Battle of the E-Penis (Rd. 2 Matchup 3)

[Board of Command]

Matchup 3: Yeah...uh...I got nothing...

http://img372.imageshack.us/img372/6825/bracketcopyhq5.jpg

[Carnage]

SK doesnt have shit on Arc.

[Yukimura]

Why are we even going through the motions for the right side? Just skip to Arcness vs mage.

[Jadugar]

Matchup 3: Yeah...uh...I got nothing...


Yes, the later stages of this battle have become very predictable.

[Assassin]

Arcness will take the trophy....i hear he has metal implants in his penis! :eek:

[rockmanj]

eww that sounds uncomfortable...but its not like he's using it for anything...that why he needs the "e" version. yea, of course arcness gets the vote this round...sk's not all that bad

[Assertn]

SK is a huge (http://forums.gotwoot.net/showthread.php?p=332662#post332662) motherfucking (http://forums.gotwoot.net/showthread.php?p=340299#post340299) troll (http://forums.gotwoot.net/showthread.php?p=340505&postcount=834)

[Board of Command]

SK truly deserves more credit for his efforts. Much of his deeds have gone unnoticed.

[Animeniax]

Arcness might be bigger and badder on irc, but he/she/it doesn't participate enough on the forums. irc chatter is fleeting, forums keep your stupidity saved in hard format for future users to see, so SK got my vote.

[Yukimura]

Everything in irc is logged all the way back to like 2004 or so, plus the really good stuff is always posted in the IRC thread. Arcness is legendary in his eTyranny and to say otherwise would be foolish.

[Terracosmo]

Ignoring dickery, I'll just vote Arcy because he's pretty sexy and unlike SK actually possesses a few braincells <3

or wait... that means I should vote SK because it's a bad thing to have a big e-penis

oh my this is just too confusing!

[joker-kun]

Arcness might be bigger and badder on irc, but he/she/it doesn't participate enough on the forums. irc chatter is fleeting, forums keep your stupidity saved in hard format for future users to see, so SK got my vote.


There's a little something called logs, most IRCers use them. Not mention try looking in the irc thread... there's how many pages of quotes?? I'll let you count.

[Animeniax]

Everything in irc is logged all the way back to like 2004 or so, plus the really good stuff is always posted in the IRC thread. Arcness is legendary in his eTyranny and to say otherwise would be foolish.

They called Galileo foolish for saying the earth rotated around the sun. See how wrong they were. If this poll were on irc, it might be different, but here on the forums, SK is the bigger dumb kid.

[joker-kun]

They called Galileo foolish for saying the earth rotated around the sun. See how wrong they were. If this poll were on irc, it might be different, but here on the forums, SK is the bigger dumb kid.

It's funny cause when BoC made the competition i'm pretty sure he said e-penis. The 'e' represents the internet as a whole as far as I know. Albert Eintstien said "Two things are infinite: the universe and human stupidity; and I'm not sure about the universe." You definately support this idea.

[XanBcoo]

I was gonna vote SK, 'cause I don't really know Arcness that well, but apparently his e-dickery reputation proceeds him. Do I vote for reputation or for a troll?

Seriously a toss-up.

[mage]

I don't think it really matters at this point.

[Animeniax]

I was gonna vote SK, 'cause I don't really know Arcness that well, but apparently his e-dickery reputation proceeds him. Do I vote for reputation or for a troll?

Seriously a toss-up.You're considering voting for someone because some other guys like or dislike him on irc? If you have no experience with Arcness' bs, then don't vote him, otherwise this contest is meaningless. Try thinking for yourself once in a while.

joker, referring to yourself as joker-kun is like referring to yourself in the third-person, or worse giving yourself a cute nickname. "Albert Eintstien" is "definately" rolling in his grave.

[Yukimura]

You're considering voting for someone because some other guys like or dislike him on irc? If you have no experience with Arcness' bs, then don't vote him, otherwise this contest is meaningless.

This contest was meaningless form the beginning since there's no consensus on what "e-penis" actually means.


Try thinking for yourself once in a while.
Thinking for one's self doesn't mean you can't choose take someone else's advice.


joker, referring to yourself as joker-kun is like referring to yourself in the third-person, or worse giving yourself a cute nickname.

So is Animeniax isn't supposed to be cute?

[Board of Command]

Thinking for one's self doesn't mean you can't choose take someone else's advice.
Taking advice and bandwagoning are two different things.

[rockmanj]

Ignoring dickery, I'll just vote Arcy because he's pretty sexy and unlike SK actually possesses a few braincells <3

or wait... that means I should vote SK because it's a bad thing to have a big e-penis

oh my this is just too confusing!

i thought the whole contest was about dickery...e-dickery

[XanBcoo]

You're considering voting for someone because some other guys like or dislike him on irc? If you have no experience with Arcness' bs, then don't vote him, otherwise this contest is meaningless. Try thinking for yourself once in a while.
And how about you start making some worthwhile posts? I see your entire image still just comprises of talking a lot of shit without making any sense whatsoever. Needlessly insulting everyone you respond to does not make a good argument if you're just gonna end it there without making a point. Go back to your sad life in the real world, come up with a decent post, and then see if you're worth something here, you insufferable troll. I'm away for half a week, and you're still shitposting. I'm really not surprised.

