BuzzerBeater Forums

This whole "what have you done for me lately" discussion is useless.

As there is no incentive for me to advertise the game, I'm just stating that nobody should count on me to get word on the streets. If BBs offers little to no value to managers who advertise the game, BB wont get many people to put in the extra work. Thats no cynicism, sarcasm or whatever type of negativity some might read into my comment.

A month supporter (value $4) for 40 referrals. Doubling Austria would be worth like six dollars.

I agree, but your post consisted entirely of over-the-top sarcasm.

Ok that's fair enough. Would you make the same remarks for, let pick a random one, hrudey? I have never ever seen any other GM moving the same criticism to hrudey and he uses sarcasm more often than I do, usually to 'mock' other users, to say it with your words.

That's kind of vague. If you'd like, you can send me a BB-mail consisting of more detail and we can try to resolve these concerns

I will most certainly do.

Source? I'm not being facetious, I'd actually like to see where these comments were written. I was mostly inactive for a two year stretch so it's entirely possible that I missed this.

Will send you this by email so you will also understand that me mentioning hrudey above is not a random comment.

I hope this line isn't in response to the comment I made to you.

Of course it's not, I have no problem whatsoever with you. You seem to be a very reasonable person who is actually reading and trying to understand where people are coming from (although I would have liked that you had spent a word on Manon's post, rather than singling me out). Which is pretty much the opposite attitude other members/former members of staff demonstrate on forums routinely (including Marin when he was a bit more active on the forums a few seasons ago). Clearly I have a problem specifically with these members/ex-members of staff (which includes hrudey), who are, to say the least, unhelpful in their participation in the forums in their 'user' capacity, as they put it.

You can just go back and re-read from the HELPFUL suggestion a new participant to this thread made and that Manon, being one of those that perceive any kind of suggestion/complaint as an attack on the BB staff and management, successfully managed to turn into a discussion about what he thinks users should be prepared to do on their own. Also trying to take the higher moral ground in the discussion (which I find lame, hypocritical and unacceptable and is the reason I finally decided to intervene in the discussion). So we have not discussed the original opinion. We have not praised the user for making a meaningful contribution. Certainly a job well done members/former members of staff (the usual ones, not you) that took upon themselves to drive conversations in the ground or sidetrack them according to their own personal opinions.

Last edited by Lemonshine at 4/1/2016 8:15:33 AM

I don't know how much your word means to you. I thought you said you'd stay away from the discussion. If I say something like that, I do it.

The above went like this:
1. Someone who does not usually use the forums wrote a post with a sensible suggestion about how to promote the game. This is RELEVANT to this thread. This is spot on on TOPIC. This is CONSTRUCTIVE.
2. God forbid. You came out right away and asked why he couldn't do it himself? This is NOT constructive. Note that you did NOT discuss whether the suggestion itself had merit, you were only out to get someone who dared to suggest that the management should consider an idea
3. Knecht weighed in and said users don't have any meaningful incentive by the game to do things like this on their own. At this point you had already reached your objective since you successfully managed to derail the conversation from "this is a good idea" to "why don't you do things like this on your own"
4. You say that increasing users is a big enough reward. Nobody really challenged the underlying assumption that working for free would produce results, but that's fine
5. Knecht explained it won't make a difference in his country even if he dedicated himself to promote the game for free
6. At this point I had enough of you acting as some kind of Mother Theresa and I pointed out that, logically, if you really believe what you are asking others to do is worthwhile, you can surely show everyone you have done in the past or tell us what exactly you're planning to do to promote BB for free, which is exactly what you are asking others to do.

Note that I CHOSE not to comment after number 2 and I did only after you insisted. The same way I gave hrudey the benefit of the doubt in the FA thread before commenting. And the same way I refrained from posting further there after I collected 5 threads worth of comments from 7-8 years ago regarding the issue.

Last edited by Lemonshine at 4/1/2016 8:38:59 AM

I don't know how much your word means to you. I thought you said you'd stay away from the discussion. If I say something like that, I do it.

