Gui,
I am not trying to pick a fight but really trying to get you to see why you don't come across so well. I mean, you have to realize that you piss people off everytime you post something. At some point, that must mean that you are at fault, and not the 99% of people who get pissed off. You post something once, one person gets pissed off, you can cut that down to chance and maybe one person being over-sensitive. But literally, every time you post you piss people off. So it's you and not them. And it's extremely annoying.

You are obviously a smart person. You are very good at Warlight. Nobody would possibly argue with you on that. Warlight requires lots of logistical skills. Yet, for some reason, those skills clearly don't translate to the message board. I mean, nobody cares that swezen posted games that he won and not that he lost in. Nobody. It's clearly an all-out attack for some personal vendetta that again, nobody else cares about. So what's the point?

Also, to Ska2D2 saying that this is how academia works is an insult to academia. In academia, you present some piece of data and you scientifically argue about that data through the literature. The people who did the work and challenge the work should be irrelevant: it's the data that matters. This was an attack against a person, and people are either defending that person or attacking Gui. There is no argument over the truth. It's just mudslinging. While that does happen in academia, that is what we aim to eliminate.

He's merely a fairly effective troll, but hopefully y'all know that.

Yes, but it's rare for such a good player to troll. It's possible the "think before you post" logic goes through.

I kinda miss the days when the top players were all kind and helpful. But on the other hand, beating Gui felt absolutely fantastic. Like beating the black knight. Beating The Impaller felt like I had achieved a great goal, but I felt nowhere near the satisfaction as when I beat Gui (and the subsequent luck whining).

typesomething: i'm glad i could give you such satisfaction. though to me (as our opening conversation shows), rejoining the ladder to play unknown and having to play you too felt like going on a date with a hot girl and being forced to interact with the girl's less interesting friend, who was tagging along. i don't mean to offend you. but we all know the 1v1 ladder is about motivation. i had none. it seems to have been your greatest moment on wl. this is why i play real-time games anonymously. if i'm just messing around or trying new things and the other guy beats me, i end up on someone's favorite games list!

type again: "99%" and "literally every time" are unbecoming remarks from a scientist with a phd. the truth: the majority of my posts have been promoting (or responding to unsolicited attacks) in threads i made (a) for ideas to reform wl's gameplay and membership structure to make games more fun and more competitive or (b) for tournaments, 20 or x. in any case it's only the forum, so there is no need for the scientific method. appearing correct is more important than actually being correct. "luck whining": i often summarize games i win or lose. i'll remember never to do that with you again, so to avoid appearing to "whine." in any case, i won't hold it against you. you are only helping your sidekick jr. your two-faced nature has always been this way: one minute typesomething is being himself, the next he feels obligated to add to what jr says.

everyone: i had another post prepared but then decided to respond to typesomething the sometimes doctor first.

other post i had prepared:

games 0-1500: i thought the forum was a joke.
games 1500- 2000: i thought i could help make wl better. unsolicited attacks and fizzer's lack of interest in ideas that could improve the gameplay and memebership structure made me realize i was wrong to have tried.
games 2000-last week: in responding to attackers like dick sharpe and jr, i became no better than dick sharpe and jr. the forum is a cess pool that makes us all a bit more dirty each time we enter it.
last week: i still believe i am right about szewen's intent. his commenting on his losses today concede as much.
in the future: the 2v2 ladder brings me to the forum. so i will quit the 2v2 ladder. dick sharpe, jr and other guys who have never offered anything constructive (and probably never even made their own thread before) might be sad they have one less person to attack.

people who have never played a game with me might be surprised if they find me friendly, kind or helpful in actual games. the truth is, wl has many circles. the forum, the ladders, real-time games, multi-day games, tournaments, etc. i would guess that i have more 'friends' (are we really friends or just friendly anonymous strangers?) on wl than anyone else. i probably also have more enemies, thanks to the forum: just look at my ancient china map's rating!

lately, all i've been doing is replying to teenagers, dimwits (eg, ryan) and guys like dicksharpe/jr/type when he supports jr and becomes no better than jr. there is no meaning in any of this. why some guys appear nice is because they don't say what they really think. it's really only a matter of dissimulation, not reality. i think the jerry sandusky trial shows that: nice guy, helpful, kind, loving in public, a pedophile in private. i don't mind appearing like an anonymous asshole in public, because in my wl games and in my private life all is well.

in any case, this is my final post. no more forum, and i won't ever see the forum trolls. for each attack on other people's threads, jr and dicksharpe play maybe 1 game. i wont see them again, because they dont come to this site to play games so much as to comment. no more medium earth ladders, no more medium earth specialists like typesomething. the anonymous wl gaming experience will be better for all of us.

Gui logic...

Offer direct insult.
Follow with phrase 'I don't mean to offend you' since that clearly absolves of all wrong.

Fits the post-grad stereotype to a T

Now that I think about it, I've read a lot of posts written by Richard Sharpe, and not a single one was constructive. Now this is based all on my current memory, so I can't say this as a fact, but it's interesting nonetheless.

Nope, not a one has ever been constructive.

Can't we all just get along?

>.>
<.<

I guess not.

Ace, please.
This is Warlight, not Bob the Builder.

Ace, yes we can!

Ace, was that a Rodney King homage? Well played sir.

If we all got along no one would read these forums.

J russel's first post was brilliant. Im sure when gui read that his mind was blown. Whether he'll admit it or not.

Typesomethings post was great too.

He just wanted gui to see why he doesnt come across well, without in anyway explaining why gui doesnt come across well.

He pulled a stat out of his ass.

He contradicted that stat.

He made sure to praise gui before insulting him.

He made a point how academia is trying to remove mudslinging in a mudslinging post.

and he did it all in only 3 paragraphs.

Well to be fair I wasn't saying I wasn't slinging mud nor was I trying to remove it. But comparing this discussion to what goes on in academia is inaccurate. It's not. Hence, exaggerations and mudslinging.

Academia has sopmething called peer review - where submitted papers are discussed by other academics. Gui introduced his reviews of the games he played with sez into a public forum of his peers.

That those peers cannot discuss that and have to resort to challenging peoples 'likeability' is a decision you all made. But yes in academia an idea is published. It is discussed, challenged or accepted.

Nice attempt at a strawman though.

I am well aware of peer review. I can promise you that the way Gui presented games with szewen would not have been accepted by any journal (OK, well maybe not any... there are a lot of journals out there). If the way you present a paper is "Here... this person sucks and did it wrong" it will not be accepted. If you say "Here is the data. We interpret it to mean this. This is different from what person X says because of reason Y" then you have a chance. Injecting malice into the paper does you no good in persuading others of your cause. Accurately presenting the data and accurately interpreting it does. Then you can argue over the data, and not the experimenter. I would say for Warlight, presenting the games and analyzing them by somebody as talented as Gui or Szewen is great. The manner in which Gui presented them did not promote analysis. It promoted mudslinging, both for and against him.

^^ Now we're getting somewhere - actual discussion and anaylsis is far more interesting and likey to get somewhere than.

"You piss people of everytime you post something"

well i don't think gui's map is low because of people 's hate for him i think it's low because people hate the map and constant tournaments on it.

Ironheart wrote:

well i don't think gui's map is low because of people 's hate for him i think it's low because people hate the map and constant tournaments on it.

I beg to differ. If that were the case, his latest Ancient China tournament wouldn't have filled up in half a day! There's more than enough interest for play on that map. For me, it's certainly in my top 3 of most played maps.

I thinks the low votes come from the fact that the map wasn't very aesthetically pleasing before the update. Not everyone updates their score.

Personally I really like that map and don't mind all the tournaments on it.