Even if I do so, they will negate what I am saying. And there's some people that I am unsure if they are part of it or not.
I can confirm that JXQ and Fabian are part of it. Didn't you noticed that in almost every thread JXQ or vice versa, the other one is also in same thread?
Note that there also exists other gangs. Though, they aren't being pretty active compared to JXQ's gang.
Joined: 8/1/2004
Posts: 2687
Location: Seattle, WA
I would also like to see a list of names. If you list everyone who takes an opposing stance to you, though, that says more about you than it does about favoritism.
This whole "gang" theory (I hate the word gang, by the by) is ludicrous. Warp tried to convey the same thing when a large group of people gave arguments counter to his own in debate topics before. Why is it that just because a group of people who aren't enemies agree on something, they are automatically teaming up on other people. Why can't it be that there is just a majority of vocal users on the site who have the same beliefs?
In case you haven't noticed, many people in this "JXQ gang" have taken sides against each other in many debates on the site. Does that mean that there is faction warfare within these supposed clans? Maybe they are infighting so as to throw you off!
Honestly, though: there are no groups of people that single out other groups of people. Everyone has their own beliefs, and if other people share those ideals, so be it. Don't try to dismiss a large group of people opposing you as a malicious "gang" that is only against you because their friend is.
Just to throw in my two cents:
Phil, by his actions in this thread, comes off like a jerk. Likewise JXQ. I know name-calling gets nowhere, but I feel this must be said.
I like a little humor in the descriptions, it makes this site more entertaining in my opinion.
RT-55J wrote:
I've read this entire thread but I still have no idea what is going on.
Neither do I, really.
<Zurreco> if so called professional players cant adapt to every playing field, theyre obviously not that great
Joined: 8/1/2004
Posts: 2687
Location: Seattle, WA
kwinse wrote:
RT-55J wrote:
I've read this entire thread but I still have no idea what is going on.
Neither do I, really.
A very concise summary. I'll try to keep this unbiased:
adelikat submits DD2 with some interesting albeit masochistic techniques.
JXQ comments on these with a fake dialog in the submission discussion, wherein he refers to Billy Lee as "Bimmy," which is a typo in DD3 that some people know about.
When the run is published, JXQ's dialog is put in the movie description since it was comical.
Phil edits the name "Bimmy" to Billy, since some people may not get the reference/assume that the name is actually Bimmy.
JXQ reverts the names to Bimmy, creates a text-link from "Bimmy" to show a screenshot of DD3 where the brothers are referred to as "Bimmy and Jimmy."
Phil reverts JXQ's edit, claiming that the name "Bimmy" is from DD3, not DD2, and so the name should stay as Billy.
JXQ removes the dialog entirely, for he chooses not being quoted over being misquoted.
Nice summary Zurreco. The problem is that the thread had turned to be an anti-phil thread.
The thing is that the site is going to be an anarchy. I am an admin then today after Bisqwit did allowed some privileges to some guys. Now it seems that each thing I do for this site is wrong.
In my latest submission I wrote that I think my movie is perfect:
"Phil is arrogant"
I think the site should be as informative as possible and not put jokes that no normal users can notice:
"Phil is overabusing is power"
Etc.... Etc....
The thing is that Bisqwit doesn't have the free time to moderate those guys. So because of that, the site is becoming more chaotic in every day.
Also, in this thread, we are talking of me and JXQ but I am not the only guy implied and thinking of that.
Originally, the site wasn't aimed to be an archive with WIKI that many people could do as they want.
I did recommend Bisqwit all games to be accepted even if they are boring. So the voting system would be different and not useful for most cases. Though some games like hacked games would need to be discussed and judged.
In my latest submission I wrote that I think my movie is perfect:
"Phil is arrogant"
I think the site should be as informative as possible and not put jokes that no normal users can notice:
"Phil is overabusing is power"
The thing is that Bisqwit doesn't have the free time to moderate those guys. So because of that, the site is becoming more chaotic in every day.
The other possibility is that the people are correct about your behavior, although they overreact to it.
There are jokes and inaccuracies in many movie descriptions, including descriptions of your own movies, furthermore, to prevent confusion JXQ provided a link to the source of "Bimmy". But you didn't like it, so you removed it.
The correct course of action would have been to PM one of the people who made the description with your complaint, just as you have requested that people PM you before reverting it.
The course of action you chose indicates that you view yourself as the absolute authority on what is best for the site, and that if you dislike something you are correct in modifying it, no matter how harmless it may be.
That's what this whole thing is about. You don't ask permission of other people to do things that you demand they ask your permission before they do.
How fleeting are all human passions compared with the massive continuity of ducks.