In any case, I'm voting Arcness, because in the end, e-penis signifies "reputation" to me, and the fact that Arcness clearly has a huge reputation for Gotwoot users means he's earned it through whatever means. SK on the other hand, can act like an ass, but really does nothing beyond that, and apparently doesn't have the reputation to keep it up without looking lame. Basically:

e-reputation = e-penis > shitposting.

And that's what I'm pretty sure this contest is about. So there's my logic, Animaniax. If you don't like it, quote my post, say "You're doing [action]? You're pathetic. I'm clearly not as much of a loser as you are, because I've just pointed out that fact." because that's all you can do, and I'm probably not going to read it anyway.

[Arcn3ss]

The thing with people like Animeniax is that they are attention whores. Ignoring them is far more effective then commenting on how much a troll they are. He's just lucky I am not a mod here. I would have banned him long ago. In IRC, I shitlist people for less. ( Go ahead and ask some of the IRC Users the reasons I sometimes ban someone.)

Gotwoot will be the same with or without him. He's just a troll, nothing special about him, nothing that sets him apart from other trolls before him. Unwanted and unneeded, I rather see him fade away from this place sooner then later, so I reiterate my ignoring him comment.

[SK]

This is a simple matchup:
Arcness Reg 2003
SK Reg 2004

Its that simple.

BTW Xancaboo you writing out that long post because this fag Animenacks made you look like a stupid asshole just makes you look like more of a stupid asshole.

[Animeniax]

This thread is about Arcness vs SK, not me being a troll or posting shit. My reply to Xan was an appeal to everyone to vote fairly, instead of band-wagoning someone to victory. I don't know how it got all blown out of proportion like this.

Arcness, think of me how you will in the limited interaction we've had with each other, but you might want to examine yourself and your trigger finger ban tendency on irc. Says a lot about you, and pots and kettles calling each other black and shit.

[Assertn]

In any case, I'm voting Arcness, because in the end, e-penis signifies "reputation" to me, and the fact that Arcness clearly has a huge reputation for Gotwoot users means he's earned it through whatever means. SK on the other hand, can act like an ass, but really does nothing beyond that, and apparently doesn't have the reputation to keep it up without looking lame.

Yes well....typical voting systems are designed such that those with the predominant reputation applicable to the issues at hand should naturally win without being a motivational factor in the initial voting decision.

In other words, a candidate's popularity should reflect the outcome of the votes, not the base for voting. All you're accomplishing is further skewing whoever currently has the lead.

[ChaosK]

In IRC, I shitlist people for less. ( Go ahead and ask some of the IRC Users the reasons I sometimes ban someone.)



He banned me for putting "..." at the end of a sentence and he said "no ings" That was a weird day.


This thread is about Arcness vs SK, not me being a troll or posting shit. My reply to Xan was an appeal to everyone to vote fairly, instead of band-wagoning someone to victory. I don't know how it got all blown out of proportion like this.



Yes but you seem to have an objection towards every single opinion made. You contradict others for the sake of being noticed.

If someone votes Haku, you give 30 reasons to not vote for him, so they vote SK and you give another 30 to not vote for him. What exactly is your goal?

[XanBcoo]

Yes well....typical voting systems are designed such that those with the predominant reputation applicable to the issues at hand should naturally win without being a motivational factor in the initial voting decision.

In other words, a candidate's popularity should reflect the outcome of the votes, not the base for voting. All you're accomplishing is further skewing whoever currently has the lead.
Man, any other poll I'd be completely behind you on this, but I honestly considered what it was I was voting for and decided "I don't really care, and my choice seems like it won't sway the outcome" so I voted for Arcness because of the reasons I already said.

We're voting for the biggest e-dick here. Who cares what I'm skewing?

[Arcn3ss]

Assertn is just upset that i made him look bad infront of Nexy. :P

[Board of Command]

E-penis criteria:

- Ego
- Physical possessions (e.g. kickass computer)
- Skill/knowledge in some relevant field (i.e. an anime guru)
- Negative interaction with others (e.g. SK, Y, Animeniax, mage, Mutata, etc...)
- Perceived difference between real-life behavior and e-behavior (bigger the better)

Vote for whoever you think scores higher among theses criteria.

[ChaosK]

Is there a reason you waited until now to reveal the rubric?

[Assertn]

Man, any other poll I'd be completely behind you on this, but I honestly considered what it was I was voting for and decided "I don't really care, and my choice seems like it won't sway the outcome" so I voted for Arcness because of the reasons I already said.
Or you could....you know.....not vote. ;)
Sometimes I think people just have too much fun clicking radio buttons.

[XanBcoo]

I also like clicking the "Go Advanced" button when I edit my posts.

