These forums have been archived and are now read-only.

The new forums are live and can be found at https://forums.eveonline.com/

EVE General Discussion

 
  • Topic is locked indefinitely.
 

"That" time of year again.

First post
Author
Tippia
Sunshine and Lollipops
#301 - 2016-01-24 18:25:16 UTC
Jenshae Chiroptera wrote:
I decline, for now and all eternity.
Then you also need to stop making spurious claims.
Alphea Abbra
Project Promethion
#302 - 2016-01-24 18:26:27 UTC
Jenshae Chiroptera wrote:
Alphea wrote:

Lol -> u.
Lol
Yes, and it's very openminded of you to recognise that you've been wrong for 15 pages. But I already wrote that I accepted your admission, so there's no reason for you to continue.

Quote:
I will be voting for Xenuria this year.
Look, I realise you want to punish someone, but honestly, CCP are not at fault here. CCP didn't control who the voters voted for. It's unfair to punish CCP simply because the voters didn't vote for you.
Jenshae Chiroptera
#303 - 2016-01-24 18:27:14 UTC  |  Edited by: Jenshae Chiroptera
Tippia wrote:
... spurious .
I disagree. Blink
Alphea Abbra wrote:
Quote:
I will be voting for Xenuria this year.
Look, I realise you want to punish someone, but honestly, CCP are not at fault here. CCP didn't control who the voters voted for. It's unfair to punish CCP simply because the voters didn't vote for you.
CCP and especially Fozzie's team deserve Xenuria after this last year's changes and for ignoring the solid feedback that the good members of CSM X presented.

CCP does not deserve a good CSM this year.
I will not be voting for someone I like and being directly responsible for putting them in a bad situation.

CCP - Building ant hills and magnifying glasses for fat kids

Not even once

EVE is becoming shallow and puerile; it will satisfy neither the veteran nor the "WoW" type crowd in the transition.

Tippia
Sunshine and Lollipops
#304 - 2016-01-24 18:30:16 UTC
Jenshae Chiroptera wrote:
I disagree.
Doesn't matter. You've openly and explicitly said that you refuse to provide evidence to support your claims. This makes them spurious. What you think beyond that point is irrelevant.

Your insistence on disagreeing with facts is yet another reason people call you a liar, by the way.
Jenshae Chiroptera
#305 - 2016-01-24 18:35:02 UTC  |  Edited by: Jenshae Chiroptera
Tippia wrote:
Doesn't matter. .
Your opinion and I do not care about it. Blink

(Note, that I am using short sentences. At some point perhaps you might get the message and stop making up what ever fantasy full of hopes you have running through your head)

CCP - Building ant hills and magnifying glasses for fat kids

Not even once

EVE is becoming shallow and puerile; it will satisfy neither the veteran nor the "WoW" type crowd in the transition.

Alphea Abbra
Project Promethion
#306 - 2016-01-24 18:37:47 UTC
Jenshae Chiroptera wrote:
Tippia wrote:
... spurious .
I disagree.
You disagree that you should stop posting spurious claims? So you think you should post spurious claims?

The alternative interpretation, that you don't think you're posting spurious claims, isn't relevant here since you already admitted that you've been wrong for 15 (Now 16) pages, and you already admitted that you had no evidence to give in support of your hypothesis. This is pretty much textbook definition of spurious, and so cannot be the intended use.

Quote:
CCP and especially Fozzie's team deserve Xenuria after this last year's changes and for ignoring the solid feedback that the good members of CSM X presented.

CCP does not deserve a good CSM this year.
I will not be voting for someone I like and being directly responsible for putting them in a bad situation.
I'm not sure I agree with your analysis of Fozzie, but given that this is your opinion, I can see how your threat/action of voting Xenuria makes sense. Of course, I also think a more contructive approach would yield better results, but let's see over the next year.
Tippia
Sunshine and Lollipops
#307 - 2016-01-24 18:38:31 UTC  |  Edited by: Tippia
Jenshae Chiroptera wrote:
Your opinion
No, it's just fact. It's very nice of you to equate the two, though.

Quote:
I do not care about it.
Again, the ample evidence you provide throughout this thread belies your claims.
Jenshae Chiroptera
#308 - 2016-01-24 18:43:15 UTC
Tippia wrote:
No, it's just fact. .
Your opinion of my claims.

Repeating a study to reproduce results that I have absolutely no doubts about, will change nothing and is a waste of my time and effort.

CCP - Building ant hills and magnifying glasses for fat kids

Not even once

EVE is becoming shallow and puerile; it will satisfy neither the veteran nor the "WoW" type crowd in the transition.

Tippia
Sunshine and Lollipops
#309 - 2016-01-24 18:55:37 UTC
Jenshae Chiroptera wrote:
Your opinion of my claims.
Again, you're confusing my opinion with facts. It's very nice of you to hold my opinion in such high regard, but it doesn't really do you any good.

