84 replies to this topic

[Gagzila]

AsianJoyKiller, on January 02 2013 - 09:18 PM, said:

When Beemann's saying I'm "deafened" he's referring to a function in Mumble that allows a person to turn off all audio from Mumble, effectively muting the entire program so you can't hear anything anyone is saying.

His point being, that I just wandered across this thread by myself and found it interesting that you're completely ignoring the proper definition and what it covers just so it supports your argument better.

I'd like you to answer the question I posed before...
If you have 10 people in a room, and no people in another room, which room has the least people_

Well I'm obviously not real familiar with Mumble, so thanks for the clarification. I take it then that you primarily communicate with each other via mumble then_ If so, that makes sense then...when I'm left to grope for a meaning, I came to the conclusion he was shouting in anger over the mic or something and therefore "defeaned" you.

I posted the proper definition earlier which both of you seem to be ignoring...go and google "least definition" and you'll see its the same, word for word. I indicated my comments by differing colour to the definition.

And I did answer your question (the second room is "the other room"):

Quote

The room with the least people is the second room BECAUSE there are no people in it...see how I specifically clarified my use of the word "least" here because otherwise it means a measurable value that is the least in the options being measured. THAT is how you use English to convey your meaning to someone and not rely on them to weigh up all the possible meanings when unspecific and pick the closest fitting one (in which case your post still means you agree with me to anyone reading it fresh).

Further to this from a previous post:

Quote

If you meant to say MA has no current exploits, then you say "I voted MA because it is not exploitable like the other game modes". If you are still of the opinion that the other modes are not exploitable as well then you failed even more as "least" indicates the other options are "more" of whatever it is least off. In this instance, your post is incredibly indefinite.

Cheers,

Gagzila

Edited by Gagzila, January 02 2013 - 09:40 PM.

[Beemann]

I shouldn't have to specify what I mean by least when I've already explained my position to you. At that point you're just deliberately being obtuse

[Gagzila]

Beemann, on January 02 2013 - 09:40 PM, said:

I shouldn't have to specify what I mean by least when I've already explained my position to you. At that point you're just deliberately being obtuse

When you used it in a way that was at odds with a previous stance, its called contradiction. To clear the contradiction you have to specify what you actually meant by it SPECIFICALLY, since it's not a specific term in itself without further explanation.

When reading that something has the least, it's derivative that there is a still a measurable amount associated with this reference. To nullify the derived meaning, you have to specify otherwise...pretty simple stuff really for anyone that cares to make themselves clear. It's because of BS like this that I hate the adoption of people saying "TL:DR", as anyone posting like this is likely to entirely miss the main point since they haven't actually understood the OP anyway, so it's just spam really as the OP author has to continually correct everyone instead of discussing the actual topic at hand. People are so lazy in replying these days, but it's funny as they end up posting 10 times to get their point / message across properly instead of just one efficient post that might be a little longer than but far quicker to digest than the back and forth mess you see these days...SMSs are a good example of this...I prefer one 2 minute phone call over 20 SMSs any day.

I am in no way being obtuse, you are the one who continually ducks and weaves in not properly responding to my posts in a reasonable manner. Your attitude is one of someone who refuses to ever compromise on their stand in the favour of reaching an understanding or try to look at it from any other than their own narrow point of view.

Cheers,

Gagzila

Edited by Gagzila, January 02 2013 - 10:04 PM.

[AsianJoyKiller]

ITT: Gagzilla gets confused by clear wording and tries to argue his way out of a sticky spot by twisting definitions to somehow only work in context of his side of things, yet their definitions suddenly change in context of Beemann's comments so that they no longer work the same way.

[Gagzila]

AsianJoyKiller, on January 03 2013 - 01:09 AM, said:

ITT: Gagzilla gets confused by clear wording and tries to argue his way out of a sticky spot by twisting definitions to somehow only work in context of his side of things, yet their definitions suddenly change in context of Beemann's comments so that they no longer work the same way.