It makes me feel like I'm actually doing something exciting.

[Board of Command]

Is there a reason you waited until now to reveal the rubric?
I thought "e-penis" would be common knowledge here, but apparently not. At first I just brushed it off by saying "vote for whoever you want," but that has backfired as shown in this thread.

[joker-kun]

joker, referring to yourself as joker-kun is like referring to yourself in the third-person, or worse giving yourself a cute nickname. "Albert Eintstien" is "definately" rolling in his grave.
I'm sure Galileo is rolling in his after being compared to a puffed up moron like you. Cheers.

PS: Sorry I don't have as much time as you to proof read my posts on a forum. I thought I should say sorry now, cause i'm sure one day i'll be working for you in your global company. Since you know, being a lifeless troll AND having proper spelling mean everything. You've got to become something huge in life for that, right?

[Animeniax]

He banned me for putting "..." at the end of a sentence and he said "no ings" That was a weird day.

Yes but you seem to have an objection towards every single opinion made. You contradict others for the sake of being noticed.

If someone votes Haku, you give 30 reasons to not vote for him, so they vote SK and you give another 30 to not vote for him. What exactly is your goal?I think you're helping to blow my omnipresence out of proportion. I just suggested Xan not mess up the vote, the same as others have suggested. But oh, if I say it, it's a huge conspiracy and I'm a troll looking for attention. Whatever man. I don't even know who haku is. Let's get back on topic.

@joker-kun: Yeah, cause there's no auto spell check function on replies. Look for the little dotted red lines.

I wonder how skewed the results of this particular poll are, with people voting for arcness based on reputation instead of personal experience. I voted for SK, but since then arcness has shown some e-dickery, but in meaningless ways like upping my warning level or threatening to ban me on irc. That can't really match up against SK's relentless foolishness.

[SK]

Now that we have the rubric, I shouldn't have even been involved in this contest.

[Kraco]

I wonder how skewed the results of this particular poll are, with people voting for arcness based on reputation instead of personal experience.

If personal experience was needed in voting, I would probably never have voted in any municipal or national elections... Nor would have a great deal of other people, and the voting rates would have looked much sadder. I mean, how many for example in the USA could claim they had personally talked with both Bush and Al Gore before deciding whom to vote for in the 2000 election? 99% of people just decided based on their reputation and other things like party, etc. Same thing here. You just have to pick a name based on whatever, and that's it. And it's nobody else's business who is your candidate.

[Animeniax]

In an election such as you speak, personal experience with the candidates involves knowing his values and policies on the topics you are concerned about. That is all the personal interaction necessary for you to make an informed decision about whether to vote for this candidate. He need not have shaken your hand or kissed your baby for you to know what he stands for.

In this forum people interact via posts and irc chats, and personal interaction consists of reading what a person posts or says whether or not it is directed at you, and not necessarily a one-on-one conversation. If you have not read any of a person's posts or chat sessions, how can you make a knowledgeable vote for him? If not a knowledgeable vote, then why vote at all? Though it also doesn't work, that's why there's an electoral college in the US election system. Otherwise, Paris Hilton would be the next president of the US.

Btw, by this rubric, I should have won already.

[SK]

If personal experience was needed in voting, I would probably never have voted in any municipal or national elections... Nor would have a great deal of other people, and the voting rates would have looked much sadder. I mean, how many for example in the USA could claim they had personally talked with both Bush and Al Gore before deciding whom to vote for in the 2000 election? 99% of people just decided based on their reputation and other things like party, etc. Same thing here. You just have to pick a name based on whatever, and that's it. And it's nobody else's business who is your candidate.

Wow......that was really dumb.

[Yukimura]

E-penis criteria:

- Ego
- Physical possessions (e.g. kickass computer)
- Skill/knowledge in some relevant field (i.e. an anime guru)
- Negative interaction with others (e.g. SK, Y, Animeniax, mage, Mutata, etc...)
- Perceived difference between real-life behavior and e-behavior (bigger the better)


If this rubric had been posted in the beginning it would have made all of this whole contest a lot easier and more entertaining b/c the contestants could have campaigned for themselves within this framework, instead of just intimidating everyone on IRC to vote for them or doing nothing.



Btw, by this rubric, I should have won already.
I'm interested to see where this goes. I say put up or shut up. You have plenty of ego and lots of negative interaction with others. But show us some evidence of kickass physical possessions, or some skills/knowledge/clout of an e-badass nature, preferably technical, but gaming or anime knowledge would work. As to differences between rl and e-behavior I don't think anyone would take your word on any of your claims on how you act in the real world so we should just throw that out.

[Kraco]

It still seems no different to me: If you have to pick from two people, you have to base it on something. In RL elections if you know nothing about one candidate, you can very well vote for the other who might be a little bit more familiar. Or you could read some questionnaire results that are aplenty before the election, or watch some TV shows where they put the candidates against each other.