Quote:
Repeating a study to reproduce results that I have absolutely no doubts about
…would provide some evidence to demonstrate that your claims are not spurious. Your doubts (or lack thereof) of the outcome are of no consequence to how spurious they remain up until that point.

If you think that it's a waste of time to have something to support your stance, then all you're really saying is that your stance is worthless.
Jenshae Chiroptera
#310 - 2016-01-24 21:49:24 UTC  |  Edited by: Jenshae Chiroptera
Tippia wrote:
…would ....
... at this point never be done, simply to spite you. Blink
... and yes, I have cut off my nose but it was less effort than spending months going around High Sec talking to people.

CCP - Building ant hills and magnifying glasses for fat kids

Not even once

EVE is becoming shallow and puerile; it will satisfy neither the veteran nor the "WoW" type crowd in the transition.

Alphea Abbra
Project Promethion
#311 - 2016-01-24 22:24:13 UTC
Jenshae Chiroptera wrote:
Tippia wrote:
…would ....
... at this point never be done, simply to spite you. Blink
... and yes, I have cut off my nose but it was less effort than spending months going around High Sec talking to people.
You're not really spiting anyone. It's more just reinforcing our belief that you're an unapologetic liar who can't find any evidence in support of your claims, and knows that perfectly well.
And spending months talking to people in hi-sec seems both like a waste of time because your magical code can do this much easier, and because the plural of anecdote isn't evidence.
Seriously, don't you get it?

You can get a thousand anecdotal testimonies, but if we don't know whether they were representative or not; honest or not; influenced by the interviewer or not; worse informed than the equivalent null-sec-player or not; ... we can't use a months' worth of anecdotes collected in hi-sec at all.

If you get 1000 testimonies of alleged hi-sec people with a roughly 70-30 of voters/non-voters, and I get 1000 testimonies of alleged null-sec people with a roughly 60-40 voters/non-voters split, would that show anything?
First of all, no it wouldn't. It would still be purely anecdotal. Secondly, such a split could easily come from a simple effect of player age (You can imagine that you don't follow the first CSM election while playing - I know I didn't, I voted blank in my first) or that the very invested players (Who are also invested in voting) are prone to moving towards null-sec.
In short, simply collecting anecdotal testimonials (And hoping it's not a CFC boogeyman behind the other screen) isn't really evidence. It's just a huge waste of time.

But at least now I begin to understand why you were so distressed when we didn't accept any of your claims. You thought your own anecdote was evidence, and thus should carry weight?
Jenshae Chiroptera
#312 - 2016-01-24 22:30:06 UTC  |  Edited by: Jenshae Chiroptera
Alphea Abbra wrote:
Blah
Still don't care. Lol

I won't back down about this.
I won't produce the evidence you want.

I am adamant that I am right and you are wrong.

Post in circles as much as you like. I have produced a historic thread demonstrating why I do not have logs.
I have run for CSM and I have the experience in this matter.

You are running around screaming, "Liar! Liar!"
I say that is slander as you lack proof.

CCP - Building ant hills and magnifying glasses for fat kids

Not even once

EVE is becoming shallow and puerile; it will satisfy neither the veteran nor the "WoW" type crowd in the transition.

Tippia
Sunshine and Lollipops
#313 - 2016-01-24 22:41:33 UTC  |  Edited by: Tippia
Jenshae Chiroptera wrote:
at this point never be done, simply to spite you.
Trying to spite me does not make you right — it only makes you look stupid (and me right).

Quote:
I have cut off my nose but it was less effort than spending months going around High Sec talking to people.
So what you're saying is that, if there is a problem — something you have been utterly incapable of proving — you are the cause. You can't be arsed with informing people, and then you complain (without proof) that they're not informed. You can't accept basic facts of statistics and sampling. You don't understand the voting system. You don't even understand the numbers we do have.

More and more, it seems like it's not the (unproven) “majority” that is uninformed or ignorant — it's only you.

Quote:
I won't back down about this.
I won't produce the evidence you want.
Then you are wrong. No amount of adamant refusal to accept this fact will change it, nor will it change the proven fact that you are a liar — in fact, it only provides further proof.
Jenshae Chiroptera
#314 - 2016-01-24 22:47:12 UTC  |  Edited by: Jenshae Chiroptera
Tippia wrote:
... Then you are wrong. ...
You will believe that even if I go out and gather evidence. Again, effort wasted. I think you are a lost cause. Lol
Believe as you will. Your opinion does no matter.

Edit: Weirdest thing. I said that I believed that the match between Camel and Warlords was fixed and everyone said I was an idiot.
Then I found this on Reddit today
Which had a this in it.

... hmmm .... I have miss-placed a thread somewhere.

