Forum adverts like this one are shown to any user who is not logged in. Join us by filling out a tiny 3 field form and you will get your own, free, dakka user account which gives a good range of benefits to you:
No adverts like this in the forums anymore.
Times and dates in your local timezone.
Full tracking of what you have read so you can skip to your first unread post, easily see what has changed since you last logged in, and easily see what is new at a glance.
Email notifications for threads you want to watch closely.
Being a part of the oldest wargaming community on the net.
If you are already a member then feel free to login now.
That is why one should never wield "I'm more experienced than you, therefore I am always right on the subject" argument. It will always be a fallacy.
No, but "I'm more experienced than you, thus you should more carefully consider my advice" as an argument *does* work. Why do you think I put my tournament record in my signature? I don't get a flying rat's titty of my wins and losses, nor my ranking. All the people up in arms over someone being labeled as good in this thread pale in comparison to the massive whining I used to have to endure when Dashofpepper wasn't well known.
I would give advice that wasn't "mainstream" and "popular" (much like the argument currently going on in the Destroyer poll thread on the same page here where I'm advocating against destroyers in a Necron army), and all the naysayers would come in with "You aren't qualified to give advice" and "lol, what a noob" and "That only works because you haven't played against serious competition" and "You have big fish, little pond syndrome." Well, I toured the GT circuit this year, definitely got out of the "little pond," wrote batreps as proof of my endeavors and how my tactics work and voila! I have a miraculous win ratio, which I post to lend credence to the advice I give. I totally forgot the intermediary step - *BEFORE* I posted batreps, a bunch of people on here just flat out accused me of lying about my win ratio. Even going so far as to make their own personalized signatures copying my own but inserting snippets about how obviously fake it was. I think it took some bannings to fix that junk. So the batreps came along to validate my wins and losses.
Why? All so that the advice I dispense in hopes of helping people won't get lost in the larger stream of static and noise that gets pumped into Dakka every day. My opinions run counter to those of other people who are willing to argue more loudly and get more personal in defense of their opinions or attacking of others here on the internet, so I have a signature full of my credentials to justify the opinions I give. Experience *does* lend weight to arguments. It doesn't make me right all the time, and I've done my share of manning up to my mistakes, but it should and does give pause before dismissing my thoughts offhand.
How sad is it that I have to go through all those steps so that I don't get simply trolled out of threads where I'm a dissenting voice?
It's amazing how often any thread that involves Dash ends up all about Dash posting about himself and how awesome he is. That is spamming in my opinion.
I asked dash a question he responded. thats not spamming.
the other guy's comment that dash is responding to doesnt have anything to do with anything I would have let it go but w/e.
No, but "I'm more experienced than you, thus you should more carefully consider my advice" as an argument *does* work.
Not really. In a debate, your statements should stand for its own, backed with evidence. What's more, an appeal to authority only counts if it is an appeal to proper authority. Boxers may win lots of times, but most of the times they're not the expert in boxing theory. The same doubt can be casted upon you. Others will also claim that the wins you've earned are irrelevant to the tourneys they play (I'm not familiar with the GT over there, so forgive me if I don't elaborate on this one but I've seen people discrediting you for it). I would also point out that you don't prepare for your metagame, but the metagame is different everywhere else, so does that make you the authority on the matter of all the metagames in the whole world? No.
Furthermore, even if you are indeed the authority figure in this matter, the claim that you are experienced only supports your argument (your argument here being "Don't think about the metagame."). It does not make it true.
Harping that you're more experienced and that means we should listen more to you and your advice is more valid, is, I'm sorry to say, a masturbatory exercise and it doesn't make your argument "truer" or "falser" or "should be considered more carefully-ier". There is only right and wrong, true or false. Everyone should equally consider everyone's argument, regardless of experience.
So if you want to be proven right, just prove it with reasoning and logic. It's not a contest of who has the biggest penis ever, or who has won more games. It's a contest of who is right, where your win-loss ratio is irrelevant.
Violence is not the answer, but it's always a good guess.
BloodThirSTAR wrote:It's amazing how often any thread that involves Dash ends up all about Dash posting about himself and how awesome he is. That is spamming in my opinion.
Modquisition on. This thread has been reported and I will be reviewing. In the interim, Frazzled will post about himself.