However, what's the difference compared to here? The candidates in these contests have posted in these threads, which is equivalent to those preelection campaign infos Animeniax referred to. The personal experience would be mainly from times before these contests, from the forums or irc. In real life you might have followed how the candidate behaved before that particular election for years in previous posts, and this is what I was referring to: I have no great interest in politics and basically the presidential elections have been the only ones where I really thought I knew something about some of the candidates beforehand (well, in that sense my example was dumb, I'll give you that, SK, I should have picked up some less grand election instead as an example. I guess everybody knew Bush and Al Gore beforehand in the US).

[XanBcoo]

Goddamn you guys can bitch.

LET'S TAKE THIS REALLY SERIOUSLY, HUH?

We have the criteria for voting now, so hopefully this will eliminate any more whining for the rest of the polls so the contest can be pointless/funny. Y'know, like it was supposed to be.

Edit: And for the record, I agree with Kraco. I also feel I have enough experience with Arcness/Haku from reading through the IRC thread to determine that he's got what SK doesn't. It wasn't totally based on rep.

[Animeniax]

Well it doesn't say anywhere that you have to vote.

Look at Xan's post, he states he was going to vote for SK because he doesn't know arcness, but then got confused because of arcness's reputation. This is in direct contradiction to what you just posted:

In RL elections if you know nothing about one candidate, you can very well vote for the other who might be a little bit more familiar.

My opinion is that if you don't know what you're dealing with, leave it be. That's why I don't vote in public elections. However, I do plan to vote for Hillary just to mess with this right-wing old coot at work. I told him I'd vote for her just to cancel out his vote. Funny thing is, neither of our votes matter.

[Kraco]

Well it doesn't say anywhere that you have to vote.

Yeah, well. That's only a matter of personal opinion and principles. In the RL I've voted in each and every election for as long as I've been allowed (been over 18 years old). But that's just how I personally feel the citizens of democracies should act. After all, those elections are the supreme power in our systems. But I admit more often than not I really didn't know who I was voting for, but voted nonetheless. And as I have such a habit in the RL, somehow it gets carried over to the net, and I tend to click those radio buttons every time there's a chance...


Look at Xan's post, he states he was going to vote for SK because he doesn't know arcness, but then got confused because of arcness's reputation.

Second hand reputation might sound like a lousy way to choose your candidate as it could justifiably be called joining the throng, but let's consider this particular contest: e-penis. Why, you know, having a huge reputation that even leaks into the consciousness of people having no first hand experience actually is a very strong sign of a big e-penis! A horde of people won't mindlessly chant the name of a nobody.

[Board of Command]

I don't know where all this talk about public elections came from. You're not voiting for the person. You're voting for what the person stands for and claims to do if he/she is elected. You're voting for the party platform. The way the candidates present themselves certainly affect the outcome of the voting, but in general people vote for party platforms. What a candidate does on his Sunday afternoons is completely irrelevant in most cases.

A lot of people don't vote precisely because they don't know who to vote for. You have to spend time reading all the party platforms if you want to make an informed decision, and most people are too lazy to do that. Simple as that.


But I admit more often than not I really didn't know who I was voting for, but voted nonetheless. And as I have such a habit in the RL, somehow it gets carried over to the net, and I tend to click those radio buttons every time there's a chance...
I admit I do this in online votes a lot, but that's a lot different from voting in real elections where the results actually affect your life. Voting for "random" candidates defeats the whole point of democracy and the voting system. If you don't know who to vote for because you didn't bother to do research, then just don't vote. There's no shame in that. It's not like you pay more taxes for abstaining.

[masamuneehs]

this is madness! serious internet business

[Assertn]

People like Kraco are the reason why we have the Electoral College.

[SK]

People like Kraco are the reason why we have the Electoral College.

ROFL.....Kraco got WTFPWND by Assertn.

[Kraco]

People like Kraco are the reason why we have the Electoral College.


ROFL.....Kraco got WTFPWND by Assertn.

Ho... There's one flaw in that logic, though. For you see, there's no such thing in Finland. We elect the president directly, not via a collection of dusty old men. So, if people like me would give birth to an electoral college system, that would mean we would also have one. And because we don't, logic dictates it's not due to people like me.

[joker-kun]

In an election such as you speak, personal experience with the candidates involves knowing his values and policies on the topics you are concerned about. That is all the personal interaction necessary for you to make an informed decision about whether to vote for this candidate. He need not have shaken your hand or kissed your baby for you to know what he stands for.

In this forum people interact via posts and irc chats, and personal interaction consists of reading what a person posts or says whether or not it is directed at you, and not necessarily a one-on-one conversation. If you have not read any of a person's posts or chat sessions, how can you make a knowledgeable vote for him? If not a knowledgeable vote, then why vote at all? Though it also doesn't work, that's why there's an electoral college in the US election system. Otherwise, Paris Hilton would be the next president of the US.

Btw, by this rubric, I should have won already.
This post isn't in direct response to the quote above. Throughout this whole topic you've been talking about how you shouldn't vote for Arcness if you don't know him. Going by YOUR logic that you've been defending shouldn't that mean you, yourself should not participate in the voting at all?