Nothing is further from the truth in this whole thread than the above...which is a filthy lie.

Edited by Gagzila, January 03 2013 - 01:15 AM.

[AsianJoyKiller]

Gagzila, the concept is simple.

If MA is not exploitable, then it is the least exploitable. And as a native English speaker, as you claim to be, you should easily understand that the implied context is that all other modes in Hawken are exploitable.
So Beemann's use of the word "least" is not at all incorrect.

Let's not even get started on the part where you are obviously confused and don't even seem to understand what he was talking about in the other thread. In regards to what he was stating there, you start arguing something that is only tangentially related. You literally have started to argue with something he didn't even say.

[Rei]

Missile assault. TDM feels too random, and Siege needs a change badly. Missile assault is pretty balanced except for the maps right now. But it's a great objective type game, 3 sites is perfect and makes people actually have to do stuff!

Siege makes people do stuff and move forward too, but currently momentum is too strong, once you control that AA and the battleship gets past the middle, you pretty much get to just base camp the other team. But 5-6 people on 1 point where you HAVE to go is a little crazy. I would like another choice which is nice with missile assault. 5 people on one spot_ Go to another.

[LeadRaven]

Siege has too many stages, and each stage is too short.
I voted for MA.

[Steakhouse]

Although I do agree something needs to be done about the flow of Siege matches, Siege itself makes me feel as though I can contribute a lot to the team even if I'm just not that good at killing and surviving. Namely in gathering energy and attacking the enemy battleship if the other team has the AA locked down. A few times I've found it's possible to take out the enemy battleship before it reaches the base without having control of the AA, but that's incredibly rare.

I've seen people say that there's no point in launching your own team's battleship if the enemy team has theirs up, or if they control the AA, but ... I could swear I've seen the battleships stop if the two of them are in the air. Do they fight each other_ If not, they should.

[Gagzila]

AsianJoyKiller, on January 03 2013 - 03:32 AM, said:

Gagzila, the concept is simple.

If MA is not exploitable, then it is the least exploitable. And as a native English speaker, as you claim to be, you should easily understand that the implied context is that all other modes in Hawken are exploitable.
So Beemann's use of the word "least" is not at all incorrect.

Let's not even get started on the part where you are obviously confused and don't even seem to understand what he was talking about in the other thread. In regards to what he was stating there, you start arguing something that is only tangentially related. You literally have started to argue with something he didn't even say.

Yes it is simple, something you both seem unable to comprehend...

Quote

If MA is not exploitable, then it is the least exploitable.

I am not arguing that it is not. The point you are failing to see, is that without saying "MA is not exploitable", simply saying it is the "least exploitable" does not indicate this. Hence myself taking away the meaning that he thought there was an exploit in MA but the other modes have more, making MA the "least" exploitable...see how it works here too and this is what we shall call the "default" meaning inferred from use of the word "least" unless further explanation is provided to indicate otherwise.

I already put it in black and white for you earlier:

least:
Adjective
Smallest in amount, extent, or significance. (all of these indicate a quantity, 0 is not a quantity)
Adverb
To the smallest extent or degree. (again this is a measurable amount, you cannot measure 0 except by its absence)
Synonyms
minimum (as above)

If you argue that, you are arguing against the English language...not me. If you both choose to use it loosely enough that the wrong meaning can be inferred from what you say, then that's your problem and you will keep having these kind of arguments where people think you are saying something other than what you actually meant.

But I know you guys aren't dumb and would realise this...the whole reason you continue to argue this silly little point Beemann is because you can't stand to be seen as wrong in any fashion, even if it's just that you didn't make a very clear post that I then pointed out how it contradicts yourself with it's implied meaning.

In regards to the other thread...it's not my fault Beemann went of on some other tangent that I could not understand it's contextual relation to what I was saying and therefore chose not to continue answering him in the end as it was fruitless (and very troll like towards the end) and it was simply best to agree to disagree (which I don't think Beemann can still even agree to, a testament to the sheer egotistic arrogance I now know him for from many a post).

