Is Moesbarring cheating?

[[Armag] diarouga]

Show hidden quotes

No. The situation is the same. Why is it different? Just because you say so?

Because you take an extreme situation, while fast shooting isn't.
I though it was just a troll post but if you actually want to make a point you have to keep in mind that even if a non game-breaking, small glitch, which is cool, is fine, it doesn't mean the most extreme cheat is fine too.

Ex:
A1) Reasonable but controversial opinion: Muslims and immigration are an issue in Europe
B1) Reasonable but controversial opinion: fast shooting is a cool mechanic

A2) Wrong opinion because too extreme: We should thus kill all the muslims
B2) Wrong opinion because too extreme: Since fast shooting is fine, moesbar is fine too

Extremity is just an opinion. Galileo's opinion that the Earth revolves around the sun instead of the other way around was thought of as an extreme opinion. Was he therefore wrong? You say A. I say B. Just subjective. Therefore we can't make an unbiased decision, and thus we're back at 3). We either ban all or nothing, which leaves us with the latter.

Sorry. Try again.

Why can't you go with what people prefer?

Because not everyone prefers the same. Clearly.

Decide by vote then? That seems fair to me at least.

So if I make a poll about whether moesbarring should be allowed or not, you will respect the outcome of that decision? Even if it's not the outcome you desire?

The tyranny of the majority is hardly fair btw.

Yes, but as Tocqueville said, it's still the best option.
In addition, by that logic, I should use fast shooting and alt d in all of my games because I shouldn't accept the tyranny of the majority?

[deleted_user0]

You could argue that, but that's not my logic. I never drew any conclusions or made any assumptions that support what you just said.

[deleted_user0]

Show hidden quotes

No. The situation is the same. Why is it different? Just because you say so?

Because you take an extreme situation, while fast shooting isn't.
I though it was just a troll post but if you actually want to make a point you have to keep in mind that even if a non game-breaking, small glitch, which is cool, is fine, it doesn't mean the most extreme cheat is fine too.

Ex:
A1) Reasonable but controversial opinion: Muslims and immigration are an issue in Europe
B1) Reasonable but controversial opinion: fast shooting is a cool mechanic

A2) Wrong opinion because too extreme: We should thus kill all the muslims
B2) Wrong opinion because too extreme: Since fast shooting is fine, moesbar is fine too

Extremity is just an opinion.

I totally agree, and our opinion about fast shooting is considered as extreme, which doesn't mean that it is objectively extreme or wong.

Galileo's opinion that the Earth revolves around the sun instead of the other way around was thought of as an extreme opinion.

Yes true, having extreme opinions doesn't mean that it is objectively wrong. I know you're trolling here again, but since the beginning of the argument, garja has been claiming that we're wrong because we're extreme.

Was he therefore wrong? You say A. I say B. Just subjective.

Yes true. Though nobody seriously claims that moesbar is fine, as it would totally change the game, so it's not an issue, while fast shooting is.

Therefore we can't make an unbiased decision, and thus we're back at 3). We either ban all or nothing, which leaves us with the latter.

Sorry. Try again.

Also you actually dodged my point, I don't know if it was on purpose because you wanted to say something true after understanding the lack of logic, or because you didn't get it:

I claimed that, unlike what mankle and you said, pushing something to the extreme and showing that the extreme is absurd doesn't make the nuanced point wrong.

And you answered that extreme opinions aren't always wrong, which is right for sure, but doesn't go against my point.

I don't care about fast shooting. This thread is about Moesbarring. My point about Moesbarring isn't extreme. Unless you mean extremely nuanced. Try to disprove my point wrong instead of making it about something else.

[[Armag] diarouga]

You could argue that, but that's not my logic. I never drew any conclusions or made any assumptions that support what you just said.

Well you said "The tyranny of the majority is hardly fair btw.", if I follow that logic I shouldn't follow the general opinion because it's not fair.

While I agree that the tyranny of the majority isn't fair, I think it's still the best indicator we have.

[deleted_user0]

You could argue that, but that's not my logic. I never drew any conclusions or made any assumptions that support what you just said.

Well you said "The tyranny of the majority is hardly fair btw.", if I follow that logic I shouldn't follow the general opinion because it's not fair.