You started an argument with Xan because he voted based on reputation. Yet you avoid admitting that you voted against someone you yourself have said multiple times don't even know. Correct me if i'm wrong but I think voting based on repuation is more legit than voting for someone because you know them and don't know the other. So really, you shouldn't have even voted in this competition.

But (yes I know you're not suppose to start a sentence with but) i'm sure you're going to say this isn't the case, but instead you voted for SK because you have witnessed his 'e-dickery'. Really that's just your hypocritical way of saying you voted for him for his repuation on the forums. Face it, you're biased, you voted for SK because of his repuation on the forums, you're bashing people for voting for Arcness for his repuation on IRC.

This whole debate or argument which ever way you want to look at it was started because you couldn't admit you were wrong. Which is sad considering this is the internet. Tell me, is it coincidence that 75% of the IRC channel doesn't like you? I knew about you simply from them talking about you. Among those were mods of this forum. Not to mention the two people who almost everyone considers the 'nicest' people on both IRC and the Forum disagree with you, have proved you wrong and have even bothered posting in response to you. I'm sure you'll have 101 reasons against this though. We're all wrong, and you're right, according to you.

Before you waste your time typing about how you don't care what people on IRC or the forums think about you, don't bother. I hope you don't, if anything it will show improvement on your part.


ROFL.....Kraco got WTFPWND by Assertn.
Doesn't really seem like someone with a 200+ IQ would say...

[Assertn]

Ho... There's one flaw in that logic, though. For you see, there's no such thing in Finland. We elect the president directly, not via a collection of dusty old men. So, if people like me would give birth to an electoral college system, that would mean we would also have one. And because we don't, logic dictates it's not due to people like me.
Not necessarily. Surely, there are many people like you in the US, hence us having one.

However, some countries apparently haven't caught on that deriving chief executive power from the general uninformed masses is only a good idea in theory.

[rockmanj]

How about that...SK vs. Arcness in the e-penis contest has sparked heated debates about democratic representation and voting ethics @_@...who saw that coming??

[Board of Command]

But (yes I know you're not suppose to start a sentence with but) i'm sure you're going to say this isn't the case, but instead you voted for SK because you have witnessed his 'e-dickery'. Really that's just your hypocritical way of saying you voted for him for his repuation on the forums. Face it, you're biased, you voted for SK because of his repuation on the forums, you're bashing people for voting for Arcness for his repuation on IRC.
This is the issue though. Animeniax is basically saying that if you don't actually visit IRC and meet Arcness, then don't vote for Arcness simply because people say he's got a real big e-penis there. I would guess that around half of the voters are forum-only people who have never witnessed Arcness's deeds. Voting for SK because you've never met Arcness is fine. Yes, it's biased. Yes, it's uninformed. However, if you're not going to learn about both candidates, then you might as well just go with your gut feelings and vote based on what you know, instead of what others know. He's saying don't let your judgment be swayed by how others are voting. He's saying don't bandwagon.

He's not saying you shouldn't vote for Arcness at all. You can get to know Arcness by reading the huge IRC thread. There's plenty of material there. Only then can forum-goers make an informed decision, and that's what it all comes down to: making informed decisions. However, you can also argue that if Arcness has such a reputation, then that's pretty evident of his e-penis deeds. That may be the case for some, and that's fine by me.

I'm not really siding with anyone here because I still don't know if my own viewpoint matches that of either side's. I just get the feeling that sometimes people argue with Animeniax not because he's wrong, but because he's Animeniax. How about everyone just hold hands and have teh buttsecks?

[Kraco]

Not necessarily. Surely, there are many people like you in the US, hence us having one.

However, some countries apparently haven't caught on that deriving chief executive power from the general uninformed masses is only a good idea in theory.

In my opinion for a democracy to work in practice the most important thing is that people actually vote. Sure, some of them may be grossly uninformed, but politicians with any sense of responsibility should then in turn strive to inform those people.

Besides, who's to judge who is informed properly and who is not? If a person thinks everything's cool and so chooses to remain "uninformed" and votes the same people already in power without knowing anything more, that's a message to keep things as they are. If a pissed off person goes and votes at random, that's a message any random candidate would handle things better than those currently in power.

[Animeniax]

This post isn't in direct response to the quote above. Throughout this whole topic you've been talking about how you shouldn't vote for Arcness if you don't know him. Going by YOUR logic that you've been defending shouldn't that mean you, yourself should not participate in the voting at all?

My point as it pertains to this thread is, if you know and/or dislike someone more than you know and/or dislike someone else, vote for the first guy. If I know SK is a punk, and know nothing about arcness, then I would vote for SK. I'm not going to forget all of SK's e-dickery because arcness might be a bigger dick. I voted for SK because of firsthand experience with his e-dickery, including his many troll posts calling me and others f*gg*ts because he disagrees with you. If knowing about one but nothing about the other is not sufficient, then refrain from voting at all. For me, it is sufficient, and people saying "trust me, arcness is a bigger dick" won't change my vote.