Salvo fired, preparing for retaliation fire...

Cheers,

Gagzila

Edited by Gagzila, January 06 2013 - 06:29 PM.

[Woobins]

Hawken forums morelike dictionary.com

[Stanith]

My favourite is regular Deathmatch by far, I tended to prefer this in various other FPS games too (Quake, UT etc) aside from the ones specifically designed for teamplay-only like Counterstrike, TF2 and Battlefield.

Unfortunately it's not the most balanced of modes when it comes to the different mech types, but it is a whole lot of fun!  I look forward to having more maps though, the number of times I've played winter Prosk followed by regular Prosk over and over is ridiculous now.

[MK501]

I still prefer Siege, the main idea is great, though it's current state is far from perfect.

[Beemann]

Gagzila, on January 06 2013 - 06:22 PM, said:

Stuff

Basically you expect me to believe that you're dense enough to, after having an argument with me concerning my assertion that MA is not exploitable, not understand that my use of least was not a confession that MA has exploits (because it doesn't) but rather a simple relative measurement so I didnt have to get into a big fight where I explain exactly why it isn't exploitable and why everything else is
I guess you win then. I believe you

[MajorMojo]

I like the idea of Siege but until it improves I enjoy MA the most.

[Gagzila]

Beemann, on January 07 2013 - 08:17 AM, said:

Gagzila, on January 06 2013 - 06:22 PM, said:

Stuff

Basically you expect me to believe that you're dense enough to, after having an argument with me concerning my assertion that MA is not exploitable, not understand that my use of least was not a confession that MA has exploits (because it doesn't) but rather a simple relative measurement so I didn't have to get into a big fight where I explain exactly why it isn't exploitable and why everything else is
I guess you win then. I believe you

Here's a simple point summary on the current argument that might help you see things a bit clearer:

- Beemann has a previous argument where his position is that MA is not exploitable

- Beemann posts a response in this thread and through the incorrect use of English, implies / leaves open to default interpretation that MA has exploits

- This causes Gagzila to call him out on an obvious contradiction to the previous argument

- Beemann does not clarify his previous post on what he actually meant

- Beemann goes on to argue the semantics about his use of "least", as if by arguing hard enough he might somehow by the force of his will, change what the word means by default

- Beemann resorts to insults and questioning the use of the english language when he is the one offending

- Gagzila takes this as a sign that maybe Beemann did actually mean what he is trying ever so fervently to say he does not while not directly invalidating his original post, otherwise why argue so hard and not just simply state so_ Gagzila continues to dig for the reasoning of such argument as it could possibly invalidate Beemann's previous arguments in the other thread.

- Beemann finally gives in, admitting that he screwed up when wording his opinion on MA exploits but can't do it in a humble fashion. He has to throw a few more insults and word it so it's full of contempt and exasperation for the person who simply pointed it out in the first place..it was Beemann who decided to argue the point instead of simply clarifying himself.

- Positions on previous argument remain and we know Beemann still believes MA has no exploits and is extremely argumentative to anyone challenging anything he posts, even when it's wrong.

Cheers,

Gagzila

[AsianJoyKiller]

- Gagzilla gets confused and argues semantics, all while misunderstanding how English works.

[Gagzila]

AsianJoyKiller, on January 09 2013 - 09:00 PM, said:

- Gagzilla gets confused and argues semantics, all while misunderstanding how English works.

Continually saying something does not make it true, it simply points out your delusion. Can you also kindly point out where it is exactly my english is failing...

Cheers,

Gagzila

[Xuande]

Team Deathmatch is the most fun but the rewards are slim compared to Seige and MA.

[Beemann]

Gagzila, on January 09 2013 - 09:54 PM, said:

Continually saying something does not make it true, it simply points out your delusion.

That's what we've been telling you
Go back to the definition of least
Note that it does not discount zero as a quantity
Realize that least and none are not mutually exclusive, and that you're only here because you've decided to forum fanboy me