CCP - Building ant hills and magnifying glasses for fat kids

Not even once

EVE is becoming shallow and puerile; it will satisfy neither the veteran nor the "WoW" type crowd in the transition.

Tippia
Sunshine and Lollipops
#315 - 2016-01-24 22:51:35 UTC
Jenshae Chiroptera wrote:
You will believe that even if I go out and gather evidence.
You're confusing me with you.
Just like how you're confusing my opinion with fact.

Quote:
Believe as you will. Your opinion does no matter.
This is not a matter of belief or opinion, but of fact. The fact is that you simply do not understand the things you're trying to discuss. We know this as a fact because it is the only thing you've ever been able to prove; it's the only conclusion of the evidence you've produced.

You are trying to argue against mathematical axioms and procedures. You are arguing against your own recorded posting history.
Jenshae Chiroptera
#316 - 2016-01-24 22:54:50 UTC  |  Edited by: Jenshae Chiroptera
Tippia wrote:
This is not a matter of belief or opinion,
I believe you are a waste of time.
You believe I am a liar.

I know that what I have stated is true.
You demand I produce proof because you are too lazy to go out and find it yourself.

I refuse.

Make your own "truths" as much as you like. I am not buying it.


Edit: Requesting a thread lock because this circular arguing IS a waste of time.
You can count it as a forum PVP win and fap to it or something, I have better things to do in life.

CCP - Building ant hills and magnifying glasses for fat kids

Not even once

EVE is becoming shallow and puerile; it will satisfy neither the veteran nor the "WoW" type crowd in the transition.

Tippia
Sunshine and Lollipops
#317 - 2016-01-24 22:58:29 UTC  |  Edited by: Tippia
Jenshae Chiroptera wrote:
You believe I am a liar.
No. I know you're a liar. I know this because of the things you've said that contradict reality, and then repeated even when this contradiction has been pointed out to you.

Quote:
I know that what I have stated is true.
Then you should have no problem proving it. Yet you can't; yet you refuse; yet you keep telling the same lies about things that have been disproven, often by you.

Quote:
You demand I produce proof because you are too lazy to go out and find it yourself.
No. I demand you produce proof because it is your duty to do so, not mine. Until you do, because you're lazy, incompetent, or just a liar, any claim you make is inherently unproven and can be trivially dismissed as untrue. Trying to shift the burden of proof is a classic fallacy and only further proves you wrong every time you try to employ it.
Jenshae Chiroptera
#318 - 2016-01-24 23:10:35 UTC
Tippia wrote:
... I know this because of the things you've said that contradict reality, ....
Your perception of reality, which is flawed.

CCP - Building ant hills and magnifying glasses for fat kids

Not even once

EVE is becoming shallow and puerile; it will satisfy neither the veteran nor the "WoW" type crowd in the transition.

Tippia
Sunshine and Lollipops
#319 - 2016-01-24 23:16:10 UTC
Jenshae Chiroptera wrote:
Your perception of reality.

No. Recorded history and data.

Quote:
which is flawed
Prove that the data is flawed. Prove that you haven't posted your posts in this thread.
Alphea Abbra
Project Promethion
#320 - 2016-01-24 23:20:53 UTC
Jenshae Chiroptera wrote:
Tippia wrote:
This is not a matter of belief or opinion,
I believe you are a waste of time.
You believe I am a liar.
Maybe we're wasting our time with you. Perhaps. We're not wasting our time insofar that your conspiracies and entirely unsubstantiated claims (Or rather, at this point, your known lies) should go unchallenged, and thus be able to poison the well for the rest of us.
And maybe it's just fun to engage in all manners of debate. Y'know, the default reason why you'd play a game is to have fun.

Quote:
I know that what I have stated is true.
You demand I produce proof because you are too lazy to go out and find it yourself.
But on page 15, you acknowledged that you'd been wrong for 15 pages. Which Jen am I supposed to believe? The one that lies and acknowledges it, or the one that lies and doubles down on it?
...
No, you're perfectly aware at this point that you're talking bovine waste. You know it because if you're so sure, you could provide loads of proof, but instead you have either rejected it, tried to shift the burden of proof, given red herrings or things that at even the most cursory inspection points in the opposite direction of your claims.
In other words, you're asking us to go out and find the proof for your claims, because you know that you're unable to do so yourself. It doesn't surprise me, really, except that at this point you should be aware that in all likelyhood, evidence that we dig up will at best be inconclusive, and at worst go against your claims even further, so you have to be aware that it wouldn't help even if we went out to dig up all the evidence.

Quote:
Make your own "truths" as much as you like. I am not buying it.
I go where the evidence leads me. So far, you've given me nothing, while all the available evidence points in other directions. If you're unwilling to go where the evidence leads you, then you'll continue being wrong.
I hope you don't act like this IRL, because if so, you'll have issues.