While I agree that the tyranny of the majority isn't fair, I think it's still the best indicator we have.

If that's your belief, then you shouldn't go against it.

The tyranny of the majority isn't fair. But you can add things institutions to make it fairer, assuming those institutions don't become corrupted.

[[Armag] diarouga]

Show hidden quotes

No. The situation is the same. Why is it different? Just because you say so?

Because you take an extreme situation, while fast shooting isn't.
I though it was just a troll post but if you actually want to make a point you have to keep in mind that even if a non game-breaking, small glitch, which is cool, is fine, it doesn't mean the most extreme cheat is fine too.

Ex:
A1) Reasonable but controversial opinion: Muslims and immigration are an issue in Europe
B1) Reasonable but controversial opinion: fast shooting is a cool mechanic

A2) Wrong opinion because too extreme: We should thus kill all the muslims
B2) Wrong opinion because too extreme: Since fast shooting is fine, moesbar is fine too

Extremity is just an opinion.

I totally agree, and our opinion about fast shooting is considered as extreme, which doesn't mean that it is objectively extreme or wong.

Galileo's opinion that the Earth revolves around the sun instead of the other way around was thought of as an extreme opinion.

Yes true, having extreme opinions doesn't mean that it is objectively wrong. I know you're trolling here again, but since the beginning of the argument, garja has been claiming that we're wrong because we're extreme.

Was he therefore wrong? You say A. I say B. Just subjective.

Yes true. Though nobody seriously claims that moesbar is fine, as it would totally change the game, so it's not an issue, while fast shooting is.

Therefore we can't make an unbiased decision, and thus we're back at 3). We either ban all or nothing, which leaves us with the latter.

Sorry. Try again.

Also you actually dodged my point, I don't know if it was on purpose because you wanted to say something true after understanding the lack of logic, or because you didn't get it:

I claimed that, unlike what mankle and you said, pushing something to the extreme and showing that the extreme is absurd doesn't make the nuanced point wrong.

And you answered that extreme opinions aren't always wrong, which is right for sure, but doesn't go against my point.

I don't care about fast shooting. This thread is about Moesbarring. My point about Moesbarring isn't extreme. Unless you mean extremely nuanced. Try to disprove my point wrong instead of making it about something else.

Well you don't care about fast shooting but I really do, and this thread was made to make fun of my arguments about fast shooting, so care a little.

My point about moesbar is that it totally changes the game because it removes all the strategy/micro/macro. Now if some people think moesbar games are funnier, they can play moesbar games and I'm totally fine with it (many players actually like to play scenarios which are like moesbar games).

I see you're trying to make the same point about fast shooting, but it is simply not game changing as it doesn't change the way macro and strat work, and only makes the micro more interesting and harder, so it is not the same situation.

[[Armag] diarouga]

You could argue that, but that's not my logic. I never drew any conclusions or made any assumptions that support what you just said.

Well you said "The tyranny of the majority is hardly fair btw.", if I follow that logic I shouldn't follow the general opinion because it's not fair.

While I agree that the tyranny of the majority isn't fair, I think it's still the best indicator we have.

If that's your belief, then you shouldn't go against it.

The tyranny of the majority isn't fair. But you can add things institutions to make it fairer, assuming those institutions don't become corrupted.

But you need people to lead those institutions, and how do you pick them? Either with a vote, in which case it is the tyranny of the majority, or on questionnable criteria, in which case you can have Tit, kynesie and me leading those institutions and alt-d becomes legit.

[deleted_user0]

Show hidden quotes

No. The situation is the same. Why is it different? Just because you say so?

Because you take an extreme situation, while fast shooting isn't.
I though it was just a troll post but if you actually want to make a point you have to keep in mind that even if a non game-breaking, small glitch, which is cool, is fine, it doesn't mean the most extreme cheat is fine too.

Ex:
A1) Reasonable but controversial opinion: Muslims and immigration are an issue in Europe
B1) Reasonable but controversial opinion: fast shooting is a cool mechanic

A2) Wrong opinion because too extreme: We should thus kill all the muslims
B2) Wrong opinion because too extreme: Since fast shooting is fine, moesbar is fine too

Extremity is just an opinion.

