers who would fit most of the criteria (most female gamers probably wouldn't, though, either, actually...) generally aren't. They're usually pretty straightforward (although also sometimes boring). Speaking majority-wise here of course.
Toggle Spoiler| Scrin wrote on Sat, 24 January 2009 13:22 |
| cAmpa wrote on Sat, 24 January 2009 12:45 |
Scrin, stop pming people to get the building bars.
|
FUCK YOU AND THIS SHIT GAME WITH YOUR SCRIPTS!!! I HAVE ASKING YOU AND ANOTHER NOOBS HERE ABOUT HELP WITH THAT BUILDING ICONS FEATURES FOR YEARS, BUT YOU KEEP IGNORING ME AND KEEP WRITE SHIT, SO BURN YOU AND YOUR ASSLICKERS FRIENDS, THIS TIME I'M NOT COME BACK!!!!!!!!!
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
| Re: Looking for a new gamer [message #410476 is a reply to message #410466] |
Fri, 13 November 2009 03:10 |
|
Dover
Messages: 2547
Registered: March 2006
Location: Monterey, California
Karma: 0
|
General (2 Stars) |
|
|
| JohnDoe wrote on Fri, 13 November 2009 00:19 |
George, I lost all the respect I had for you here. 
|
Bawwww.
| JohnDoe wrote on Fri, 13 November 2009 00:19 |
1. You need both inductive and deductive methods to obtain knowledge. I don't see there being any empirical research about the effects that female gamers have on their environment...stop acting educated, you're not.
|
You're wrong, I bet I could fill several books with things you don't see.
Deductive reasoning always leads to a correct conclusion (Assuming correct premises). The most famous example is:
Premise 1: All men are mortal.
Premise 2: Socrates is a man.
Conclusion: Socrates is mortal.
So long as premise 1 and premise 2 (And any subsequent premises, if necessary) are correct, the conclusion always will be correct. This is why deductive reasoning is great.
-------------
On the other hand, inductive reasoning MAY lead to a correct conclusion, even when building on a correct premise, but often times doesn't. Two examples our beloved Wikipedia gives are:
| Wikipedia |
I always hang pictures on nails.
Therefore:
All pictures hang from nails.
|
and
| Wikipedia |
Many speeding tickets are given to teenagers.
Therefore:
All teenagers drive fast.
|
These are obviously false, but using nothing but inductive reasoning there is no problem with these conclusions. This is why inductive reasoning sucks. Inductive reasoning can be helpful, at times, but it doesn't ensure truth.
Logic is deductive, not inductive.
I shouldn't have to tell you any of this. I thought you were a student?
| JohnDoe wrote on Fri, 13 November 2009 00:19 |
2. Who cares? Here's someone looking for a friend (albeit in a very strange way). He doesn't owe anyone an explanation...jeez 
|
And I don't expect an explanation. In fact, he hasn't responded in quite a while. I'm not asking for a explanation so much as trying to get him to think outside his preconceptions.
| DarkDemin wrote on Thu, 03 August 2006 19:19 |
Remember kids the internet is serious business.
|
[Updated on: Fri, 13 November 2009 03:13] Report message to a moderator |
|
|
|
| Re: Looking for a new gamer [message #410490 is a reply to message #410476] |
Fri, 13 November 2009 07:51 |
|
JohnDoe
Messages: 1416
Registered: May 2006
Karma: 0
|
General (1 Star) |
|
|
| Dover wrote on Fri, 13 November 2009 04:10 |
| JohnDoe wrote on Fri, 13 November 2009 00:19 |
George, I lost all the respect I had for you here.
|
Bawwww.
| JohnDoe wrote on Fri, 13 November 2009 00:19 |
1. You need both inductive and deductive methods to obtain knowledge. I don't see there being any empirical research about the effects that female gamers have on their environment...stop acting educated, you're not.
|
You're wrong, I bet I could fill several books with things you don't see.
Deductive reasoning always leads to a correct conclusion (Assuming correct premises). The most famous example is:
Premise 1: All men are mortal.