1. Weiner dogs have really bad breath. Ancient weiner dogs' breath smell like wet old man ass.
2. You should see what they eat, then you'd understand why.
3. As of point of writing, the Shanker has not killed any snakes this week.
4. Tangled is a girly movie. I know, I have SEEN! 5. As of point of writing, no weiner legionaire has peed on this year's Christmas tree. Not like last year...
-"Wait a minute.....who is that Frazz is talking to in the gallery? Hmmm something is going on here.....Oh.... it seems there is some dispute over video taping of some sort......Frazz is really upset now..........wait a minute......whats he go there.......is it? Can it be?....Frazz has just unleashed his hidden weiner dog from his mini bag, while quoting shakespeares "Let slip the dogs the war!!" GG
-"Don't mind Frazzled. He's just Dakka's crazy old dude locked in the attic. He's harmless. Mostly."
-TBone the Magnificent 1999-2014, Long Live the King!
Frazzled, isn't the leader of the weiner dog brigade called an Ancient, much like a Haemonculi Ancient?
Automatically Appended Next Post:
starsdawn wrote:
Dashofpepper wrote:
No, but "I'm more experienced than you, thus you should more carefully consider my advice" as an argument *does* work.
Not really. In a debate, your statements should stand for its own, backed with evidence. What's more, an appeal to authority only counts if it is an appeal to proper authority. Boxers may win lots of times, but most of the times they're not the expert in boxing theory. The same doubt can be casted upon you. Others will also claim that the wins you've earned are irrelevant to the tourneys they play (I'm not familiar with the GT over there, so forgive me if I don't elaborate on this one but I've seen people discrediting you for it). I would also point out that you don't prepare for your metagame, but the metagame is different everywhere else, so does that make you the authority on the matter of all the metagames in the whole world? No.
Furthermore, even if you are indeed the authority figure in this matter, the claim that you are experienced only supports your argument (your argument here being "Don't think about the metagame."). It does not make it true.
Harping that you're more experienced and that means we should listen more to you and your advice is more valid, is, I'm sorry to say, a masturbatory exercise and it doesn't make your argument "truer" or "falser" or "should be considered more carefully-ier". There is only right and wrong, true or false. Everyone should equally consider everyone's argument, regardless of experience.
So if you want to be proven right, just prove it with reasoning and logic. It's not a contest of who has the biggest penis ever, or who has won more games. It's a contest of who is right, where your win-loss ratio is irrelevant.
And if every piece of advice only had to be dispensed a single time, in a well-written, example-laden, meticulous manner that was then categorized, indexed, and referred to later for all future discussion about the same topic.....what you say would make sense.
Except that it is not.
My 4k+ posts are mostly in the army list section and tactics section of 40k, dispensing the same advice and the same critiques over and over and over and over and over.....to the point where I have bookmarked certain well written thoughts on different topics to just copy and paste when the same threads pop up again and again by different posters. I will not re-write the same extensive critiques, thoughts, or tactics repeatedly and endlessly for different people again and again. It gets mind-numbing - which is why I rarely post in army lists anymore - the same advice needs to be given to most of the Ork lists. I got tired of copy/pasting and of people asking me the same questions endlessly.
So INSTEAD, I find an intermediate solution, where I can often given abbreviated advice, let me advice stand on my experience having proven it, and let it rest. I don't NEED to flesh out every thought in detail, especially when the counter-arguments to my advice are so often simply comprised of personal attacks or accusations of penis-waving, much like this thread. Several of the posters in here have nothing relevant to say except negative things about me. I don't care if my advice is taken or not. What I *do* care about is being able to dispense it where I feel comfortable speaking from experience and knowledge, and having a solid foundation of success to back up what I'm saying.
I do have that. At the end of the day, haters will hate, trolls will troll, the internet will continue being the internet, and there's no point getting in a tizzy about the scrubs.
This message was edited 1 time. Last update was at 2010/11/29 18:52:47
The 40k ruleset is rather simplistic with minimal opportunity to 'surprise' an opponent with combos/non-linear gameplay.
40k, by GW admission, is not intended to be competitive even though many players attempt to play competitively.
Scenarios in 'sanctioned' tournament events often significantly change or alter the fundamental mechanics of certain armies'/lists' "normal" 40k gameplay.
TLDR: Having the best competitive 40k hobby opinions ever is kinda like being the tallest midget in the world.
Edit: The true metagame for 40k tournaments is figuring out what amalgamation of Scenario, TO knowledge/rules bias, and matchup prioritization (or comps, if it exists). All things equal, for a good player with several strong lists to choose from, these inputs will have more effect.