I'm only bashing people for voting based solely off reputation (so and so said he's an a-hole) instead of actual experience (like reading his posts). What really got me going was Xan admitting he dislikes SK, but wasn't sure who to vote for because other people dislike arcness (hence his reputation). Is this Xan's vote he's casting, or does he represent a collective we don't know about?

I'm not wrong, I just have a differing viewpoint on a debatable issue. I assume you mean Kraco and Xan when you talk about the 2 nicest guys on the internet. Funny, I was going to use that as an insult against them both, but decided against it, or just hadn't gotten around to it. They haven't proven anything, just that herd mentality will be the downfall of democracy. I don't care how nice they are either. Niceness has nothing to do with intelligence. And I don't care if you don't like me. I didn't like you first.

BoC is dead-on with what I am saying. I am not alone in my fight to save humanity.

[joker-kun]

My point as it pertains to this thread is, if you know and/or dislike someone more than you know and/or dislike someone else, vote for the first guy. If I know SK is a punk, and know nothing about arcness, then I would vote for SK. I'm not going to forget all of SK's e-dickery because arcness might be a bigger dick. I voted for SK because of firsthand experience with his e-dickery, including his many troll posts calling me and others f*gg*ts because he disagrees with you. If knowing about one but nothing about the other is not sufficient, then refrain from voting at all. For me, it is sufficient, and people saying "trust me, arcness is a bigger dick" won't change my vote.

I'm only bashing people for voting based solely off reputation (so and so said he's an a-hole) instead of actual experience (like reading his posts). What really got me going was Xan admitting he dislikes SK, but wasn't sure who to vote for because other people dislike arcness (hence his reputation). Is this Xan's vote he's casting, or does he represent a collective we don't know about?

I'm not wrong, I just have a differing viewpoint on a debatable issue. I assume you mean Kraco and Xan when you talk about the 2 nicest guys on the internet. Funny, I was going to use that as an insult against them both, but decided against it, or just hadn't gotten around to it. They haven't proven anything, just that herd mentality will be the downfall of democracy. I don't care how nice they are either. Niceness has nothing to do with intelligence. And I don't care if you don't like me. I didn't like you first.

BoC is dead-on with what I am saying. I am not alone in my fight to save humanity.
You assumed wrong. I don't even know Xan. It's Kraco and Yuki i'm talking about. As for niceness reflecting ones intelligence. You're right, it doesn't. Re read what I said, it was never referring to intelligence.

Basically everyone's point in here is you do things to purposely attract attention or get on people's nerves. If you want to be technical, No that it isn't what you said at first.


Arcness might be bigger and badder on irc, but he/she/it doesn't participate enough on the forums. irc chatter is fleeting, forums keep your stupidity saved in hard format for future users to see, so SK got my vote.
That is. Yuki and I disagreed with you on that comment. On that comment, you ARE wrong. With IRC logs and with the IRC thread IRC chat IS saved in hard format. Then you decided to get defensive, make a ridiculous comparison to Galileo and slowly your argument changed.


They called Galileo foolish for saying the earth rotated around the sun. See how wrong they were. If this poll were on irc, it might be different, but here on the forums, SK is the bigger dumb kid.
That is shown above. So the original issue was if IRC should be put in consideration for ones vote. Clearly it should . You avoided accepting that or even answering that by changing your argument as I said above.


You're considering voting for someone because some other guys like or dislike him on irc? If you have no experience with Arcness' bs, then don't vote him, otherwise this contest is meaningless. Try thinking for yourself once in a while.

joker, referring to yourself as joker-kun is like referring to yourself in the third-person, or worse giving yourself a cute nickname. "Albert Eintstien" is "definately" rolling in his grave.
That was your next post. As you can see, you completely avoided agreeing or disagreeing with my and Yuki's point. Instead you took it upon yourself to disagree with Xan. I really don't care, once again I don't know Xan. After that though you quoted me. You made absolutely no attempt to talk normal. Instead you tried to insult me twice. Both times insulting yourself. Considering animaniax as far as I know refers to the three, so what are you plural? I already addressed the second insult in one of my posts, don't see a need to do so again.


Taking advice and bandwagoning are two different things.
BoC was the first one to mention Bandwagoning. During the discussion on page two you followed and made the argument your own. The fact is you made a direct attempt to insult Yuki and myself because we disagreed with your assesment that IRC is unimportant. You made no attempt to continue that discussion. As I said, you instead insulted us. The only reason I continued to post was to show how you slowly changed after each point you made was answered with an opposing point.

The fact is, you're looking for attention. You don't know how to carry a proper discussion. You're like an immature elementary school child that says "I know you are but what am I" whenever someone doesn't agree with them. If you said what you said above from the beginning I doubt anyone would have replied to you. If they did, Boc would probably be right, they did it just because of how unliked you are. That isn't the case here though.

[complich8]

both this thread and this whole contest make me sad.