I totally agree, and our opinion about fast shooting is considered as extreme, which doesn't mean that it is objectively extreme or wong.

Galileo's opinion that the Earth revolves around the sun instead of the other way around was thought of as an extreme opinion.

Yes true, having extreme opinions doesn't mean that it is objectively wrong. I know you're trolling here again, but since the beginning of the argument, garja has been claiming that we're wrong because we're extreme.

Was he therefore wrong? You say A. I say B. Just subjective.

Yes true. Though nobody seriously claims that moesbar is fine, as it would totally change the game, so it's not an issue, while fast shooting is.

Therefore we can't make an unbiased decision, and thus we're back at 3). We either ban all or nothing, which leaves us with the latter.

Sorry. Try again.

Also you actually dodged my point, I don't know if it was on purpose because you wanted to say something true after understanding the lack of logic, or because you didn't get it:

I claimed that, unlike what mankle and you said, pushing something to the extreme and showing that the extreme is absurd doesn't make the nuanced point wrong.

And you answered that extreme opinions aren't always wrong, which is right for sure, but doesn't go against my point.

I don't care about fast shooting. This thread is about Moesbarring. My point about Moesbarring isn't extreme. Unless you mean extremely nuanced. Try to disprove my point wrong instead of making it about something else.

Well you don't care about fast shooting but I really do, and this thread was made to make fun of my arguments about fast shooting, so care a little.

My point about moesbar is that it totally changes the game because it removes all the strategy/micro/macro. Now if some people think moesbar games are funnier, they can play moesbar games and I'm totally fine with it (many players actually like to play scenarios which are like moesbar games).

I see you're trying to make the same point about fast shooting, but it is simply not game changing as it doesn't change the way macro and strat work, and only makes the micro more interesting and harder, so it is not the same situation.

No, it wasn't. I've never said it was. Don't presume to know my thoughts or intentions.

I've already made clear that Moesbarring improves gameplay, not making it worse. You can say you disagree, but that's just your opinion. And you know where that ends up.

[deleted_user0]

Show hidden quotes

You could argue that, but that's not my logic. I never drew any conclusions or made any assumptions that support what you just said.

Well you said "The tyranny of the majority is hardly fair btw.", if I follow that logic I shouldn't follow the general opinion because it's not fair.

While I agree that the tyranny of the majority isn't fair, I think it's still the best indicator we have.

If that's your belief, then you shouldn't go against it.

The tyranny of the majority isn't fair. But you can add things institutions to make it fairer, assuming those institutions don't become corrupted.

But you need people to lead those institutions, and how do you pick them? Either with a vote, in which case it is the tyranny of the majority, or on questionnable criteria, in which case you can have Tit, kynesie and me leading those institutions and alt-d becomes legit.

Those are not the only two options. And just because you vote people into power to make decisions on your behalf doesn't mean they'll rule exactly as you like. Not necessarily makes it fairer, but it's no longer majority tyranny.

[momuuu]

Show hidden quotes

No. The situation is the same. Why is it different? Just because you say so?

Because you take an extreme situation, while fast shooting isn't.
I though it was just a troll post but if you actually want to make a point you have to keep in mind that even if a non game-breaking, small glitch, which is cool, is fine, it doesn't mean the most extreme cheat is fine too.

Ex:
A1) Reasonable but controversial opinion: Muslims and immigration are an issue in Europe
B1) Reasonable but controversial opinion: fast shooting is a cool mechanic

A2) Wrong opinion because too extreme: We should thus kill all the muslims
B2) Wrong opinion because too extreme: Since fast shooting is fine, moesbar is fine too

Extremity is just an opinion. Galileo's opinion that the Earth revolves around the sun instead of the other way around was thought of as an extreme opinion. Was he therefore wrong? You say A. I say B. Just subjective. Therefore we can't make an unbiased decision, and thus we're back at 3). We either ban all or nothing, which leaves us with the latter.

Sorry. Try again.

Why can't you go with what people prefer?

Because not everyone prefers the same. Clearly.

Decide by vote then? That seems fair to me at least.

So if I make a poll about whether moesbarring should be allowed or not, you will respect the outcome of that decision? Even if it's not the outcome you desire?

