Re: Selected Maps
Posted: Sun Dec 17, 2017 3:08 am
Instead of making a new useful post, you are editing your post? Why? I didn't even realise, that you changed it.jao wrote: ↑Sun Dec 17, 2017 2:56 amYou are not wrong, though this was never mentioned and there was no response/change whatsoever.aaa wrote:[...]
As hi_leute said, the process may was too subjective, so that's a thing you can (objectively) asume went wrong. And there is more stuff, such as making rushed decisions, including people with little knowledge, etc..aaa wrote:[...]
If you think explaining how it was done is sufficent, then why didn't you do it already for your list?aaa wrote:[...]
If this list was made by a balanced team then this would mean that these maps got support by multiple and different people, which then would mean that there is really a point why they are in there and why others aren't. This would be a completely different base to argue on than if it was made by only a single person.
I explained very detailed how to do a proper selection. Ofc this doesn't mean that this is the only way to do.
There were always two guys from iMTG (Soreu and me) who were known and who took the responsibility for what iMTG is doing. Also in public.aaa wrote: ↑Sun Dec 17, 2017 2:27 am edit: ironically enough hi_leute even demonstrates this, proving himself wrong on the importance of knowing the names.
he explains how imtg proceeded without any name being mentionned, simply the method they used and that's more than enough to understand how it was made, having the full list would literally not change anything besides ppl flaming the members (hint: it even happened on this thread without a single name being called, now imagine with actual names.)
jao wrote: ↑Sun Dec 17, 2017 2:19 am If I was to improve the list, I would try to work it out with the person who made it as they have most knowledge about it and else it would be pretty unfair for them. Also, to know how to improve you have to know what went wrong, so you obviously have to get those informations from the person who is responsible for it.
Then tell me please, how am I supposed to get "an explanation by whoever did it" if I don't know who did it? Do you expect me to ask an anonymous person?^^
To 1: aaa basically only responds to explain why he doesn't respond to the topic itself and won't give any information. Anyway these information would be needed to progress further in this discussion.Welf wrote: ↑Sun Dec 17, 2017 11:45 amInstead of making a new useful post, you are editing your post? Why? I didn't even realise, that you changed it.jao wrote: ↑Sun Dec 17, 2017 2:56 amYou are not wrong, though this was never mentioned and there was no response/change whatsoever.aaa wrote:[...]
As hi_leute said, the process may was too subjective, so that's a thing you can (objectively) asume went wrong. And there is more stuff, such as making rushed decisions, including people with little knowledge, etc..aaa wrote:[...]
If you think explaining how it was done is sufficent, then why didn't you do it already for your list?aaa wrote:[...]
edit:
1. now you have a responding aaa and instead of arguing you say that he doesn't respond. Yeah that is also usefull for a discussion in this forum. I bet it triggers him. Please don't harass him any further lol.
2./3. So what do you want? I think we don't have enough trusted persons who are motivated to make a new list. Even if so, it would be biased. It can't be an objective list.
Maybe we should make a new thread if a better ordered discussion. I am confused right now.
The thing is rather that I want things to be done as good as possible and get annoyed if people are statisfied with half-done or poorly made solutions.Jimmy Jazz The 1st wrote: ↑Sun Dec 17, 2017 9:11 am It is clear that Hi_leute has some sort of superiority complex where he has to prove his intelligence or how he does stuff better. But aside from all of that his suggestions are not bad, he just doesnt seem to direct them very nicely. So its understandable people are tired of responding to him.