|
|
Post by Tigertecz on Oct 22, 2009 10:19:50 GMT -5
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. You're contradicting yourself then. If you're all about rewarding effort and want to be fair and consistent, then I should be getting double points for a mega article like Saga did, no? The amount of work that went in to this article is the same amount of work that's put in to 3 or 4 other articles and I don't think it's out of line to ask for the equivalent credit for two articles. I'm not asking for 3 or 4 or anything more. You know what you're saying is bullshit right? Surely you must know this? |
|
|
|
Post by martinez on Oct 22, 2009 11:00:36 GMT -5
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. You know what you're saying is bullshit right? Surely you must know this? He swims in bullshit that defines David Ezekiel Krubitchski's life. |
|
|
|
Post by Kruwaukee on Oct 22, 2009 11:11:58 GMT -5
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. You're contradicting yourself then. If you're all about rewarding effort and want to be fair and consistent, then I should be getting double points for a mega article like Saga did, no? The amount of work that went in to this article is the same amount of work that's put in to 3 or 4 other articles and I don't think it's out of line to ask for the equivalent credit for two articles. I'm not asking for 3 or 4 or anything more. You know what you're saying is bullshit right? Surely you must know this? You are basing off of one article. We can go over the course of league history and see longer and shorter articles that may have been in the same range of points. Just post it as two articles and there shouldn't be a problem. The justify an article people voted 5 points and assume it should count double is unfair. Why can't you seem to follow the rules? Thats the only thing that is bullshit. Everyone in the league has to post two articles and get 15 votes per in order to achieve max bonus points. Why do you think you only need to do one and double people's votes? It's a simple solution to break it in half and post two articles so people can vote and give merit to your work as they see fit. You aren't special where you can decide for yourself what is worth double points and what is not. There isn't a special clause in the rules for you. |
|
|
|
Post by Tigertecz on Oct 22, 2009 11:18:20 GMT -5
You're contradicting yourself then. If you're all about rewarding effort and want to be fair and consistent, then I should be getting double points for a mega article like Saga did, no? The amount of work that went in to this article is the same amount of work that's put in to 3 or 4 other articles and I don't think it's out of line to ask for the equivalent credit for two articles. I'm not asking for 3 or 4 or anything more. You know what you're saying is bullshit right? Surely you must know this? You are basing off of one article. We can go over the course of league history and see longer and shorter articles that may have been in the same range of points. Just post it as two articles and there shouldn't be a problem. The justify an article people voted 5 points and assume it should count double is unfair. Why can't you seem to follow the rules? Thats the only thing that is bullshit. Everyone in the league has to post two articles and get 15 votes per in order to achieve max bonus points. Why do you think you only need to do one and double people's votes? It's a simple solution to break it in half and post two articles so people can vote and give merit to your work as they see fit. You aren't special where you can decide for yourself what is worth double points and what is not. There isn't a special clause in the rules for you. And there's a special clause in the rules for Saga? You still haven't answered that. Anyway, I'm done here. I will post another article if you want to get the other points? |
|
|
|
Post by Kruwaukee on Oct 22, 2009 11:23:35 GMT -5
You are basing off of one article. We can go over the course of league history and see longer and shorter articles that may have been in the same range of points. Just post it as two articles and there shouldn't be a problem. The justify an article people voted 5 points and assume it should count double is unfair. Why can't you seem to follow the rules? Thats the only thing that is bullshit. Everyone in the league has to post two articles and get 15 votes per in order to achieve max bonus points. Why do you think you only need to do one and double people's votes? It's a simple solution to break it in half and post two articles so people can vote and give merit to your work as they see fit. You aren't special where you can decide for yourself what is worth double points and what is not. There isn't a special clause in the rules for you. And there's a special clause in the rules for Saga? You still haven't answered that. Anyway, I'm done here. I will post another article if you want to get the other points? I'm not in control of that. However the rules are the rules for a reason if not then people would just get whatever points they decide. If you want to propose a new set of rules that would allow you to write one article then do that. |
|
|
|
Post by Tigertecz on Oct 22, 2009 11:24:02 GMT -5
I'll title it "Krup is an asshole".
And in the body it can say:
If you think I deserve more than the +5 I got for the other article, please vote accordingly.
That might work right?
|
|
|
|
Post by Brophdog88 on Oct 22, 2009 11:25:42 GMT -5
so because he didn't split it into two articles, he deserves only five points, but had he split it into two articles, he would have most likely gotten 2 5's had he split it...but the issue is, where could he have split it up. This article would have gotten two fives, if there was a way to split it clean, but really, you can't split it up into PG SG and SF/PF/C...as he says All UOSLR Teams..I guess he could have split ALL UOSLR Back court and front court, but this makes the most sense, having it all in one, he even mentioned at the beginning that he could split it up and get two articles, but it makes the most sense together, so he hoped he could get points for two articles...Its not like he posted it as one article. THIS BY HIS OWN ACCOUNT IS 2 ARTICLES, he said so, he just didn't want to break it up. Now you can say that maybe he shouldn't get double points for it, but he posted it saying it was two articles...ashes can decide what he gets.
|
|
|
|
Post by Tigertecz on Oct 22, 2009 11:28:45 GMT -5
Yeah I'm leaving it up to Ashes anyway. But I could've split it say All UOSLR 1st and 2nd team, and then All UOSLR 3rd team + honourable mentions, but really, that would've just been unnecessary. It's two (or more) articles worth of work that was put in to it. I'll leave it up to Ashes though. If he wants me to get one +5 then I'll accept it. I don't need to listen to Krup on this.
|
|
|
|
Post by Kruwaukee on Oct 22, 2009 11:41:18 GMT -5
Yes think out scenarios though.
