169 replies to this topic

[Nathan Bloodguard]

Joseph Mallan, on 02 February 2015 - 11:25 AM, said:

com·pet·i·tive adjective \kəm-ˈpe-tə-tiv\ :
of or relating to a situation in which people or groups are trying to win a contest or be more successful than others :
relating to or involving competition
: having a strong desire to win or be the best at something :
as good as or better than others of the same kind :
able to compete successfully with others

I striked out 'win or' to make it clearer as in English the 'or' would make the first half also apply to the second statement of the sentence. Naturally 'a strong desire to be the best at something' would mean you would be improving yourself to be the best at something. Correct?

Now trying to compare a video game that has no trophy to paid, high performance sports, is not a good comparison. It is a video game with the intent of providing fun. High end performance sports, is not designed to have fun (although they can) but instead designed to make money and prove who is the best out there. To make a mistake for a high paid performance game can mean the difference between keeping ones job and being kicked out. However, even then there are rules and regulations to keep things from going to far. How expensive is it again if a fight breaks out between two teams in the NFL?

Fun is defined differently for each person. Some people can have fun while losing, because it was a good and close game. Others define fun as winning, with no room for loses. I personally don't take this game 'seriously' and try to just have fun. If they had a single player option and a co-op mode, I would likely play that and never bother with the competitive side of this game. Never did like PvP, too many people who get hurt from it because other people have to take things to the extreme.

[Dimento Graven]

Nathan Bloodguard, on 02 February 2015 - 01:30 PM, said:

So you are telling me that Tesunie's OP would have prompted you to rehash that one incident even though the OP has nothing to do with that incident? I don't recall the OP telling you that YOU are "over competitive". it just states that taking things (even competitiveness) to far is never healthy for both you and those around you (or those you interact with in this case). If you translate it as you being "over competitive" that is not my nor Tesunie's fault, and would still have nothing to do with that incident.

No, you misunderstand me. I'm saying I would have posted here arguing against:

Making the definitions of self-improvement and competition the same.
Decrying an entire segment of the MWO community as "overly competitive" because he was called names.
Even coming close to (accidentally or otherwise) equating 'rudeness' with 'cheating'.

The fact that the incident came up in the thread just happened to provide gristle for the mill...

Quote

Now as for me telling you that "anyone else in this game not cheating, that you're 'too competitive". I have not done so. I have not even touched that subject, nor named you as such. So please refrain from putting words in my (or Tesunie's) mouth as neither one of us has said that.

If said, YOU said that, I apologize, that's not my intent. However, Percival in fact did pretty much say that in general about organized teams in CW, or anyone else who is rude to an underperformer, uncooperative team member.

He equated being rude to being overly competitive, his own words.

Quote

Now about the event. You where not there and is hearing this via a third party, just like me on some of this. This leads to very inaccurate 'facts' being shared and tends to color it in one sides favor or the other depending upon who gets to you first. As was stated numerous times by Tesunie (as you are replying to the point of my post that was what Tesunie had stated) that there was more going on besides the one phrase "we got this". According to him, as he has stated again, he was being treated poorly before this statement was said. Now as for what really happened, the only way to know that would have been to be an unbiased person that would have had to have been there (on your team, but not unit) for both the first and second game, or a recording/screen shots (once again, if these do exist, then please remember to get permission from those involved to prevent a name and shame problem) of the full chat log for both games. As no one has or wants to post these things then it is still impossible for any real, full, unfiltered facts to be reached by anyone in this matter.

I'm pretty sure I was there for the first match, not the second.

The minutes sitting there as our DC was trying to get everyone, including Percival in a jumping light 'mech as the counter ticked off before the launch are always stressful.

AT MOST, you have 10 minutes, that's a turret run and if not everyone makes it into their jump capable light on a turret run, oh well.

However, when you get matched against an enemy it's however long you were into that 10 minutes, reduced down to 60 seconds. No more time for fooling around, drop your roosters and pull up your socks, it's Big Stompy Robot Time!

Quote

As for bullying. You have called him more then that (although some of it may have been shorthand for you 'nickname' of him), and you have also done other things that classify as such.

Subjective as your perspective is...