I think the site should be as informative as possible and not put jokes that no normal users can notice:
"Phil is overabusing is power"
I believe that descriptions should be amusing, but also informative; not just one or the other:
Can you write entertaining and appropriate descriptions of movies in fluent (not chatroom) English? Can you write interesting articles or fix grammatical mistakes? Contact Bisqwit.
Personally, I would've just used "Player 1/2" instead of "Billy/whatever". It avoids the confusion present if you don't know the character names and avoids injokes only a few people would know.
Edit: Thank you phpbb for screwing up my post.
Joined: 8/1/2004
Posts: 2687
Location: Seattle, WA
I think that JXQ's text link to the Bimmy screenshot was enough to clarify that joke. Maybe an asterisk with a footnote mentioning that the real name was Billy would have solved the problem. That's just my thought on that.
Upthorn:
It may be indeed possible Though, it wasn't my intentions.
If I would indeed overabusing my power like they claim then I could assure you that I would probably be more active by refusing some boring movies, ignoring people's opinion and such.
In fact, I wouldn't even posted in this thread. And, I am starting to think that I should because I am wasting my time here in this thread.
Let's create my own site, stop submitting movies here , writing FAQs , worse, ask Bisqwit to remove my movies and be the boss. That would be overabusing power.
Everyone just needs to stop. This entire conversation has gotten out of hand. It seems to me multiple people are abusing their powers here; what's worse is that people are taking sides. This behavior is not conducive to teamwork at all. After all, if we all choose sides, then how will we be able to work together on projects again?
All ego and reasoning aside--*EDIT* I need to look at my facts again.
Now, I could propose something simple and fair to prevent something like this from happening again, but I'll pass for now. It's not my place, and I do not want to encroach on someone else's territory.
I hope I speak for the silent majority.
this is ridiculous. it's just some description about some 20 years old game. most people don't care if the guy is called zelda or whatever (intended pun). there shouldn't be such a thread at the first place. I thought adults wouldn't post things like that.
I never sleep, 'cause sleep is the cousin of death - NAS
I propose that all Zelda game descriptions should contain a joke about Gannon. If possible, Ocarina of Time's should contain three.
More importantly, I guess restoring the joke would be nice. I found it amusing, and I think it'd be hard to be part of JXQ's Illuminati when I can't even stay logged onto IRC. :)
Perhaps people have their own opinions. Wouldn't that be a gas?
I think there's some misunderstandings. It's not that I am anti-joke. But it would be nice if it could be associated with their own game. If I make a joke of Gannon in Link's awakening would seem rather illogical. Though, the final boss looks like ganon.
Well, I've had a four hour nap between now and my last post. I now feel stupid for having posted about this in the first place.
I take the intent of the site from the actions (or inaction) of the admin. I feel that I must have the role of Editor slightly mistaken in comparison to how the site's vision defines it. I have decided it would be best for myself and the site if I stop contributing as editor for the time being. I feel it is pointless to do so when Phil is also an editor.
If Phil ever has his editing privileges revoked, as I personally feel he should, I could see myself contributing once again. However, my wishes should not be used as merit to do so (and I don't think they would be, anyway).
I think it is better for me to contribute through my TASing, which cannot be edited by another member. I will still update my User page here, however.
I apologize for the fuss.
<Swordless> Go hug a tree, you vegetarian (I bet you really are one)
The jokes are allowed but if jokes are only for your gang to understand then it's clearly not needed.
I think there's a big difference between having the opinion that the movie description is not a place for obscure jokes (debatable, but everyone is entitled to their opinion) and actually starting an edit war.
You are very entitled to your opinion, but IMO engaging in edit war just because of it is juvenile and out of line. It makes you look like you think that you have some kind of higher authority over other editors and that your opinion has more weight than others.
Details on disagreements should be discussed in a civilized way in the proper forums.
Warp: Me engaging? You are totally wrong. I did correct Bimmy to Billy. Then JXQ did started the war editing without telling me or any other editors why Bimmy should be used instead of valid name Billy.
Afaik, the "you think that you have some kind of higher authority" is strange. Though, imo, I think that you and other people are jealous because yes, I have indeed an higher authority than common editors. But that's not the point. Here is the Bimmy Vs. Billy thread and Billy won which makes some kind of people angry because they are wrong. But anyway, you are free to think what it is.
Afaik, the "you think that you have some kind of higher authority" is strange. Though, imo, I think that you and other people are jealous because yes, I have indeed an higher authority than common editors.
Brushy, I don't care I never liked you since you started to laugh at me for my bad englsih. Why should I respect guys like you? Imo, you should permanently be banned for long time.
If it's a joke, then it doesn't make much sense. You are just deliberately annoying people. That's not a very wise way of joking.
If you are being serious, then *sigh*
In that case perhaps you need some professional help?
