|
|
Post by Tigertecz on Oct 22, 2009 2:05:08 GMT -5
|
|
|
|
Post by Tigertecz on Oct 22, 2009 2:06:56 GMT -5
nick anderson not even an honorable mention?  sad to see him disappear from getting love. I did consider him but I prefer Barry and everyone else listed above him to be honest. |
|
|
|
Post by crazymike2021 on Oct 22, 2009 2:22:56 GMT -5
awesome job
|
|
|
|
Post by Kruwaukee on Oct 22, 2009 7:39:34 GMT -5
Anyways It's 5,500 words not 7,200 also if you take out all the repeated headings you give of each player and their copy pasted stats then its also about 2,000 words less too. My point is it's one article so it deserves credit for one article. If you wanted to break it up into two then you should have but you didn't. Shit the table that broph did was a lot better than this in my opinion. I thought this article was great don't get me wrong but get off your pedestal asking for double points. What the fuck are you on? NONE of your articles are anywhere near 5,500 words! Are you stupid? If this is the type of reaction then fuck it I@m not writing any more articles. What are you crying about? Everyone enjoyed it including myself but its not worth double its that simple. Stop bitching. |
|
|
|
Post by Tigertecz on Oct 22, 2009 7:41:28 GMT -5
What the fuck are you on? NONE of your articles are anywhere near 5,500 words! Are you stupid? If this is the type of reaction then fuck it I@m not writing any more articles. What are you crying about? Everyone enjoyed it including myself but its not worth double its that simple. Stop bitching. LMAO at you telling someone else to stop bitching  |
|
|
|
Post by Brophdog88 on Oct 22, 2009 7:43:30 GMT -5
And your Western Conference Draft grade article was also around 1,700 words. Where in the fuck are you getting 7,200 from? And yeah, I easily could've split it into more articles. I could've done one for each of the three teams I ranked and then another for honourable mentions, but what's the point. It's one article, so I wanted to keep it all together because it's a nice article all in one and the league deserves good reads. I've written enough to be worth 3 times your articles but I know the limit is two, so I'm not asking for 3 +5's or anything like that. Just thought that this article was worth more than just one +5. If you disagree that's up to you but I think that's pretty fucked up. Anyways It's 5,500 words not 7,200 also if you take out all the repeated headings you give of each player and their copy pasted stats then its also about 2,000 words less too. My point is it's one article so it deserves credit for one article. If you wanted to break it up into two then you should have but you didn't. Shit the table that broph did was a lot better than this in my opinion. I thought this article was great don't get me wrong but get off your pedestal asking for double points. This article was harder to do then my article, mine was a lot of copy pasting except for making that damn table, I have no issues with this getting double points. |
|
|
|
Post by Brophdog88 on Oct 22, 2009 7:47:24 GMT -5
the articles I typically write end up about 3000 words long including all the copy paste work, this is about double that...I would whole heatedly agree with double credit for it.
|
|
|
|
Post by Tigertecz on Oct 22, 2009 7:47:44 GMT -5
Thanks Broph. You know what Krup's like though.
|
|
|
|
Post by Kruwaukee on Oct 22, 2009 8:06:51 GMT -5
Thanks Broph. You know what Krup's like though. Whats that Tiger? I forgot you're the judgmental person amongst everyone here. The fact is there is no quantifiable way to justify whether something is worth double unless you post it twice as part 1 and 2. It's that simple. |
|
|
|
Post by Brophdog88 on Oct 22, 2009 8:11:12 GMT -5
Thanks Broph. You know what Krup's like though. Whats that Tiger? I forgot you're the judgmental person amongst everyone here. The fact is there is no quantifiable way to justify whether something is worth double unless you post it twice as part 1 and 2. It's that simple. so basically because he didn't split it up into double he should be punished...its more convenient for us to read like this. You will notice that Saga's article was one article, but he didn't want to split it up even though it lent itself to being two articles much moreso than this article, as he could have split it into East and West. This article fits best into one long one, even if the effort required to write it is as much as it would take to do two articles so he should get credit for two articles. |
|
|
|
Post by Tigertecz on Oct 22, 2009 8:29:48 GMT -5
Thanks Broph. You know what Krup's like though. Whats that Tiger? I forgot you're the judgmental person amongst everyone here. The fact is there is no quantifiable way to justify whether something is worth double unless you post it twice as part 1 and 2. It's that simple. Do you see me being the only one arguing this point here? Do you see anyone else arguing your point? I don't know what your problem is but you always have to latch on to any time I try and earn an upgrade or anything like that. |
|
|
|
Post by Kruwaukee on Oct 22, 2009 10:00:03 GMT -5
Whats that Tiger? I forgot you're the judgmental person amongst everyone here. The fact is there is no quantifiable way to justify whether something is worth double unless you post it twice as part 1 and 2. It's that simple. Do you see me being the only one arguing this point here? Do you see anyone else arguing your point? I don't know what your problem is but you always have to latch on to any time I try and earn an upgrade or anything like that. Why do you think you're above the rules? I don't find it inconvenient to read it in two spots or voting twice. There is no quantum to being able to decipher what garners consideration to 5 points to 10 points. It's simply unfair. Just write two articles. |
|
|
|
Post by Tigertecz on Oct 22, 2009 10:01:48 GMT -5
Do you see me being the only one arguing this point here? Do you see anyone else arguing your point? I don't know what your problem is but you always have to latch on to any time I try and earn an upgrade or anything like that. Why do you think you're above the rules? I don't find it inconvenient to read it in two spots or voting twice. There is no quantum to being able to decipher what garners consideration to 5 points to 10 points. It's simply unfair. Just write two articles. So why did Saga get two lots for his article? Is he above the rules? No it's not about that is it? It's about appreciating someone's efforts. |
|
|
|
Post by Kruwaukee on Oct 22, 2009 10:05:01 GMT -5
Why do you think you're above the rules? I don't find it inconvenient to read it in two spots or voting twice. There is no quantum to being able to decipher what garners consideration to 5 points to 10 points. It's simply unfair. Just write two articles. So why did Saga get two lots for his article? Is he above the rules? No it's not about that is it? It's about appreciating someone's efforts. I'm all about rewarding effort but it must be fair and consistent. Writing one mega article to get double points has no merit or measure unless we add into polls +9 +10 but then I think we're going to be giving away too many points. It will be a slippery slope. I'm not trying to harp on you specifically but it just so happens the issue involves you currently. We have rules in place to write two articles then post two articles and let people vote on them accordingly. I split up my East/West because of that. Its the fairest way of doing things and it isn't an inconvenience to the poster or the reader. |
|
|
|
Post by Brophdog88 on Oct 22, 2009 10:19:23 GMT -5
Thing is we do have a fair way to decide whether somebody gets double points....ashes....
|
|
sad to see him disappear from getting love.