Quote

As for the LP, I guess that would depend upon your performance. I would have to admit that it would be better to field the full phoenix mech line only on a defense, as you generate more LP then you would in a zurg rush. However you still can't think of any other tactics that could have been employed with one mech not being a jumping light? How much would you get from a victory? I think its something like 75 or so (each faction is different and keeps changing). I have been known to get 300 or more LP from performance alone. (I will double check when the cease fire is over, if possible, do also remember that would be a total of 40% LP boast if fielding all four Phoenix mechs and another 8% potential from medallions.)

The amount is insufficient enough, over the long term to really not bother insisting on the point. So he'd get an extra 50 or so LP he with a Phoenix 'mech, than without it.

Was the 50LP THAT big a difference to be such a sticking point, or to justify NOT cooperating with the 11 other people that dropped?

I don't think so.

Quote

As for the pugger stuff. Did he stick with the team for the first match? Did he Rambo off into the horizon or go through a different gate (unless told to of course)? How did his match score at the end look. Was he bottom, best, or somewhere in-between? I think you guys focused to much on this light mech stuff and forgot about the rest of the game. Like stated, there are more tactics available that could have easily been employed.

It doesn't matter where he placed and it doesn't matter what OTHER tactics COULD have been used. What does matter was the ACTUAL tactics THAT WERE going to be employed and understood by the 11 other people (not all of the same organized group) on the team.

Now suddenly because Percival wants an extra 50LP, we have to arrange for new tactics, at the last minute, for one person?

I think not.

Quote

Now for unit mates. If this is how you treat your friends, its amazing that they stick with you. I know my unit this behavior would not be tolerated. I know because we did drop as a unit and one of our unit mates dropped in his DDC Atlas while the rest of us were in our lights. We didn't give him garbage for the mistake, we just had him sit and wait for wave two instead. Sometimes you have to change tactics. I always liked Joseph Mallen's sig. All plans are plan B. Battle plans are the first casualty of any conflict.

I do apologize for not quoting, but when I quote, it all just becomes one paragraph for some odd reason right now.

Some units work differently than others, people with thicker skins and more serious intentions will gravitate towards one another while those of lesser fortitude and skill will gravitate towards then own groups.

It's natural and in my (unfortunately by now) DECADES of online gaming, I'm more often in groups/units/clans comprised of the former, rather than later, my experience leads me to believe the MAJORITY of groups/units/clans operate under the same level of expectation.

Do well, and don't screw up. Screw up, be prepared to hear about it.

It doesn't mean my unit will tolerate the extremis, however, if you're acting the idiot, you'd better expect someone to call you on it. If you can't take being called an idiot, DON'T ACT LIKE AN IDIOT.

It's a simple enough formula to remember...

In your own example, if that ONE player INSISTED in bringing nothing but two atlas's and two locusts would you develop a strategy that catered just to his whims? Or, after a few polite attempts at changing the behavior would start to get stern, and after being stern didn't work, start getting a little rude?

I've already covered the normal progression of human interaction in that regard and I think we all know what the REALISTIC answer would be.

[Tesunie]

I'm sorry. Magic had nothing to do with following the logical progression of the desire to win becoming a desire to improve oneself. Someone who is being competitive, and not just saying they are, will try to always improve or maintain their skills. If they already see themselves as the best, then that is their folly.

You present an odd case to try and argue your point. It's a long shot and fairly rare incident from my observations. Most players, even the very best in their fields, realize that they continually need to work on maintaining or improving their skills.

Assumption requires that I did not think about the progression. It indicates that I assumed something without farther research. I did no such thing, and instead just followed a logical progression of events. If you wish to look at it, I presented a situation where one is in a competitive event and wishes to actually compete. Most people would work on practices and trying to improve their skills. Very few people who actively join in a competitive event (with the intent to win it) don't try to bolster their skills before the competition. Thus, by a series of events, the two concepts are related.


You are now talking about a professional team. It isn't just their job, but they are also an already established team who are use to each other. They are all following the same level of competitiveness, and all have the same degree on the desire to win. Now, imagine in your scenario you have presented here, and remove 2-3 of the professional team players with a couple of high school players. Place them under the same stress and hold them to the same competitive level (without pay, as it isn't their job) and I'm sure you'd have some of them leave because they feel insulted. They may have shown up to the team simply to have fun and play a game. Yes, they want to win the game, but not at the same level as the professional players.