The tyranny of the majority is hardly fair btw.

Surely if the majority thinks we should allow moesbar in tournaments then I'll probably accept that. Granted obviously that would never be the case. I've also always silently accepted alt-d because the majority of people probably dislikes it. My point of bringing that up was that some people don't actually realize why they don't like it. It's important to actually think about these things and that's the entire point that diarouga and I have been making. Please truly think if you dislike or like the crackshot bug. Play around with it, test it, have a discussion about the potential pitfalls of it or things that make it abusable, state honestly that you might not like it because you feel like you'd be bad at it, etc. Ideally we should have an honest discussion, and people should consider arguments instead of saying "LOL BUGABUSE IS ALWAYS CHEATING" when that's just not true. And then we should probably vote.

The tyranny of the majority is an acceptable solution to something that's otherwise hard to solve btw.

[Snuden]

In the days of CS 1.5 and 1.6 there was a lot of talk about the interpolation setting you could make in your .config file.
Iirc the default setting was 0.02, changing it to 0.05 would make your opponents "face pixels" to actually be where your screen showed they were.

There were a few other tweaks that could be done to the .config file, giving you an advantage compared to players not using a modified .config

Heavy debates on forums and IRC about this but the general agreement was that as long as you didn't use an external program, it was not considered cheating.

Maybe this can also be the case for AoE3?

[[Armag] diarouga]

Show hidden quotes

No. The situation is the same. Why is it different? Just because you say so?

Because you take an extreme situation, while fast shooting isn't.
I though it was just a troll post but if you actually want to make a point you have to keep in mind that even if a non game-breaking, small glitch, which is cool, is fine, it doesn't mean the most extreme cheat is fine too.

Ex:
A1) Reasonable but controversial opinion: Muslims and immigration are an issue in Europe
B1) Reasonable but controversial opinion: fast shooting is a cool mechanic

A2) Wrong opinion because too extreme: We should thus kill all the muslims
B2) Wrong opinion because too extreme: Since fast shooting is fine, moesbar is fine too

Extremity is just an opinion.

I totally agree, and our opinion about fast shooting is considered as extreme, which doesn't mean that it is objectively extreme or wong.

Galileo's opinion that the Earth revolves around the sun instead of the other way around was thought of as an extreme opinion.

Yes true, having extreme opinions doesn't mean that it is objectively wrong. I know you're trolling here again, but since the beginning of the argument, garja has been claiming that we're wrong because we're extreme.

Was he therefore wrong? You say A. I say B. Just subjective.

Yes true. Though nobody seriously claims that moesbar is fine, as it would totally change the game, so it's not an issue, while fast shooting is.

Therefore we can't make an unbiased decision, and thus we're back at 3). We either ban all or nothing, which leaves us with the latter.

Sorry. Try again.

Also you actually dodged my point, I don't know if it was on purpose because you wanted to say something true after understanding the lack of logic, or because you didn't get it:

I claimed that, unlike what mankle and you said, pushing something to the extreme and showing that the extreme is absurd doesn't make the nuanced point wrong.

And you answered that extreme opinions aren't always wrong, which is right for sure, but doesn't go against my point.

I don't care about fast shooting. This thread is about Moesbarring. My point about Moesbarring isn't extreme. Unless you mean extremely nuanced. Try to disprove my point wrong instead of making it about something else.

Well you don't care about fast shooting but I really do, and this thread was made to make fun of my arguments about fast shooting, so care a little.

My point about moesbar is that it totally changes the game because it removes all the strategy/micro/macro. Now if some people think moesbar games are funnier, they can play moesbar games and I'm totally fine with it (many players actually like to play scenarios which are like moesbar games).

I see you're trying to make the same point about fast shooting, but it is simply not game changing as it doesn't change the way macro and strat work, and only makes the micro more interesting and harder, so it is not the same situation.

No, it wasn't. I've never said it was. Don't presume to know my thoughts or intentions.

I've already made clear that Moesbarring improves gameplay, not making it worse. You can say you disagree, but that's just your opinion. And you know where that ends up.

Yes, you indeed have the right to claim moesbarring improves the gameplay, and it's a totally fine opinion.
However, if you read the eso rules, it is explicitly written that you can not modify your game files, while there's nothing about bugs.