[Board of Command]

This contest is lawlz. Man, I love myself.

[Kraco]

They haven't proven anything, just that herd mentality will be the downfall of democracy.

Herd mentality is one of the cornerstones of democracy. That's what parties are partially built upon: A core of people who design the ideology and then the masses that find it agreeable and join it and then the other masses who join it (or just vote for it) because others are joining it, thus giving the party extra strength. And they all are needed: Some people want to lead, some want to know what's going on but still live and better their ordinary lives as factory workers, clerks, priests, ship captains, soldiers; and then some who don't care but want to continue their lives as they have continued so far, and trust that hope on people they don't know yet still think it's ok for whatever personal reasons. And as has been proven by the years, it can work just fine.


I'm only bashing people for voting based solely off reputation (so and so said he's an a-hole) instead of actual experience (like reading his posts). What really got me going was Xan admitting he dislikes SK, but wasn't sure who to vote for because other people dislike arcness (hence his reputation).

Well, few people consciously want to base their opinions entirely on what others think, but if 20 people verify Arc is a hopeless edick, you'd think that counts for something? Unless you think they are all lying for whatever reasons. At the very least it should encourage to find out the truth. But since we aren't choosing the president here, a regular lazy guy might opt to believe what that bunch of other people said, and validate the wisdom of that mentality, to a degree. Because it couldn't be proven wrong, either.


You assumed wrong. I don't even know Xan. It's Kraco and Yuki i'm talking about.

Secretly I have always yearned to be a tragic, wicked person, but that's not the reason why I must decline this honour. KitKat all by herself takes the first three seats as the nicest person. Never seen a more nice character. I mean, she's even ready to knit scarfs to total strangers she only "knows" from the irc and the forums! Truly an esaint if one ever existed.

Yeah, it would have been insanely funny if she had been included in this contest...

[Jadugar]

BOC has made a serious error in making this match's poll. There should be only one choice at the top, VOTE FOR ARCNESS.

IRC or gotwoot, Arcness RULES !

What I want to know is, who has been voting for SK?


P.S Why is everybody picking on Animeniax? He seems like such a nice guy. Have you no shame/e-penis?

[XanBcoo]

If it makes anyone feel any better, the reputation thing I mentioned was just an offhand comment. I can't help but feel partly responsible for this mess.

I already explained I made my decision based on stuff I've been reading in the IRC thread for the past 2 years. The huge reputation surrounding his e-dickery reinforced it.

I'm sorry. I'll remember to make more informed choices on internet voting in the future.

Funny, I was going to use that as an insult against them both, but decided against it, or just hadn't gotten around to it. They haven't proven anything, just that herd mentality will be the downfall of democracy.
That's a pretty drastic conclusion, considering I've not once voted since I turned 18, precisely because I've not felt myself informed enough to make a proper judgment call in major elections. Leave me out of your tirade.

[Jadugar]

.............meanwhile the search continues for the next gotwoot idol.

[Yukimura]

Wow, I think this whole thread is great what with people talking about democracy's pro's and cons and the herd mentality etc.
I have to thank Animeniax though, because he is actaully a pretty decent post generator.
A lot of the things said in response to his posts are worth thinking about. I mean when do we really get into debates about real life issues except for when some troll misuses a fancy concept or misrepresents an idea.

@joker-kun: Thanks for the compliment, I appreciate it.

Since this debate started from the premise that people shouldn't vote based on anything but their own knowledge I'd have to agree, but what everyone who isn't Animeniax seems to be saying is that word of mouth from others is a valid form of knowledge with which to make a decision. What's so wrong with taking other peoples opinions into account before making a decision?

[Assertn]

I don't see where other peoples' opinions are a justifiable factor in the decision a person makes when voting between candidates. The whole point of voting is to incorporate your own personal preference into the mixture of general conjecture. If all you're concerned about is that the popular opinion wins, then you can accomplish that just as easily by not voting at all.

If you need to rely on the input of others, you should opt for the objective details or references that others might wish to emphasize, rather than just their opinions.

In other words, instead of voting for candidate A over candidate B because more of your friends like A, you should vote for candidate A because A supports issues C, D, and E, which you have discovered through the cases your friends have brought up.

[Board of Command]

Since this debate started from the premise that people shouldn't vote based on anything but their own knowledge I'd have to agree, but what everyone who isn't Animeniax seems to be saying is that word of mouth from others is a valid form of knowledge with which to make a decision. What's so wrong with taking other peoples opinions into account before making a decision?
There's nothing wrong with taking others' opinions into account, but that's a whole other scenario. The scenario being discussed here is using other people's opinions as the foundation of your decision. (This is not directed at Xanbcoo, by the way.) By doing so you are starting with a bias.

If you have no knowledge about the candidates, then other people's opinions is not the first place to start learning. You have to construct your own opinions first, then let others influence you if need be. You don't start from scratch and just go with what others are doing.

Example of textbook bandwagoning: Windows Vista. I can guarantee you that at least 75% of the people bashing Vista have no idea what they're talking about and have never used it for more than 1 hour.