Hence, I was not a member of your unit. Thus, I should not be treated in the same manner you may treat other members of your unit. I should not be held to the same level of competitiveness as your unit. I was a PUG, a random player looking for a good game and some fun, who dropped beside you. Yes, I intended to win as I gain more rewards for winning. However, I was not willing to win the same way you apparently wanted to. Thus, when I was bullied to try and change my mech and I didn't because it was a demand instead of a request, I felt insulted. That may work in your unit, but I wasn't playing at that same level of competitiveness. There was a reason I was a PUG, and not a unit mate.

From the sounds of your unit though, I'd probably would leave as none of you seem to match my personality nor my level of competitiveness. Thus, I have taken measures to avoid playing with that unit again.

"and we all expect our teammates to also want and work for it at least as badly as we do."
And this is the exact thing I'm talking about here. That is the over-competitive spirit that is telling everyone around you how they should play, because you tell them to. You try and exert peer pressure simply because "there are more of us, so you have to listen to us" to get your way. You try to hold everyone else to your expectations, and then berate them when they don't meet up to it. This, is wrong.


Within the word: Compete

Quote

strive in common

You can not "strive" to win without a desire to improve yourself. Strive indicates an action. You can not strive for something with inaction.

Quote

to strive (alongside another) for the attainment of something

Once more, it says to strive for something. If something is blocking you access, you have to overcome the obstacle. Thus, you have to improve yourself to be able to attain your objective, if something is hindering you. Thus why I say someone who is competitive must "strive" improve themselves if they are to "obtain their objective" win. One goes hand in hand with the other.

Another root word: Petition

Quote

a seeking, searching

So, can you seek or search without looking around? One action leads to another. Thus, competitiveness leads to the desire to improve one's skills to be able to compete.

Another root word: petere

Quote

to make for, go to; attack, assail; seek, strive after

Strive after. That also means to do something about it. Thus, one action leads to another. Thus, to be or remain competitive, people seek to become better. They seek ways to overcome, which means improving their skills.

Another connected word: rival

Quote

One who is in pursuit of the same object as another.

We are in the same pursuit. Even the enemy is in the same pursuit. To win. However, when we are pitched as we are against each other, the players with the better skills tend to win. Thus, in the pursuit of trying to obtain the same objective, we desire to improve ourselves so we can improve our changes of gaining said object(ive).

So, we have now approached he root of the words in Latin. It actually agrees with me. On more than one part of it's root.


I'm saying, from your apple and tree reference:
"Hey look. That apple came from this tree. This tree grows apples. It must be an apple tree."


Edit: Posting went wonky again, don't know why. Had to fix the coding.

Edited by Tesunie, 02 February 2015 - 02:18 PM.

[FupDup]

[Dimento Graven]

Nathan Bloodguard, on 02 February 2015 - 01:51 PM, said:

I striked out 'win or' to make it clearer as in English the 'or' would make the first half also apply to the second statement of the sentence. Naturally 'a strong desire to be the best at something' would mean you would be improving yourself to be the best at something. Correct?

Spin it all you want, competitive does not mean self-improvement.

The act of competing does not mean you are automatically improving yourself.

The act of improving yourself does not mean you automatically competing.

Seriously, give that up. Neither dictionary nor thesaurus agree with you or Percival on the matter.

Quote

Now trying to compare a video game that has no trophy to paid, high performance sports, is not a good comparison. It is a video game with the intent of providing fun. High end performance sports, is not designed to have fun (although they can) but instead designed to make money and prove who is the best out there. To make a mistake for a high paid performance game can mean the difference between keeping ones job and being kicked out. However, even then there are rules and regulations to keep things from going to far. How expensive is it again if a fight breaks out between two teams in the NFL?

Why not? There are professional gamer leagues out there (LoL comes to mind). There are colleges beginning to provide SCHOLARSHIPS for video gaming (probably a sign of the apocalypse, I know).

So it is actually an apt comparison.

Quote

Fun is defined differently for each person. Some people can have fun while losing, because it was a good and close game. Others define fun as winning, with no room for loses. I personally don't take this game 'seriously' and try to just have fun. If they had a single player option and a co-op mode, I would likely play that and never bother with the competitive side of this game. Never did like PvP, too many people who get hurt from it because other people have to take things to the extreme.