This message was edited 1 time. Last update was at 2010/11/29 19:04:23
BloodThirSTAR wrote:It's amazing how often any thread that involves Dash ends up all about Dash posting about himself and how awesome he is. That is spamming in my opinion.
Modquisition on. This thread has been reported and I will be reviewing. In the interim, Frazzled will post about himself.
1. Weiner dogs have really bad breath. Ancient weiner dogs' breath smell like wet old man ass.
2. You should see what they eat, then you'd understand why.
3. As of point of writing, the Shanker has not killed any snakes this week.
4. Tangled is a girly movie. I know, I have SEEN! 5. As of point of writing, no weiner legionaire has peed on this year's Christmas tree. Not like last year...
I don't think there's a need to close it, really. Maybe just a reminder that we should stay on topic. Which I didn't do in all my posts, I admit.
Violence is not the answer, but it's always a good guess.
It's amazing how often any thread that involves Dash ends up all about Dash posting about himself and how awesome he is. That is spamming in my opinion.
It is amazing, how every thread Dash posts in turns into a flamewar of envy. That can be very annoying. For him and for the others.
So it would be better to consider, what people say instead of throwing it away unreflected.
@Dash
My point is that I think it is *FAR* more important to know your own army, how to use it in a variety of situations....and then to be quick on your feet with understanding immediate threats you face against you on a table then to try roleplaying or dice-rolling or math-hammering out what statistical outcomes will be against different armies or builds. Kind of like poker. Don't worry about what the other people might have. Focus on what cards you have.
I know that this is your idea of what you do. I fear, I have to disagree a little bit.
I think you (I mean you, Dash ) indeed want to know the enemy. Otherwise you wont be able to identify threats and create the situations you want to make use of.
Remember our game against your DE. I was too slow in knowing the enemy. This resulted in a closed reserve edge (a thing that I normally avoid doing, because unless it is houseruled, or the BRB-FAQ with tanks has to be transferred to infantry (not being able to make it on table from reserve -> immediately destroyed), it causes rule problems ).
And why do you ask so many questions before each game?
I would consider it a matter of philosophy. And it also depends on the kind of strategy you are playing.
(if you are playing a bunch of individual specialists to deal with a specific target each, you should focus on the enemy, if you have an army of redundant flexible units you just have to throw as many of them as possible against the nearest threat)
1. You have to know what you are facing in order to judge forces correctly.
2. And you have to know what you are having in order to judge forces correctly.
You can either focus on the first one or on the second one, but you should not deny any of them.
But, yes: vacuum-pseudo-mathhammer is something about useless, because it can never cover a game situation properly.
BloodThirSTAR wrote:It's amazing how often any thread that involves Dash ends up all about Dash posting about himself and how awesome he is. That is spamming in my opinion.
Modquisition on. This thread has been reported and I will be reviewing. In the interim, Frazzled will post about himself.
1. Weiner dogs have really bad breath. Ancient weiner dogs' breath smell like wet old man ass.
2. You should see what they eat, then you'd understand why.
3. As of point of writing, the Shanker has not killed any snakes this week.
4. Tangled is a girly movie. I know, I have SEEN! 5. As of point of writing, no weiner legionaire has peed on this year's Christmas tree. Not like last year...
I don't think there's a need to close it, really. Maybe just a reminder that we should stay on topic. Which I didn't do in all my posts, I admit.
Good Point.
Modqusiition on. Lets retarget to the actual point of the post and note one particular poster thank you. Please everyone consider this a public warning. Failure to do so will result in both closing this thread and potential disciplinary action.
-"Wait a minute.....who is that Frazz is talking to in the gallery? Hmmm something is going on here.....Oh.... it seems there is some dispute over video taping of some sort......Frazz is really upset now..........wait a minute......whats he go there.......is it? Can it be?....Frazz has just unleashed his hidden weiner dog from his mini bag, while quoting shakespeares "Let slip the dogs the war!!" GG
-"Don't mind Frazzled. He's just Dakka's crazy old dude locked in the attic. He's harmless. Mostly."
-TBone the Magnificent 1999-2014, Long Live the King!
sourclams wrote:Having the best competitive 40k hobby opinions ever is kinda like being the tallest midget in the world.
Thanks for this memorable line and for posting on-topic!
This is becoming a meta-thread rather than a thread about the meta. Please get back to the topic at hand and hope that Frazzled doesn't sick the Ruinous Wieners on any of you for what you've already done/failed to do. (No promises.) In all seriousness, I think sourclam's line above is a pretty good point to restart the on-topic discussion.