Premise 2: Socrates is a man.
Conclusion: Socrates is mortal.
So long as premise 1 and premise 2 (And any subsequent premises, if necessary) are correct, the conclusion always will be correct. This is why deductive reasoning is great.
-------------
On the other hand, inductive reasoning MAY lead to a correct conclusion, even when building on a correct premise, but often times doesn't. Two examples our beloved Wikipedia gives are:
| Wikipedia |
I always hang pictures on nails.
Therefore:
All pictures hang from nails.
|
and
| Wikipedia |
Many speeding tickets are given to teenagers.
Therefore:
All teenagers drive fast.
|
These are obviously false, but using nothing but inductive reasoning there is no problem with these conclusions. This is why inductive reasoning sucks. Inductive reasoning can be helpful, at times, but it doesn't ensure truth.
Logic is deductive, not inductive.
I shouldn't have to tell you any of this. I thought you were a student?
| JohnDoe wrote on Fri, 13 November 2009 00:19 |
2. Who cares? Here's someone looking for a friend (albeit in a very strange way). He doesn't owe anyone an explanation...jeez
|
And I don't expect an explanation. In fact, he hasn't responded in quite a while. I'm not asking for a explanation so much as trying to get him to think outside his preconceptions.
|
I hereby summon the Wikipedia knowledge multi-quote attack!
Listen dummy, you're not going to get very far by relying solely on deduction...there just isn't enough empirical data available.
Do you possess some kind of extensive research on male-female behavior in a gaming environment that trumps his observations? Thought so...now stfu and crawl back to wikipedia. Looking like a dweeb doesn't make you educated..
lol
|
|
|
|
| Re: Looking for a new gamer [message #410492 is a reply to message #410490] |
Fri, 13 November 2009 07:59 |
|
Dover
Messages: 2547
Registered: March 2006
Location: Monterey, California
Karma: 0
|
General (2 Stars) |
|
|
| JohnDoe wrote on Fri, 13 November 2009 06:51 |
|
You kept the picture of me! How cool!
No, not cool. The other thing.
Gay.
| JohnDoe wrote on Fri, 13 November 2009 06:51 |
I hereby summon the Wikipedia knowledge multi-quote attack!
|
Philosophy 1A knowledge multi-quote attack. The only time I need to refer to Wikipedia is for well-known and widely accepted examples.
You've claimed to be a student several times now. If you were, you'd already know all of this. Either you're a bad student or you're a lying sack of shit. Which is it?
| JohnDoe wrote on Fri, 13 November 2009 06:51 |
Listen dummy, you're not going to get very far by relying solely on deduction...there just isn't enough empirical data available.
Do you possess some kind of extensive research on male-female behavior in a gaming environment that trumps his observations?
|
Do I need to? All I need to do is show that inductive reasoning is a bullshit way to draw conclusions.
I don't need to present an alternative, that burden goes on you or ZIMMER or Oblivion or anyone else who wants to draw some kind of conclusion linking female gamers and attention whoring, or female gamers and male gamer reactions.
| JohnDoe wrote on Fri, 13 November 2009 06:51 |
Thought so...now stfu and crawl back to wikipedia. Looking like a dweeb doesn't make you educated..
|
Faggot.
| DarkDemin wrote on Thu, 03 August 2006 19:19 |
Remember kids the internet is serious business.
|
[Updated on: Fri, 13 November 2009 08:00] Report message to a moderator |
|
|
|
| Re: Looking for a new gamer [message #410498 is a reply to message #410492] |
Fri, 13 November 2009 08:11 |
|
JohnDoe
Messages: 1416
Registered: May 2006
Karma: 0
|
General (1 Star) |
|
|
| Dover wrote on Fri, 13 November 2009 14:59 |
| JohnDoe wrote on Fri, 13 November 2009 06:51 |
|
You kept the picture of me! How cool!
No, not cool. The other thing.