Wining is almost always fun, and losing is almost always NOT fun for me.

If I make a mistake, I'm pissed at myself.

If my team mate makes a mistake, I'm pissed at him.

If we just get out played, I'm pissed that I didn't try hard enough, or, I'm pissed that the end of match screen shows that I was the only one trying (for non-CW matches it sucks consistently having one of the highest end of match scores but being on the losing side) "hard".

Now if it was a close hard fought match... Win or lose, that's pretty cool, and doesn't happen often enough as far as I'm concerned.

[Nathan Bloodguard]

bul·ly¹

ˈbo͝olē/

verb
gerund or present participle: bullying

• 
  
  

  
  use superior strength or influence to intimidate (someone), typically to force him or her to do what one wants.
  "a local man was bullied into helping them"
  synonyms: persecute, oppress, tyrannize, browbeat, harass, torment, intimidate, strong-arm, dominate; More
  
  
  informalpush around, bullyrag
  "the others bully him"

  
  
  coerce, pressure, pressurize, press, push;
  force, compel;
  badger, goad, prod, browbeat, intimidate, dragoon, strong-arm;
  informalbulldoze, railroad, lean on
  "she was bullied into helping"

The definition of Bully. Does any of these fit?

Never heard him decry an entire segment of MWO community as overly competitive because he was called names in the OP. Maybe I missed that. That is you forcing words into his mouth again. This only came about because stoned prophet decided to post 'the incident' here where it was never mentioned (once again). It had no right to be here unless the OP mentioned it, unto which he would then be in the wrong here.

Once again no mention of rudeness being applied to competitiveness, as 'the incident' was never mentioned and (once again) has no reason to be dragged in here to begin with.

I understand the slip up. Got that part. However Tesunie (not Percival, as you can at least use his proper name when talking to ME, otherwise it is considered rude to me and I am getting fed up with it.) has not said that organized teams in CW are all 'over competitive', that would be your interpretation of what he said, and not what he actually said. He also did not link up Rude with Competitive, that would be your interpretation, but not what he said. (if he did indeed say so then please quote him on it)

If you could please refrain from your 'rooster' talk it would go a long way to make you look better and people to perceive your points in a better light. Also it is rude and uncalled for. (Not everyone wants to hear about your apparent fascination about that, so please keep them to yourself.)

About tactics. You folks couldn't think of one other tactic that could work, considering you blew the gate gen anyways right? In the end, did it matter that he didn't take a jumping light? Did you lose the match (the first one to clarify, as he actually played that one, the second he wasn't give the chance according to him)? If it didn't matter in the end, why make such a big stink about it now? He hasn't. It just seems that you and your unit (or a small portion of them I should say) seem to be having a problem with letting a bad teammate that you still won the game with ruin your game. Not that it should have mattered in this thread anyways.

As for LP: If you did the math right, and he did get say 300 LP in the match, that would be more like 150 LP added (Almost 50%, or half, of the original amount.) It can add up to far more then just one victory if played correctly, and one can get such performance from attack as well and still win if done right. However I have already said that it was likely better to drop in a non phoenix mech for attack, but whatever then...

If one person refuses to change to the team's needs, then the team either needs to change the Tactic, or go with it and leave said 12th person behind. There are better things to do then 'berate' a person (rather this happened or not is far beyond the point anymore as neither of us have said photo/video of 'the incident' to make it an arguable point).

On what I would do in the case of someone wanting to bring in 2 atlas and 2 locusts. I would try to have them change it (if it was even necessary). If their heart was really intent, then it would be either a change of plans or leave them behind (but still trying to tell them what the game plan is). I try not to be rude over the chat channel as I can proof read myself some (takes time and thought to type, unlike talking). Now over TS, I might get snippity, but then I would likely apologize for it later.

[Nathan Bloodguard]

Dimento Graven, on 02 February 2015 - 02:18 PM, said:

Spin it all you want, competitive does not mean self-improvement. The act of competing does not mean you are automatically improving yourself. The act of improving yourself does not mean you automatically competing.

The verb competing or the adjective Competitive? Similar words, derived from the same root. Verb vs. description of the same word.

having a strong desire to be the best at something.

Edited by Nathan Bloodguard, 02 February 2015 - 03:04 PM.