Thus, you can't use moesbar on eso (or you don't follow the rules of the game which is by definition cheating), and if it was actually possible to use it without breaking the eso rules, then we would have to create a patch or a sub-game where moesbar is forbidden.

[deleted_user0]

Show hidden quotes

No. The situation is the same. Why is it different? Just because you say so?

Because you take an extreme situation, while fast shooting isn't.
I though it was just a troll post but if you actually want to make a point you have to keep in mind that even if a non game-breaking, small glitch, which is cool, is fine, it doesn't mean the most extreme cheat is fine too.

Ex:
A1) Reasonable but controversial opinion: Muslims and immigration are an issue in Europe
B1) Reasonable but controversial opinion: fast shooting is a cool mechanic

A2) Wrong opinion because too extreme: We should thus kill all the muslims
B2) Wrong opinion because too extreme: Since fast shooting is fine, moesbar is fine too

Extremity is just an opinion. Galileo's opinion that the Earth revolves around the sun instead of the other way around was thought of as an extreme opinion. Was he therefore wrong? You say A. I say B. Just subjective. Therefore we can't make an unbiased decision, and thus we're back at 3). We either ban all or nothing, which leaves us with the latter.

Sorry. Try again.

Why can't you go with what people prefer?

Because not everyone prefers the same. Clearly.

Decide by vote then? That seems fair to me at least.

So if I make a poll about whether moesbarring should be allowed or not, you will respect the outcome of that decision? Even if it's not the outcome you desire?

The tyranny of the majority is hardly fair btw.

Surely if the majority thinks we should allow moesbar in tournaments then I'll probably accept that. Granted obviously that would never be the case. I've also always silently accepted alt-d because the majority of people probably dislikes it. My point of bringing that up was that some people don't actually realize why they don't like it. It's important to actually think about these things and that's the entire point that diarouga and I have been making. Please truly think if you dislike or like the crackshot bug. Play around with it, test it, have a discussion about the potential pitfalls of it or things that make it abusable, state honestly that you might not like it because you feel like you'd be bad at it, etc. Ideally we should have an honest discussion, and people should consider arguments instead of saying "LOL BUGABUSE IS ALWAYS CHEATING" when that's just not true. And then we should probably vote.

It's not about alt-d or fast shot. I've stated this multiple times. Stop changing the discussion. You reject Moesbarring without ever having tried it. I think that's dishonest debating then.

The tyranny of the majority is an acceptable solution to something that's otherwise hard to solve btw.

You'd say that if you're on the right side of that tyranny.

[[Armag] diarouga]

Show hidden quotes

You could argue that, but that's not my logic. I never drew any conclusions or made any assumptions that support what you just said.

Well you said "The tyranny of the majority is hardly fair btw.", if I follow that logic I shouldn't follow the general opinion because it's not fair.

While I agree that the tyranny of the majority isn't fair, I think it's still the best indicator we have.

If that's your belief, then you shouldn't go against it.

The tyranny of the majority isn't fair. But you can add things institutions to make it fairer, assuming those institutions don't become corrupted.

But you need people to lead those institutions, and how do you pick them? Either with a vote, in which case it is the tyranny of the majority, or on questionnable criteria, in which case you can have Tit, kynesie and me leading those institutions and alt-d becomes legit.

Those are not the only two options. And just because you vote people into power to make decisions on your behalf doesn't mean they'll rule exactly as you like. Not necessarily makes it fairer, but it's no longer majority tyranny.

Then tell me what the other options are, I'm interested. Pick them based on their results?
Also in the case these guys are elected it's the tyranny of 10 popular guys, which is probably worse than the tyranny of the majority.

[deleted_user0]

Show hidden quotes

You could argue that, but that's not my logic. I never drew any conclusions or made any assumptions that support what you just said.

Well you said "The tyranny of the majority is hardly fair btw.", if I follow that logic I shouldn't follow the general opinion because it's not fair.

While I agree that the tyranny of the majority isn't fair, I think it's still the best indicator we have.

If that's your belief, then you shouldn't go against it.

The tyranny of the majority isn't fair. But you can add things institutions to make it fairer, assuming those institutions don't become corrupted.