Gay.
| JohnDoe wrote on Fri, 13 November 2009 06:51 |
I hereby summon the Wikipedia knowledge multi-quote attack!
|
Philosophy 1A knowledge multi-quote attack. The only time I need to refer to Wikipedia is for well-known and widely accepted examples.
You've claimed to be a student several times now. If you were, you'd already know all of this. Either you're a bad student or you're a lying sack of shit. Which is it?
| JohnDoe wrote on Fri, 13 November 2009 06:51 |
Listen dummy, you're not going to get very far by relying solely on deduction...there just isn't enough empirical data available.
Do you possess some kind of extensive research on male-female behavior in a gaming environment that trumps his observations?
|
Do I need to? All I need to do is show that inductive reasoning is a bullshit way to draw conclusions.
I don't need to present an alternative, that burden goes on you or ZIMMER or Oblivion or anyone else who wants to draw some kind of conclusion linking female gamers and attention whoring, or female gamers and male gamer reactions.
| JohnDoe wrote on Fri, 13 November 2009 06:51 |
Thought so...now stfu and crawl back to wikipedia. Looking like a dweeb doesn't make you educated..
|
Faggot.
|
Hahaha...calm down, dweeb. You know what happens when you get stressed out...you start eating - excessively. Keep that shit up and you'll develop that 3rd chin!
Induction is only bullshit if there's an alternative. In this case, there isn't...stfu, wii-fit is calling.
lol
|
|
|
|
| Re: Looking for a new gamer [message #410500 is a reply to message #410498] |
Fri, 13 November 2009 08:19 |
|
Dover
Messages: 2547
Registered: March 2006
Location: Monterey, California
Karma: 0
|
General (2 Stars) |
|
|
| JohnDoe wrote on Fri, 13 November 2009 07:11 |
Hahaha...calm down, dweeb. You know what happens when you get stressed out...you start eating - excessively. Keep that shit up and you'll develop that 3rd chin!
|
Who's stressed? I'm presenting my case calmly and logically. You're the one getting all emotional and trying to make this shit personal.
| JohnDoe wrote on Fri, 13 November 2009 07:11 |
Induction is only bullshit if there's an alternative. In this case, there isn't...
|
There is an alternative. It's called deductive reasoning. Inb4 not enough evidence--That's not my problem. If you want it, you can go look for it.
| JohnDoe wrote on Fri, 13 November 2009 07:11 |
stfu, wii-fit is calling.
|
Faggot.
| DarkDemin wrote on Thu, 03 August 2006 19:19 |
Remember kids the internet is serious business.
|
|
|
|
|
| Re: Looking for a new gamer [message #410503 is a reply to message #410500] |
Fri, 13 November 2009 08:26 |
|
JohnDoe
Messages: 1416
Registered: May 2006
Karma: 0
|
General (1 Star) |
|
|
| Dover wrote on Fri, 13 November 2009 09:19 |
| JohnDoe wrote on Fri, 13 November 2009 07:11 |
Hahaha...calm down, dweeb. You know what happens when you get stressed out...you start eating - excessively. Keep that shit up and you'll develop that 3rd chin!
|
Who's stressed? I'm presenting my case calmly and logically. You're the one getting all emotional and trying to make this shit personal.
| JohnDoe wrote on Fri, 13 November 2009 07:11 |
Induction is only bullshit if there's an alternative. In this case, there isn't...
|
There is an alternative. It's called deductive reasoning. Inb4 not enough evidence--That's not my problem. If you want it, you can go look for it.
| JohnDoe wrote on Fri, 13 November 2009 07:11 |
stfu, wii-fit is calling.
|
Faggot.
|
I took a philosophy class and now I declare the whole field of induction as superfluous! I'm so hardcore, I'd rather learn nothing than learn something potentially faulty! Watch me flex my 2nd chin!
lol
|
|
|
|
| Re: Looking for a new gamer [message #410509 is a reply to message #410313] |
Fri, 13 November 2009 08:48 |
|
GEORGE ZIMMER
Messages: 2605
Registered: March 2006
Karma: 0
|
General (2 Stars) |
|
|
For once I actually agree with JohnDoe- there really isn't a large scale, accurate, deductive study of female gamers and their likelihood of being attention whores, and really, the chance of that ever happening is about as likely as scrin not being a massive faggot. Therefore, the next best thing is to rely on your own personal experience, aswell as the experience of others. Really, what more is a massive study of the behavior of someone than a small group of people experiencing- through a proverbial glass window- whatever it is they're studying?