If you split 1st and 2nd and then did a 3rd. Perhaps you get a +5 for the 1st and 2nd and a +4 for the 3rd. Maybe you get +5 for both...who knows?
You also need 15 votes per article.
It's unfair to assume you automatically get two +5's.
How do you justify and measure worth of 1 article into two? You can't which is why we have the rules in place.
|
|
|
|
Post by Kruwaukee on Oct 22, 2009 11:43:24 GMT -5
I'll title it "Krup is an asshole". And in the body it can say: If you think I deserve more than the +5 I got for the other article, please vote accordingly. That might work right? I haven't insulted or threw out slander to you in anyway yet you sure throw a lot towards me but I'm the asshole? I told you its nothing personal just so happens you're involved with the situation. Stop making this a me vs you thing or I'm so against you. Remove your own feelings or animosity you have towards me and look at the facts. |
|
|
|
Post by Tigertecz on Oct 22, 2009 11:57:21 GMT -5
I'll title it "Krup is an asshole". And in the body it can say: If you think I deserve more than the +5 I got for the other article, please vote accordingly. That might work right? I haven't insulted or threw out slander to you in anyway yet you sure throw a lot towards me but I'm the asshole? I told you its nothing personal just so happens you're involved with the situation. Stop making this a me vs you thing or I'm so against you. Remove your own feelings or animosity you have towards me and look at the facts. I have looked at the facts. You haven't. Fact 1: More people agree that it should get multiple points than just me Fact 2: Yes there are rules but Saga's article proved there are exceptions to rules Fact 3: You lied in all your assessments by bringing your own articles in to question saying they had 7,200 words in them. I queried it so you back track and say 5,000+ words, and yet, the truth is the two articles of yours I checked were 1,700 or something Fact 4: As Broph pointed out, I openly said I could have split this in to two articles (possibly even more) but I kept it together because it looks nicer, it doesn't eliminate the fact I put in enough effort here to warrant more than the one article. Fact 5: You have insulted me by saying I think I'm above the rules. All I stated in the opening post was for Ashes to decide as he sees fit. Since then I have argued my point. |
|
|
|
Post by Kruwaukee on Oct 22, 2009 12:09:01 GMT -5
I haven't insulted or threw out slander to you in anyway yet you sure throw a lot towards me but I'm the asshole? I told you its nothing personal just so happens you're involved with the situation. Stop making this a me vs you thing or I'm so against you. Remove your own feelings or animosity you have towards me and look at the facts. I have looked at the facts. You haven't. Fact 1: More people agree that it should get multiple points than just me Fact 2: Yes there are rules but Saga's article proved there are exceptions to rules Fact 3: You lied in all your assessments by bringing your own articles in to question saying they had 7,200 words in them. I queried it so you back track and say 5,000+ words, and yet, the truth is the two articles of yours I checked were 1,700 or something Fact 4: As Broph pointed out, I openly said I could have split this in to two articles (possibly even more) but I kept it together because it looks nicer, it doesn't eliminate the fact I put in enough effort here to warrant more than the one article. Fact 5: You have insulted me by saying I think I'm above the rules. All I stated in the opening post was for Ashes to decide as he sees fit. Since then I have argued my point. You do think you are above the rules if you think there should be an exception made for you and that isn't insulting you by saying that. Why can't you just follow the rules and post two separate articles? It's pretty easy to follow the rules as no one else but you seem to have a problem with it. Why are you so special that you don't need to follow the rules? |
|
|
|
Post by martinez on Oct 22, 2009 12:17:21 GMT -5
tiger give it up, Krupinski is the most delusional person I have ever met.
Notice how he casually avoids the fact that, not only has "double points" been given out for one article before but there is no specific rule that says "double points are not allowed."
|
|
|
|
Post by Kruwaukee on Oct 22, 2009 14:12:04 GMT -5
Marty you hop on any anti-krup bangwagon there is. Now thats a fact.
Your logic is so idiotic as well. Does every rule have to be stated twice to have both positive and negative meaning.
Stop at the Red Light
Do not Go at the Red Light
Duh!
|
|
|
|
Post by martinez on Oct 22, 2009 14:18:27 GMT -5
Marty you hop on any anti-krup bangwagon there is. Now thats a fact. Your logic is so idiotic as well. Does every rule have to be stated twice to have both positive and negative meaning. Stop at the Red Light Do not Go at the Red Light Duh! In the last version of BBS we had to make a rule called the "Anti-Loophole" rule also known as the "Krupinski rule" because you would always abuse rules and find loopholes. You of all people should be the last one lecturing anyone in regards to "following the rules" when you have generally always been one of the people to find ways around them. Get off your high horse, there is no "bandwagon hate Krupinski" going on here. When you are wrong, you are wrong. If I want to call you out on that, I will, regardless of the situation. Now point out to me where there is a rule that specifically states that one article that warrants receiving double the points based on quality, length, and presentation is not allowed because the max you can receive is 5 points? There is not such a rule. While I think if he gets the double, that should count as his two articles for the year and he can not use the +10 on just one player, which IS in the rules. |
|