But you need people to lead those institutions, and how do you pick them? Either with a vote, in which case it is the tyranny of the majority, or on questionnable criteria, in which case you can have Tit, kynesie and me leading those institutions and alt-d becomes legit.

Those are not the only two options. And just because you vote people into power to make decisions on your behalf doesn't mean they'll rule exactly as you like. Not necessarily makes it fairer, but it's no longer majority tyranny.

Then tell me what the other options are, I'm interested. Pick them based on their results?
Also in the case these guys are elected it's the tyranny of 10 popular guys, which is probably worse than the tyranny of the majority.

Apart from more elaborate and complicated systems or mixes of systems there is also Lottery (pick based on luck) and Merit (pick based on qualifications).

Perhaps, if those 10 guys had infinite power. But not if they're checked and balanced by other people.

[[Armag] diarouga]

Show hidden quotes

No. The situation is the same. Why is it different? Just because you say so?

Because you take an extreme situation, while fast shooting isn't.
I though it was just a troll post but if you actually want to make a point you have to keep in mind that even if a non game-breaking, small glitch, which is cool, is fine, it doesn't mean the most extreme cheat is fine too.

Ex:
A1) Reasonable but controversial opinion: Muslims and immigration are an issue in Europe
B1) Reasonable but controversial opinion: fast shooting is a cool mechanic

A2) Wrong opinion because too extreme: We should thus kill all the muslims
B2) Wrong opinion because too extreme: Since fast shooting is fine, moesbar is fine too

Extremity is just an opinion. Galileo's opinion that the Earth revolves around the sun instead of the other way around was thought of as an extreme opinion. Was he therefore wrong? You say A. I say B. Just subjective. Therefore we can't make an unbiased decision, and thus we're back at 3). We either ban all or nothing, which leaves us with the latter.

Sorry. Try again.

Why can't you go with what people prefer?

Because not everyone prefers the same. Clearly.

Decide by vote then? That seems fair to me at least.

So if I make a poll about whether moesbarring should be allowed or not, you will respect the outcome of that decision? Even if it's not the outcome you desire?

The tyranny of the majority is hardly fair btw.

Surely if the majority thinks we should allow moesbar in tournaments then I'll probably accept that. Granted obviously that would never be the case. I've also always silently accepted alt-d because the majority of people probably dislikes it. My point of bringing that up was that some people don't actually realize why they don't like it. It's important to actually think about these things and that's the entire point that diarouga and I have been making. Please truly think if you dislike or like the crackshot bug. Play around with it, test it, have a discussion about the potential pitfalls of it or things that make it abusable, state honestly that you might not like it because you feel like you'd be bad at it, etc. Ideally we should have an honest discussion, and people should consider arguments instead of saying "LOL BUGABUSE IS ALWAYS CHEATING" when that's just not true. And then we should probably vote.

It's not about alt-d or fast shot. I've stated this multiple times. Stop changing the discussion. You reject Moesbarring without ever having tried it. I think that's dishonest debating then.

Moesbar is forbidden by the game rules, so you can't do it. Likewise, if I play in an eso tourney, even if I might complain about not being allowed to use fast shooting, I won't do it because it's their rules.

The tyranny of the majority is an acceptable solution to something that's otherwise hard to solve btw.

You'd say that if you're on the right side of that tyranny.

Here we're against the tyranny of the majority. If we made a post about alt-d, 80% of the community would probably be against it. I'm not actually that much in favour of alt-d, I wouldn't mind it, but I understand why people are totally against it. I think however that we should have a discussion about fast shooting, and in my opinion we haven't really had this discussion. Garja just went full garja and came with 0 arguments, hazza just trolled, and _H2O even though I know he's capable of thinking, just didn't think arguing about it was worth his time.
Honestly, although you're trolling, you're the only guy who's actually discussing the issue and arguing against us. The others just ignore the issue and act as if banning it is the obvious choice.

[yemshi]

"Here we're against the tyranny of the majority."

Oh how awful!

[momuuu]

Show hidden quotes

No. The situation is the same. Why is it different? Just because you say so?