Automatically Appended Next Post: Edit: Too late! Doom is already upon you all.
This message was edited 1 time. Last update was at 2010/11/29 19:15:19
And if every piece of advice only had to be dispensed a single time, in a well-written, example-laden, meticulous manner that was then categorized, indexed, and referred to later for all future discussion about the same topic.....what you say would make sense.
Except that it is not.
..what? NOTHING is like that. Ever. Not every spoken argument can be archived. Not everyone is smart and civil enough to conduct discussion in a polite manner. This is a strawman fallacy, at best.
My 4k+ posts are mostly in the army list section and tactics section of 40k, dispensing the same advice and the same critiques over and over and over and over and over.....to the point where I have bookmarked certain well written thoughts on different topics to just copy and paste when the same threads pop up again and again by different posters. I will not re-write the same extensive critiques, thoughts, or tactics repeatedly and endlessly for different people again and again. It gets mind-numbing - which is why I rarely post in army lists anymore - the same advice needs to be given to most of the Ork lists. I got tired of copy/pasting and of people asking me the same questions endlessly.
Again, irrelevant.
So INSTEAD, I find an intermediate solution, where I can often given abbreviated advice, let me advice stand on my experience having proven it, and let it rest. I don't NEED to flesh out every thought in detail, especially when the counter-arguments to my advice are so often simply comprised of personal attacks or accusations of penis-waving, much like this thread. Several of the posters in here have nothing relevant to say except negative things about me. I don't care if my advice is taken or not. What I *do* care about is being able to dispense it where I feel comfortable speaking from experience and knowledge, and having a solid foundation of success to back up what I'm saying.
Yeah, I do agree that attacking you personally is irrelevant and also a fallacy (not to mention uncalled for). However, that does not make your fallacious statements valid. Two wrongs does not make a right. I'm not saying you have been an offensive person, I'm just saying that your win-loss ratio is is almost always not relevant.
I do have that. At the end of the day, haters will hate, trolls will troll, the internet will continue being the internet, and there's no point getting in a tizzy about the scrubs.
And fallacies will always be false. Now if we could go back to your statement about the metagame not being relevant, and me countering that, we could go back in discussing this topic. Minus the who won the most games, if you don't mind.
EDIT: sorry, typing this before the other posts.
To stay on topic, just like what Nazdreg has said, trying to know your enemy is metagaming. Preparing yourself the moment you face them is sure fine and dandy, but it would be a waste if you have the knowledge of the local meta and not put in in good use. It's more akin to knowing your enemy has arrows, but never bothering to use shields because you're oh so good with wielding your sword two-handed. That's a simplistic way of putting it, but knowledge is power. And power is useless if you don't use it.
This message was edited 1 time. Last update was at 2010/11/29 19:26:33
Violence is not the answer, but it's always a good guess.
starsdawn, the reason you can't pin me down for an argument with you is because I don't feel like you're bringing anything useful to the discussion. You're attacking my opinions for the sake of attacking them - which *is* off topic. If you disagree with my approach on metagaming (which I've outlined explicitly) don't dismiss them as *irrelevant* or as *strawman arguments* which in themselves are irrelevant points....make a COUNTERPOINT that is better and more intuitive than my own.
I've put forth a long and expansive explanation of how I build a list, what considerations I put into it, why I think opponent armies are irrelevant to the process, why list tailoring is useless, why local meta in different places is a non-consideration for a serious player.....
You're accusing me of using strawman arguments, but that is precisely what you are doing. Here's a definition:
wiki wrote:
"A straw man argument is an informal fallacy based on misrepresentation of an opponent's position.[1] To "attack a straw man" is to create the illusion of having refuted a proposition by substituting it with a superficially similar yet unequivalent proposition (the "straw man"), and refuting it, without ever having actually refuted the original position
You've created the illusion of having refuted my arguments, but all you've done is dismiss them off-hand. Pot, meet kettle?
Put substance into your posting, and I'll stop ignoring what you write.
This message was edited 1 time. Last update was at 2010/11/29 19:42:36
One more time. Get back on topic or I'm going berserk. Fair warning.
-"Wait a minute.....who is that Frazz is talking to in the gallery? Hmmm something is going on here.....Oh.... it seems there is some dispute over video taping of some sort......Frazz is really upset now..........wait a minute......whats he go there.......is it? Can it be?....Frazz has just unleashed his hidden weiner dog from his mini bag, while quoting shakespeares "Let slip the dogs the war!!" GG
-"Don't mind Frazzled. He's just Dakka's crazy old dude locked in the attic. He's harmless. Mostly."