Someone had to take a look and see how much an elephant shits enough times to conclude that elephants shit a certain amount of times on average. That person experienced seeing an elephant shitting multiple times, therefore he's more credible as a source, no? And in order to back up his claims, surely different people also studied and experienced an elephant shitting numerous times, and their data more or less matched.
That's basically all a study is really- a person intentionally experiencing something a good lot of times in order to make an average. The "intentionally" does not make or break that study, though. It just makes it go by quicker. So if someone were to live around elephants enough times- maybe at a zoo or an elephant farm, I don't know- surely he would come up with his own average that would more or less be pretty accurate because of how long he's been around elephants.
If anything, I'd go so far as to say studying something to a great degree can often lead to shit happening that wasn't intended- maybe if the same guy watches the same herd of elephants shit a ton of times and the elephants see him a good lot of times, the elephants would feel uncomfortable, and wouldn't shit as often, and when they DO shit, they shit alot more or alot less, thus interfering with the data.
Yes, I know, you can study something to a greater degree and ensure that there's not really any interference, thus getting accurate data... but to truly do that in our specific situation of girl gamers being annoying attention whores, would be nigh impossible. Therefore, if there ARE any "studies" of girl gamers and their likelihood of being annoying as hell attention whores, they're either inaccurate, biased, and/or retarded.
Really, applying a scientific method to studying humans almost never fucking works. Science in whole is pretty much the wikipedia of studies- unlike math or more solid subjects, it changes every damn day because of new discoveries. Sure, history and such changes a little, but it's pretty solid that Abraham Lincoln was assassinated. The only thing more you could attempt to find out is how long he lived after getting shot (I'm sure there's some morons willing to spend their life finding this out), what exact type of gun his assassin used, what he was sitting on, etc etc. But the basic principle remains- he died. The same is not true for science- it RELIES on all those tiny little details to make up its core. And the fact is, it's almost impossible to come up with some 100% accurate knowledge of humans. If we had that, evolution would have been proven or disproven the second it happened, we'd be able to cure any disease, etc etc.
Thus, your whole argument of "well inductive reasoning is bad because it's not deductive!" is pretty retarded because there is no fucking way to fully research whether or not the majority of women are attention whores. And truly deductive reasoning practically relies on that, otherwise it's inductive reasoning with a mustache ("THIS GUY SAID THIS AND THAT HAPPENED SO THIS MUST BE TRUE" as compared to "I SAW THIS AND THAT SO THIS MUST BE TRUE").
Plus, I don't see why it's such a bad thing to rely a little on your own personal experience. Just because some jackass with a degree from who the fuck cares college said "oh yeah this is totally true/false" does not mean it's more credible than a large majority of people who, through their own personal experience, have drawn a conclusion (possibly with facts thrown in, which I'm pretty sure there are for this case). Unless there is a largely deductive alternative to this that numerous people of the same (and possibly different) fields of studies have come to the same conclusion of, it's pretty likely that the largely accepted through personal experience thing is pretty accurate (maybe not 100% accurate, but hey). Religion really being the only thing excluded from this argument, of course.
Basically, what you're saying here is "but there's no deductive reasoning behind this therefore your personal experiences and personal wants are rendered moot because there is no deductive process behind it", which is a bit retarded.
Let's say for the sake of this discussion science could not figure out why fire hurts people (again, for the sake of this discussion). However, numerous testimonies from numerous people say fire will hurt you if you touch it, through their own personal experience. Therefore, is a largely deductive process really necessary to conclude that fire will fucking burn you and hurt you? No, because numerous people already agree. Really, the deductive process is only useful for disproving something, not for proving something. So if anything, you're the one that has to come up with a huge study to disprove my opinion that the majority of female gamers are usually attention whores.