Because you take an extreme situation, while fast shooting isn't.
I though it was just a troll post but if you actually want to make a point you have to keep in mind that even if a non game-breaking, small glitch, which is cool, is fine, it doesn't mean the most extreme cheat is fine too.

Ex:
A1) Reasonable but controversial opinion: Muslims and immigration are an issue in Europe
B1) Reasonable but controversial opinion: fast shooting is a cool mechanic

A2) Wrong opinion because too extreme: We should thus kill all the muslims
B2) Wrong opinion because too extreme: Since fast shooting is fine, moesbar is fine too

Extremity is just an opinion. Galileo's opinion that the Earth revolves around the sun instead of the other way around was thought of as an extreme opinion. Was he therefore wrong? You say A. I say B. Just subjective. Therefore we can't make an unbiased decision, and thus we're back at 3). We either ban all or nothing, which leaves us with the latter.

Sorry. Try again.

Why can't you go with what people prefer?

Because not everyone prefers the same. Clearly.

Decide by vote then? That seems fair to me at least.

So if I make a poll about whether moesbarring should be allowed or not, you will respect the outcome of that decision? Even if it's not the outcome you desire?

The tyranny of the majority is hardly fair btw.

Surely if the majority thinks we should allow moesbar in tournaments then I'll probably accept that. Granted obviously that would never be the case. I've also always silently accepted alt-d because the majority of people probably dislikes it. My point of bringing that up was that some people don't actually realize why they don't like it. It's important to actually think about these things and that's the entire point that diarouga and I have been making. Please truly think if you dislike or like the crackshot bug. Play around with it, test it, have a discussion about the potential pitfalls of it or things that make it abusable, state honestly that you might not like it because you feel like you'd be bad at it, etc. Ideally we should have an honest discussion, and people should consider arguments instead of saying "LOL BUGABUSE IS ALWAYS CHEATING" when that's just not true. And then we should probably vote.

It's not about alt-d or fast shot. I've stated this multiple times. Stop changing the discussion. You reject Moesbarring without ever having tried it. I think that's dishonest debating then.

The tyranny of the majority is an acceptable solution to something that's otherwise hard to solve btw.

You'd say that if you're on the right side of that tyranny.

Well, I like build orders and micro and I feel like moesbar would reduce everything that aoe3 currently is and create a game where these aspects as much less prevalent. I would not like that, so I know what Ill vote.

[Garja]

Discussion about fast shooting already happened on staff discord back when it was discovered.
And I think you also missed the thread where the chinese guy used it with a macro in a recced game.

[[Armag] diarouga]

Show hidden quotes

You could argue that, but that's not my logic. I never drew any conclusions or made any assumptions that support what you just said.

Well you said "The tyranny of the majority is hardly fair btw.", if I follow that logic I shouldn't follow the general opinion because it's not fair.

While I agree that the tyranny of the majority isn't fair, I think it's still the best indicator we have.

If that's your belief, then you shouldn't go against it.

The tyranny of the majority isn't fair. But you can add things institutions to make it fairer, assuming those institutions don't become corrupted.

But you need people to lead those institutions, and how do you pick them? Either with a vote, in which case it is the tyranny of the majority, or on questionnable criteria, in which case you can have Tit, kynesie and me leading those institutions and alt-d becomes legit.

Those are not the only two options. And just because you vote people into power to make decisions on your behalf doesn't mean they'll rule exactly as you like. Not necessarily makes it fairer, but it's no longer majority tyranny.

Then tell me what the other options are, I'm interested. Pick them based on their results?
Also in the case these guys are elected it's the tyranny of 10 popular guys, which is probably worse than the tyranny of the majority.

Apart from more elaborate and complicated systems or mixes of systems there is also Lottery (pick based on luck) and Merit (pick based on qualifications).

Lottery would the worst out of all in my opinion, because some crazy guys could come to the power and do shit. Merit is interesting, and I really like this idea, it might statistically be better than democracy. The big issue it has though, is that, first it's hard to decide who's the guy who's the most qualified, because there's no way someone can be the best everywhere, he'll be at best, be the best at something, and that's it. Thus, how do you decide on what we should select these guys? Also, it might be the tyranny of the elit, which isn't better than the tyranny of the majority.

Perhaps, if those 10 guys had infinite power. But not if they're checked and balanced by other people.