The above went like this:
1. Someone who does not usually use the forums wrote a post with a sensible suggestion about how to promote the game. This is RELEVANT to this thread. This is spot on on TOPIC. This is CONSTRUCTIVE.
2. God forbid. You came out right away and asked why he couldn't do it himself? This is NOT constructive. Note that you did NOT discuss whether the suggestion itself had merit, you were only out to get someone who dared to suggest that the management should consider an idea
3. Knecht weighed in and said users don't have any meaningful incentive by the game to do things like this on their own. At this point you had already reached your objective since you successfully managed to derail the conversation from "this is a good idea" to "why don't you do things like this on your own"
4. You say that increasing users is a big enough reward. Nobody really challenged the underlying assumption that working for free would produce results, but that's fine
5. Knecht explained it won't make a difference in his country even if he dedicated himself to promote the game for free
6. At this point I had enough of you acting as some kind of Mother Theresa and I pointed out that, logically, if you really believe what you are asking others to do is worthwhile, you can surely show everyone you have done in the past or tell us what exactly you're planning to do to promote BB for free, which is exactly what you are asking others to do.

Note that I CHOSE not to comment after number 2 and I did only after you insisted. The same way I gave hrudey the benefit of the doubt in the FA thread before commenting. And the same way I refrained from posting further there after I collected 5 threads worth of comments from 7-8 years ago regarding the issue.

You missed a little bit of it. A more accurate timeline is:

1. Someone who isn't active in the global forums as much as the local forums did have a sensible suggestion.
2. Knecht responded to it with "Whats the incentive to do so? 4 weeks supporter? Yeehaaaaa.."
3. Manon answered knecht: more users in the game".
4. a couple of posts on an earlier discussion from O Bear and justme.
5. Knecht says that users need to be rewarded for doing the work of promoting the game.
6. Manon says "if you don't want new users, I don't know what to say."
and so on.

Now, your assertion is that coachlambini made a suggestion, and Manon immediately came out and asked why he couldn't do it himself. That is absolutely, undeniably false - coachlambini made his post, knecht immediately dismissed it, and Manon engaged Knecht. I'm sure that was an honest mistake and that you'll appreciate the correction.

So to be absolutely clear, this discussion has not been censored.

Meh, look I wasn't expecting you to get it: I was referring to one of Knecht's threads from some time ago (explicitly about a honest discussion about censorship) which I read and chose not to participate in! I hope you feel more at ease now that you know I was not referring to you or this thread. It was to describe the general attitude of some GMs towards some users, I left it generic on purpose...

It serves absolutely no constructive purpose whatsoever, other than to satisfy whatever personal animosity you have towards whatever members of the staff you're currently feuding with.

Ha! and here I thought I had been the bigger person in the other thread (about FA), after I collected -as LeBron would say- not one, not two, not three...but 5 threads from 7-8 years ago which I could have used against you and I let you have the last word that is clearly so important to you. I wonder what you would have said now if I did!

In any case, as everyone can read for himself earlier in the thread, I did not start the shenanigans here. In fact, you will struggle to find some sarcastic and provocative post by me which is not a reaction to somebody else's post. Also it was not me who doubled down on some hypocritical hot take with some organised crime analogy.

Personally, I can't understand how you don't realise that your posts, this one included, will never have the effect you claim to strive for (constructive discussion). And personally I can't, for the life of me, understand how is it so difficult to understand that most people go on a game forum and post when they have a problem. When I was looking for old threads to show you why your claims on FAs were unsubstantiated, guess who popped up several times complaining and arguing with members of staff? Yeah, a current member of staff who was not a member of staff back then.

If you don't like the fact that we're not enthusiastically parroting your every word, speaking only for myself, please excuse me for reserving for myself the same right to express my opinion as I afford you and every other person who posts here.

You couldn't be farther from the truth. The problem is not that you express your opinions, it's that you would like others not to express theirs because you disagree and rather than discussing about the merit of what's being said, you prefer to drive the conversation into the ground (again, for the avoidance of doubt, I'm not talking about myself). And I admit you're not even the worst out there, as you only do that when you have exhausted other options (which usually involve using sarcasm), while others proceed immediately to the final solution.