TL;DR: shut the fuck up, Dover.
Toggle Spoiler| Scrin wrote on Sat, 24 January 2009 13:22 |
| cAmpa wrote on Sat, 24 January 2009 12:45 |
Scrin, stop pming people to get the building bars.
|
FUCK YOU AND THIS SHIT GAME WITH YOUR SCRIPTS!!! I HAVE ASKING YOU AND ANOTHER NOOBS HERE ABOUT HELP WITH THAT BUILDING ICONS FEATURES FOR YEARS, BUT YOU KEEP IGNORING ME AND KEEP WRITE SHIT, SO BURN YOU AND YOUR ASSLICKERS FRIENDS, THIS TIME I'M NOT COME BACK!!!!!!!!!
|
|
|
|
|
| Re: Looking for a new gamer [message #410511 is a reply to message #410503] |
Fri, 13 November 2009 08:49 |
|
Dover
Messages: 2547
Registered: March 2006
Location: Monterey, California
Karma: 0
|
General (2 Stars) |
|
|
| JohnDoe wrote on Fri, 13 November 2009 07:26 |
|
| Dover wrote on Fri, 13 November 2009 06:59 |
You kept the picture of me! How cool!
No, not cool. The other thing.
Gay.
|
| JohnDoe wrote on Fri, 13 November 2009 07:26 |
I took a philosophy class
|
You've claimed to be a student several times, and that philosophy class is pretty basic and required for most degrees. If you're not a lying faggot, which I suspect you are with every post you make, chances are you've taken the same class.
| JohnDoe wrote on Fri, 13 November 2009 07:26 |
and now I declare the whole field of induction as superfluous! I'm so hardcore, I'd rather learn nothing than learn something potentially faulty!
|
If you learn something faulty, you haven't learned anything at all. Worse, you're under the impression that you HAVE learned something, and tend to spread your misinformation around. Not to mention when you learn something faulty, you're less likely to correct your ignorance, since you're unaware you are ignorant.
So yeah, basically, learning nothing > "learning" something that isn't true.
| JohnDoe wrote on Fri, 13 November 2009 07:26 |
Watch me flex my 2nd chin!
|
Faggot.
| DarkDemin wrote on Thu, 03 August 2006 19:19 |
Remember kids the internet is serious business.
|
|
|
|
|
| Re: Looking for a new gamer [message #410512 is a reply to message #410509] |
Fri, 13 November 2009 08:56 |
|
Dover
Messages: 2547
Registered: March 2006
Location: Monterey, California
Karma: 0
|
General (2 Stars) |
|
|
| GEORGE ZIMMER wrote on Fri, 13 November 2009 07:48 |
For once I actually agree with JohnDoe- there really isn't a large scale, accurate, deductive study of female gamers and their likelihood of being attention whores, and really, the chance of that ever happening is about as likely as scrin not being a massive faggot. Therefore, the next best thing is to rely on your own personal experience, aswell as the experience of others. Really, what more is a massive study of the behavior of someone than a small group of people experiencing- through a proverbial glass window- whatever it is they're studying?
Someone had to take a look and see how much an elephant shits enough times to conclude that elephants shit a certain amount of times on average. That person experienced seeing an elephant shitting multiple times, therefore he's more credible as a source, no? And in order to back up his claims, surely different people also studied and experienced an elephant shitting numerous times, and their data more or less matched.
That's basically all a study is really- a person intentionally experiencing something a good lot of times in order to make an average. The "intentionally" does not make or break that study, though. It just makes it go by quicker. So if someone were to live around elephants enough times- maybe at a zoo or an elephant farm, I don't know- surely he would come up with his own average that would more or less be pretty accurate because of how long he's been around elephants.