-TBone the Magnificent 1999-2014, Long Live the King!
Dashofpepper wrote:starsdawn, the reason you can't pin me down for an argument with you is because I don't feel like you're bringing anything useful to the discussion. You're attacking my opinions for the sake of attacking them - which *is* off topic. If you disagree with my approach on metagaming (which I've outlined explicitly) don't dismiss them as *irrelevant* or as *strawman arguments* which in themselves are irrelevant points....make a COUNTERPOINT that is better and more intuitive than my own.
It is relevant because it needed to be said that what you say does not support your claim, and while it may not support my argument it certainly makes yours more wobbly. What I did do is dismiss the parts where your claim that you're right because you won so and so. Saying that I attack them for the sake of attacking is uncalled for and putting words in my mouth.
And I did provide my counter-arguments--like in my first, second and last post. What I would like you to do is address them. In which you didn't in regards to my first and last post.
And I'm not attacking your opinions. I'm attacking your arguments. Opinions are subjective while arguments are declarative sentences.
I've put forth a long and expansive explanation of how I build a list, what considerations I put into it, why I think opponent armies are irrelevant to the process, why list tailoring is useless, why local meta in different places is a non-consideration for a serious player.....
And I did take them in consideration, I assure you. What I didn't take into consideration is the fact that you needed to point out you're good at 40k or whatever.
You're accusing me of using strawman arguments, but that is precisely what you are doing. Here's a definition:
You've created the illusion of having refuted my arguments, but all you've done is dismiss them off-hand. Pot, meet kettle?
Fallacious arguments ARE to be dismissed, since they present faulty logic. Also, what I have done is not strawman. I have pointed out how and why they are fallacies. Because they are. It's not an illusion. Please read again what strawman really means. I'll highlight it for you.
wiki wrote:
"A straw man argument is an informal fallacy based on misrepresentation of an opponent's position.[1] To "attack a straw man" is to create the illusion of having refuted a proposition by substituting it with a superficially similar yet unequivalent proposition (the "straw man"), and refuting it, without ever having actually refuted the original position
What you did back was that (presenting an illusion world where every argument is presented in an orderly manner). What I did isn't because IT IS the same proposition. Be assured that I don't dismiss what you say entirely. I dismiss parts of it. And before I dismiss them, I consider first if they are relevant, if they do hold water, and if they are logically sound and are not fallacious. If they are fallacious, I point them out so that you wouldn't stand on that same point again, therefore making the discussion more orderly and not stemming of using faulty logic. THAT is why you point out fallacies. next time, please point out the right ones.
So yes. You need to learn how to spot fallacies and how to avoid them. Because you pointed the wrong one. Also, making a fallacious argument is in itself a reason for dismissing it.
And for someone who opposes pointing out fallacies and not contributing anything to the discussion, you're the one to talk am I right? So yeah, pot meets kettle and calls it black all right.
Put substance into your posting, and I'll stop ignoring what you write.
I just did. You just didn't. Yes, this post I'm replying to is every bit as "off-topic" as the other posts you've faulted me with. So yeah, pot meets kettle all right but it's the other way around.
Unlike you though, I do not ignore what the other side says just because I want to. It doesn't make me a better person, nor does it make me right in this argument.
Still waiting for your counter-argument.
EDIT: YES, PLEASE REPLY TO MY ARGUMENT. We can't stay on topic and continue the discussion if you don't because it gives me nothing to counter except your previous statement which I already debunked.
This message was edited 1 time. Last update was at 2010/11/29 20:13:00
Violence is not the answer, but it's always a good guess.
This thread is closed. The original poster is free to start a new thread on the same topic. The moderators will watch that one.
-"Wait a minute.....who is that Frazz is talking to in the gallery? Hmmm something is going on here.....Oh.... it seems there is some dispute over video taping of some sort......Frazz is really upset now..........wait a minute......whats he go there.......is it? Can it be?....Frazz has just unleashed his hidden weiner dog from his mini bag, while quoting shakespeares "Let slip the dogs the war!!" GG
-"Don't mind Frazzled. He's just Dakka's crazy old dude locked in the attic. He's harmless. Mostly."
-TBone the Magnificent 1999-2014, Long Live the King!