[momuuu]

Discussion about fast shooting already happened on staff discord back when it was discovered.
And I think you also missed the thread where the chinese guy used it with a macro in a recced game.

The staff actually has mostly very stubborn guys. People that would even refuse the discuss building rotator at all. You, h2o and mitoe would just overrule everyone without many arguments...

[Garja]

This is your opinion, and an incorrect one.

[[Armag] diarouga]

Discussion about fast shooting already happened on staff discord back when it was discovered.
And I think you also missed the thread where the chinese guy used it with a macro in a recced game.

It's good to know it has been discussed.
Still, I can see that there is a consensus against it in the staff (and it's not surprising because the staff members were picked because they have the same view on how the game and the community should work as the first staff members), and I wouldn't be surprised if nobody tried to defend this mechanic.
Thus, it makes the decision unfair, because no opposition was allowed. If you've watched 12 angry men, you should know that sometimes people are so stubborn and think they're right, that they don't consider the other options at all, and that they would change their mind about it if someone argumentated against them.

It's a bit utopist here because some guys in the staff (like you) can't change their mind, and it wouldn't change shit. Still, if there was no real discussion, the conclusion of the staff is irrelevant.

Finally, if there was a discussion (which I doubt there was), and you don't want the community to use it on eso, I think we're entitled to have a summary of that discussion, with the pros and the cons, and why this decision was made.

You can do what you want on ESOC because it belongs to you, but if you want to change the whole ESO community, you have to justify your decisions.

[Sargsyan]

building rotator is something that should be ok to use.can someone explain me why is it forbidden ?

[deleted_user0]

Show hidden quotes

No. The situation is the same. Why is it different? Just because you say so?

Because you take an extreme situation, while fast shooting isn't.
I though it was just a troll post but if you actually want to make a point you have to keep in mind that even if a non game-breaking, small glitch, which is cool, is fine, it doesn't mean the most extreme cheat is fine too.

Ex:
A1) Reasonable but controversial opinion: Muslims and immigration are an issue in Europe
B1) Reasonable but controversial opinion: fast shooting is a cool mechanic

A2) Wrong opinion because too extreme: We should thus kill all the muslims
B2) Wrong opinion because too extreme: Since fast shooting is fine, moesbar is fine too

Extremity is just an opinion. Galileo's opinion that the Earth revolves around the sun instead of the other way around was thought of as an extreme opinion. Was he therefore wrong? You say A. I say B. Just subjective. Therefore we can't make an unbiased decision, and thus we're back at 3). We either ban all or nothing, which leaves us with the latter.

Sorry. Try again.

Why can't you go with what people prefer?

Because not everyone prefers the same. Clearly.

Decide by vote then? That seems fair to me at least.

So if I make a poll about whether moesbarring should be allowed or not, you will respect the outcome of that decision? Even if it's not the outcome you desire?

The tyranny of the majority is hardly fair btw.

Surely if the majority thinks we should allow moesbar in tournaments then I'll probably accept that. Granted obviously that would never be the case. I've also always silently accepted alt-d because the majority of people probably dislikes it. My point of bringing that up was that some people don't actually realize why they don't like it. It's important to actually think about these things and that's the entire point that diarouga and I have been making. Please truly think if you dislike or like the crackshot bug. Play around with it, test it, have a discussion about the potential pitfalls of it or things that make it abusable, state honestly that you might not like it because you feel like you'd be bad at it, etc. Ideally we should have an honest discussion, and people should consider arguments instead of saying "LOL BUGABUSE IS ALWAYS CHEATING" when that's just not true. And then we should probably vote.

It's not about alt-d or fast shot. I've stated this multiple times. Stop changing the discussion. You reject Moesbarring without ever having tried it. I think that's dishonest debating then.

The tyranny of the majority is an acceptable solution to something that's otherwise hard to solve btw.

You'd say that if you're on the right side of that tyranny.

Well, I like build orders and micro and I feel like moesbar would reduce everything that aoe3 currently is and create a game where these aspects as much less prevalent. I would not like that, so I know what Ill vote.

If you're mind is made up, and you won't even try to experiment outside your comfort zone, then there's no point to continue this discussion.