If anything, I'd go so far as to say studying something to a great degree can often lead to shit happening that wasn't intended- maybe if the same guy watches the same herd of elephants shit a ton of times and the elephants see him a good lot of times, the elephants would feel uncomfortable, and wouldn't shit as often, and when they DO shit, they shit alot more or alot less, thus interfering with the data.
Yes, I know, you can study something to a greater degree and ensure that there's not really any interference, thus getting accurate data... but to truly do that in our specific situation of girl gamers being annoying attention whores, would be nigh impossible. Therefore, if there ARE any "studies" of girl gamers and their likelihood of being annoying as hell attention whores, they're either inaccurate, biased, and/or retarded.
Really, applying a scientific method to studying humans almost never fucking works. Science in whole is pretty much the wikipedia of studies- unlike math or more solid subjects, it changes every damn day because of new discoveries. Sure, history and such changes a little, but it's pretty solid that Abraham Lincoln was assassinated. The only thing more you could attempt to find out is how long he lived after getting shot (I'm sure there's some morons willing to spend their life finding this out), what exact type of gun his assassin used, what he was sitting on, etc etc. But the basic principle remains- he died. The same is not true for science- it RELIES on all those tiny little details to make up its core. And the fact is, it's almost impossible to come up with some 100% accurate knowledge of humans. If we had that, evolution would have been proven or disproven the second it happened, we'd be able to cure any disease, etc etc.
Thus, your whole argument of "well inductive reasoning is bad because it's not deductive!" is pretty retarded because there is no fucking way to fully research whether or not the majority of women are attention whores. And truly deductive reasoning practically relies on that, otherwise it's inductive reasoning with a mustache ("THIS GUY SAID THIS AND THAT HAPPENED SO THIS MUST BE TRUE" as compared to "I SAW THIS AND THAT SO THIS MUST BE TRUE").
Plus, I don't see why it's such a bad thing to rely a little on your own personal experience. Just because some jackass with a degree from who the fuck cares college said "oh yeah this is totally true/false" does not mean it's more credible than a large majority of people who, through their own personal experience, have drawn a conclusion (possibly with facts thrown in, which I'm pretty sure there are for this case). Unless there is a largely deductive alternative to this that numerous people of the same (and possibly different) fields of studies have come to the same conclusion of, it's pretty likely that the largely accepted through personal experience thing is pretty accurate (maybe not 100% accurate, but hey). Religion really being the only thing excluded from this argument, of course.
Basically, what you're saying here is "but there's no deductive reasoning behind this therefore your personal experiences and personal wants are rendered moot because there is no deductive process behind it", which is a bit retarded.
Let's say for the sake of this discussion science could not figure out why fire hurts people (again, for the sake of this discussion). However, numerous testimonies from numerous people say fire will hurt you if you touch it, through their own personal experience. Therefore, is a largely deductive process really necessary to conclude that fire will fucking burn you and hurt you? No, because numerous people already agree. Really, the deductive process is only useful for disproving something, not for proving something. So if anything, you're the one that has to come up with a huge study to disprove my opinion that the majority of female gamers are usually attention whores.
TL;DR: shut the fuck up, Dover.
|
You're mixing up your analogies, ZIMMER. You're comparing strong observations like "Every fire ever observed hurts people" to weak ones like "I saw this girl this one time on Counter-Strike and she was a real attention whore". If the threshold for truth was so low, then all I would have to do is say "JohnDoe is a real faggot. He's also German, according to the little flag next to his name. All Germans must be faggots". In fact, I'd have extra support for my claim since I could also point to Madrackz. Regardless, that wouldn't make my claim any more true. I'm sure there is a German out there who isn't a huge throbbing faggot.
| DarkDemin wrote on Thu, 03 August 2006 19:19 |
Remember kids the internet is serious business.
|
|
|
|
|
| Pages (5): [1 ] |
  |
Goto Forum:
Current Time: Mon Apr 29 03:03:45 MST 2024
Total time taken to generate the page: 0.01342 seconds
|
Search
Help
Members
Register
Login
Home