[Dimento Graven]

Nathan Bloodguard, on 02 February 2015 - 02:39 PM, said:

...

The definition of Bully. Does any of these fit?

Are we arguing bullying or are we discussing competitiveness and its application in online gaming?

If he 'feels' bullied, whatever, I'm not in charge of his feelings. Personally, I've found that 'bullying' is the latest straw man the overly sensitive and PC zealots have brought to bear to try and force everyone into behaving in a way that allows them to treat everyone else any way they want without having to suffer the consequences.

Too often I've witnessed the "Oh I wasn't rude, why is he bullying me!?!?" faux indignation of the closet ******* instigator. My immediate first reaction when I see one of these people that brings it upon themselves is to respond with, "You think you were being bullied by him? LOL, MY TURN!!!"

Quote

Never heard him decry an entire segment of MWO community as overly competitive because he was called names in the OP. Maybe I missed that. That is you forcing words into his mouth again. This only came about because stoned prophet decided to post 'the incident' here where it was never mentioned (once again). It had no right to be here unless the OP mentioned it, unto which he would then be in the wrong here.

In his own OP he puts under the singular category of 'over-competitiveness' "rude treatment" and "cheating".

That's exactly what he did. If you can't see that, I call your perspective seriously off base.

Quote

Once again no mention of rudeness being applied to competitiveness, as 'the incident' was never mentioned and (once again) has no reason to be dragged in here to begin with.

Oh for F's sake you're being obtuse on this. He didn't use the word "rude" he tap danced around it very nicely, but when using statements like

Quote

...

These people, who have over-competitiveness poison, don't stop to consider fun anymore. They expect everyone else to play as they do, your feelings meaning nothing. They will tell other players how they must play.

...

Often times, those who suffer from this over-competitiveness poison don't see the affect they have on others around them.

...

These people will try to win, no matter the cost. Honor. Integrity. Respect. All are but wheat to a scythe when it comes to victory.

...

Using statements like these is an absolute crock. What else could he be talking about other than, the competitive players didn't treat him nice, didn't lead him around by the nose, with raised pinky fingers and 'please and thank you's', and "Of course little princes, you can use whatever 'mech you want and do what ever you think is most fun, the other 11 of us bow to your whims and fancies..."

I find it offensive.

You screw up and affect the game for 11 other people, not only did you do badly, you should FEEL badly.

A lot of these people like this aren't "aware" enough to understand, or more probably don't care, that there are 11 other people who want to have fun too and aren't there to accommodate just ONE person's idea of 'fun'.

Quote

I understand the slip up. Got that part. However Tesunie (not Percival, as you can at least use his proper name when talking to ME, otherwise it is considered rude to me and I am getting fed up with it.) has not said that organized teams in CW are all 'over competitive', that would be your interpretation of what he said, and not what he actually said. He also did not link up Rude with Competitive, that would be your interpretation, but not what he said. (if he did indeed say so then please quote him on it)

What do you care what name I refer to him by? If I call him "carrot" as long as we all know who we're talking about I'm not sure where it matters.

As far as everything else, discussed, pointedly already.

Quote

If you could please refrain from your 'rooster' talk it would go a long way to make you look better and people to perceive your points in a better light. Also it is rude and uncalled for. (Not everyone wants to hear about your apparent fascination about that, so please keep them to yourself.)

Oh my god, again, the intentional obtuseness. That was a paraphrase of a common military call to action used for generations, as is appropriate in a semi mil-sim team based 'thinking man's shooter'.

If you didn't know that, fine, go watch a few military movies it'll show up there, and if not go ahead and retranslate it with the appropriate substitution for 'rooster' and you'll find it referenced in many stories about military life.

If you DID know it (and I find it hard to believe anyone over the age of 20 wouldn't) I think you're just choosing to be offended, like the army of the PC, looking for things to offend you.

Quote

About tactics. You folks couldn't think of one other tactic that could work, considering you blew the gate gen anyways right? In the end, did it matter that he didn't take a jumping light? Did you lose the match (the first one to clarify, as he actually played that one, the second he wasn't give the chance according to him)? If it didn't matter in the end, why make such a big stink about it now? He hasn't. It just seems that you and your unit (or a small portion of them I should say) seem to be having a problem with letting a bad teammate that you still won the game with ruin your game. Not that it should have mattered in this thread anyways.