Hypocrisy. Those are loaded words, and they're definitely things to shun.

Then do tell me which adjective you would use to describe someone who insists someone else does a job for free (apparently for the greater good), but he himself has never done that and doesn't think he should do that either.

highly unlikely to make me consider the rest of the words you throw out alongside them as having any value.

See point about shutting down conversations. It appears the mafia can discuss the merit of a specific point but others can't. So, if person A points out person B inconsistencies, you're not even trying to make the case that that person B is actually reasonable, you prefer to just attack person A or dismiss his entire point because of something completely unrelated to it and perhaps your own personal animosity with person A. So, I ask you, whose opinion has more value, the guy who wants to discuss the merit of an opinion or they guy who wants to avoid discussing it? Again so we're on the same page: I'm A, Manon is B and you're the guy who's trying to help B, not on merit, but by attacking A. If you really wanted to discuss the merit of my assertions you would explain to us why it's not hypocritical to behave like Man

Correction accepted. I'm sure you will accept that Manon has been the only person who has argued in favour of users acting on their own to prop the number of users, which is the reason why I challenged him to do it himself. Knecht had a perfectly understandable position about it: I don't think that should be done for free, the benefits and rewards are not enough, so I won't do it. Manon: it should be done for free, rewards are enough, but I've not done it and won't do it.

I stand corrected also on the fact that Manon didn't jump coachlambini the way you guys have done to others, though.


Last edited by Lemonshine at 4/1/2016 9:26:22 AM

highly unlikely to make me consider the rest of the words you throw out alongside them as having any value.

See point about shutting down conversations. It appears the mafia can discuss the merit of a specific point but others can't. So, if person A points out person B inconsistencies, you're not even trying to make the case that that person B is actually reasonable, you prefer to just attack person A or dismiss his entire point because of something completely unrelated to it and perhaps your own personal animosity with person A. So, I ask you, whose opinion has more value, the guy who wants to discuss the merit of an opinion or they guy who wants to avoid discussing it? Again so we're on the same page: I'm A, Manon is B and you're the guy who's trying to help B, not on merit, but by attacking A. If you really wanted to discuss the merit of my assertions you would explain to us why it's not hypocritical to behave like Man

A few quick notes, as I have many other things I need to be doing today and I'm not at all intent on going into everything you typed now or possibly ever.

First, whatever opinions I choose to express or not are my own choices. The fact that A and B are disagreeing on something doesn't mean that I have to specifically take a side on that or address that - or else I'd spend my entire life posting in every forum thread in which there's any hint of disagreement. A could post something I entirely disagree with but don't feel strongly enough to comment on, B can post something I agree with but in a way that I disagree with, and I can choose to discuss the part that I feel like discussing.

Second, Manon has already disputed your statement that he's suggesting users should be responsible for recruiting. If that was the point you were hoping to make, it appears we're in universal agreement.

Third, if your post had been something like "Hey, Manon, I don't think that mafia comment was helpful. I don't think we should expect users to recruit" then it would have been clear that you were trying to make a point, and that a reasonable expectation would be that Manon would (as he had) clarified his remarks, maybe some other people would have agreed with you, and we'd all be done with that.

But that wasn't at all what you posted. Not one sentence in your post was at all like that; the only reference at all to the topic of recruiting users began with "If you had any honesty at all". And your insistence that my post was to help Manon's point in this A/B nonsense is nonsense - I'm not defending what he said, or what you claim he said. Nor was your post on that topic at all. The post I responded to was nothing but taking an opportunity to react to one negative comment by pissing all over Manon in specific and the staff in general - and *that* is what I was responding to.

Read post 179 again, and tell me honestly if you think the point you are trying to make was: "Hey, Manon, I don't think that mafia comment was helpful. I don't think we should expect users to recruit" or if it was instead an attack on the staff to the point that there was not a single sentence that was primarily intended for anything other than to denigrate the staff.

If you're going to call out the idea of attacking the messenger rather than the topic, read post 179 again. Read my response again. Ask yourself why you have this notion that I should be discussing a topic that you yourself didn't feel worth the effort of making an honest attempt at.