AGAIN, HERE YOU GO, OH.MY.GOD!!! You have a strategy discussed and agreed heretofor by 11 other people and now we suddenly have to change all those plans AT THE LAST MINUTE to suite his need for 50 EXTRA LP!?!?!?

You seem to think it's ok for ONE person to make 11 other people change their plans just for his own convenience, and like him, think it's unfair that 11 other people should be able to tell him how he should play.

That's extremely undemocratic of you both. The majority ruled one way, but you insist on special treatment...

Quote

As for LP: If you did the math right, and he did get say 300 LP in the match, that would be more like 150 LP added (Almost 50%, or half, of the original amount.) It can add up to far more then just one victory if played correctly, and one can get such performance from attack as well and still win if done right. However I have already said that it was likely better to drop in a non phoenix mech for attack, but whatever then...

50LP, 150LP, does it matter that ONE PERSON wanted to make a little extra LP and required 11 other people to change their plans to suite him.

That's exactly what you're indicating should happen.

Apparently your little Percival is special and should be treated as such. You're not just his friend, you're a close relative. I would guess mom, but the nom de guerre of 'Nathan' seems to suggest otherwise. Close Uncle?

Quote

If one person refuses to change to the team's needs, then the team either needs to change the Tactic, or go with it and leave said 12th person behind. There are better things to do then 'berate' a person (rather this happened or not is far beyond the point anymore as neither of us have said photo/video of 'the incident' to make it an arguable point).

On what I would do in the case of someone wanting to bring in 2 atlas and 2 locusts. I would try to have them change it (if it was even necessary). If their heart was really intent, then it would be either a change of plans or leave them behind (but still trying to tell them what the game plan is). I try not to be rude over the chat channel as I can proof read myself some (takes time and thought to type, unlike talking). Now over TS, I might get snippity, but then I would likely apologize for it later.

Wow... Just... Wow...

If you're not prepared to play a team game as part of a team, don't play a team game.

I'm not sure I can take you seriously any more either.

Nathan Bloodguard, on 02 February 2015 - 03:02 PM, said:

The verb competing or the adjective Competitive? Similar words, derived from the same root. Verb vs. description of the same word.

having a strong desire to be the best at something.

I still haven't found the definition that includes self-improvement and it currently appears that you are pointedly ignoring my counters the false logic.

[Burktross]

Dimento Graven, on 02 February 2015 - 12:46 PM, said:

If you can find me an actual definition of the word 'competitive', 'compete', or 'competition' that includes "desire to improve one's self" I'll concede the 'context' stipulation.

I think you miss the point of connotation...

[Gremlich Johns]

I beg to differ from the OP regarding the definition of Competitiveness.

I submit that in the video game world, Competitiveness is that drive to dominate over others - nothing more. You improve yourself for your own sake, not others. You know what you need to do to do better. That's what makes the difference between gamers who are Alphas and those who are Betas. Betas are always trying to prove to other Betas that they are Alphas - but they aren't, they're still Betas. Alphas have nothing to prove - everybody, Beta on down, KNOWS who the Alphas are, they just won't admit it.

[Tesunie]

The bully now has an inverted Mohawk! So completely missed the point.

By the way, I've said it once, I don't like that you call me by a different name. Joking placed aside, it's rude and IS bullying. I've asked you before to stop. You have not.

But wait, you don't only have full rights to tell me how to play this game, you also have full rights to change my name on a whim. Because. And if I complain about it, I'm the one being rude...

Take it as you wish.

Gremlich Johns, on 02 February 2015 - 03:31 PM, said:

I beg to differ from the OP regarding the definition of Competitiveness.

I submit that in the video game world, Competitiveness is that drive to dominate over others - nothing more. You improve yourself for your own sake, not others. You know what you need to do to do better. That's what makes the difference between gamers who are Alphas and those who are Betas. Betas are always trying to prove to other Betas that they are Alphas - but they aren't, they're still Betas. Alphas have nothing to prove - everybody, Beta on down, KNOWS who the Alphas are, they just won't admit it.

I'm not just referring to video games here, but I can understand where you are coming from. My main point is, no matter what, there should be no excuse for treating people poorly. Respect and sportsmanship should still be in.

[Nathan Bloodguard]

FupDup, on 02 February 2015 - 02:01 PM, said:

Hey I just watched that! Most epic dagger fight ever! xP

[Dimento Graven]

Burktross, on 02 February 2015 - 03:30 PM, said:

I think you miss the point of connotation...

And I can through connotation, context, and various other literary means suggest the moon is made of green cheese.

It still won't actually be made of green cheese.

Or, let's try this equivalent statement as a comparisson:

If you are educated, you can read. Therefore if you read a lot, you are well educated.

No........

[FupDup]

[Tesunie]

FupDup, on 02 February 2015 - 04:04 PM, said:

Spoiler

Do you have one with "Circular Argument in progress" maybe? That could also be rather fitting...

[Dimento Graven]

Tesunie, on 02 February 2015 - 03:41 PM, said:

The bully now has an inverted Mohawk! So completely missed the point.

There was no real point to miss. You have none, other than you want carte blanche to play the way you want to play and you don't want anyone complaining to you about it.

Quote

By the way, I've said it once, I don't like that you call me by a different name. Joking placed aside, it's rude and IS bullying. I've asked you before to stop. You have not.

No, I haven't.

Quote

But wait, you don't only have full rights to tell me how to play this game, you also have full rights to change my name on a whim. Because. And if I complain about it, I'm the one being rude...

Take it as you wish.

Just like YOU don't have the right to tell 11 other people how THEY should play.

You talk about respect but both you and (your Uncle?) Nathan seem to believe that the respect towards your own individual selves is MORE important than the respect you pay to the other 11 people on your team.

That you should just be allowed to do what you want to do, because, well, you have a right to do whatever you want to do, so there, nyah.

I don't think I've ever been so completely unreasonable that I as a member of a team had an expectation that the entire team had to accommodate my individual wishes.

[FupDup]

Tesunie, on 02 February 2015 - 04:07 PM, said:

Do you have one with "Circular Argument in progress" maybe? That could also be rather fitting...

[Tesunie]

So, I don't have the right to tell "11 other people" how to play (when I didn't), but they have the right to tell me (because there are just more of them) how I can play? That doesn't seem right either...

And you continue with the name calling, and still don't see yourself as a bully.

FupDup, on 02 February 2015 - 04:14 PM, said:

I request, and I get. With timely delivery too! (You aren't charging me extra for the speedy delivery, are you? )

[Dimento Graven]

Tesunie, on 02 February 2015 - 04:18 PM, said:

So, I don't have the right to tell "11 other people" how to play (when I didn't), but they have the right to tell me (because there are just more of them) how I can play? That doesn't seem right either...

They just have to accommodate your need for extra LP.

Quote

And you continue with the name calling, and still don't see yourself as a bully.

No, I don't.

[Burktross]

Dimento Graven, on 02 February 2015 - 04:02 PM, said:

And I can through connotation, context, and various other literary means suggest the moon is made of green cheese.

It still won't actually be made of green cheese.

Or, let's try this equivalent statement as a comparisson:

If you are educated, you can read. Therefore if you read a lot, you are well educated.

No........

No... that's not how that works.
If you're so intent on using only denotation, look at this.

Quote

connotation

1.

• the associated or secondary meaning of a word or expression in addition to its explicit or primary meaning: A possible connotation of “home” is “a place of warmth, comfort, and affection.”.
  
• the act of connoting; the suggesting of an additional meaning for a word or expression, apart from its explicit meaning.

2.


something suggested or implied by a word or thing, rather than being explicitly named or described:
“Religion” has always had a negative connotation for me.
3.
Logic. the set of attributes constituting the meaning of a term and thus determining the range of objects to which that term may be applied; comprehension; intension.

OP's definition of competition is not far off, and is well within reasonable bounds to be a logical connotation of the word. You suggest wildly different things.

Connotation is not linking the moon with cheese. Connotation is linking honor with courage.

Fun fact: Common connotation can eventually lead to new denotation, such as "gay."
We all know both gay's connotation and denotation used to mean happy or merry, but now even oxford accepts what used to be connotation as a valid denotation.
http://www.oxforddic...rchDictCode=all

TL;DR
Connotations are not irrelevant, and in fact, lead to accepted definitions.

Edit: Dear god, this is my first forum warrior match.
What have I become

Edited by Burktross, 02 February 2015 - 04:51 PM.