[SK]

Doesn't really seem like someone with a 200+ IQ would say...

206 buddy. BTW, fuck you.

EDIT: And Jadugar needs to have his posting privileges taken away.

[joker-kun]

206 buddy. BTW, fuck you.

EDIT: And Jadugar needs to have his posting privileges taken away.

Drop the 0, you've got your IQ and the number of worthwhile posts from you.

Dude...don't just post to flame people. User warned.

[Animeniax]

You assumed wrong. I don't even know Xan. It's Kraco and Yuki i'm talking about. As for niceness reflecting ones intelligence. You're right, it doesn't. Re read what I said, it was never referring to intelligence.
Good lord man, this is the second or third time we've replied to each other and you felt it necessary to write a dissertation? And you say I'm the attention whore? Yukimura is one of the nicest people here?? He's in this same contest for being an e-dick...

My purpose was to lambaste Xan for presumably letting other's opinions override his personal experience. That was it. You others felt the need to come after me, and that started this debate, which is actually pretty interesting anyway. I was wrong about irc being fleeting, but it was a flippant remark and not meant to be taken so seriously, so I didn't care to respond to your assertions about irc logs. To me, if you participate in irc chats, that's one thing. I don't think you get the same feel for a person from reading the logs. Xan admitted he had no experience with arcness's assholery (whether it be on the forums or from reading irc logs). He changed it later to say he read some irc logs, but my post was well before that and in reaction to his first statement.

Look at what I wrote about thinking for yourself, then compare that to the term "band wagoning". BoC summarized what I was talking about. So instead of writing out my argument each time, I shortened it to band-wagoning to make it easier for the kiddies to follow, though that doesn't seem to have helped, and instead aroused fiery disagreement from the bandwagoners.

[kAi]

So, if you watched the news and the news reporter said
news reporter "This bad man has just killed his friend"
but you didnt see it, and you didnt see video evidence of him killing his friend

would this not make him a bad man?

-----

random gotwooter "arcness is bad, he bans people for nothing"
animeniax "he aint bad, i didnt see him do it"

[Animeniax]

Terrible yet appropriate comparison. What if the guy killed in self-defense? What if the friend was even more evil and engaged in another criminal act, and the first guy had a crisis of conscience and changed his ways and had to stop his friend at any cost? After all, evil men keep evil company, right? Then maybe you see evil guy number one and shoot him dead, then find out he was a good guy after all, and the media only distorted his image to garner ratings and sell advertising time. Now you're in prison for murder and all your new friends in prison are evil people too. It's a vicious cycle.

random gotwooter: arcness is bad cause some other folks say he's bad
me: I don't know the whole story about arcness, so I'll reserve judgement. However, I do know SK is an evil guy, so I'll vote for him.

[rockmanj]

So, if you watched the news and the news reporter said
news reporter "This bad man has just killed his friend"
but you didnt see it, and you didnt see video evidence of him killing his friend

would this not make him a bad man?

-----

random gotwooter "arcness is bad, he bans people for nothing"
animeniax "he aint bad, i didnt see him do it"


well, if you assume that the news is objective, then yes; however, just the use of the word 'bad' is subjective, as that makes a judgement that something is not 'good'. but the concept of good and bad all depends on circumstance and personal ethics and such, so sone could argue, concerning the case above, that there is not enough information to say that the man is bad just because he killed his friend. it couldve been in self-defense, or a myriad of other reasons.

[kAi]

take the news reporter out,
and make it a friend of yours

and said "this guy is bad, he killed the guy for no reason"

[rockmanj]

Do you assume that he knows everything about the situation? everyone has a reason for every action, even if it isnt explicit.

[kAi]

man, why must you take things out of context?
it's a simple example, take it as it is

does it even matter if he doesnt know?
some guy walks up to someone in the street pulls a gun on someone and shoots them?
does this not make them a bad person? or a killer? or a murderer?
does it not make them such a thing?

and then your friend tells you that he is, and saw it
but you say i didn't see it, its not true

[Board of Command]

Killer? Definitely. You can't deny facts.
Murderer? Yes.
Bad person? You don't have enough information, and neither did your friend.

Acknowledging an event is completely different from understanding it. You can't deny that it happened, but you can reserve judgment on it until you do. Learning about it second-hand certainly doesn't help your understanding. It's inevitable that you'lll make some preliminary judgments on the situation, what what those judgments are need to have been derived out of some background information.

Think back to the Virgina Tech incident a few months ago. When I first heard of the news, the first thing that came to mind was not "that dude is a crazy ass psycho!" Instead, my first thoughts were "why the hell would he do such a thing?"

[rockmanj]

I never take things as they are; i question almost everything, and i wouldnt say its not true, but i would ask my friend what else happened, and if he didnt know, i'd say, yea, that sucks that someone got shot, I dont like dealing with conjecture, really, so im not gonna assume anything.

[Animeniax]

I'm not big on "an enemy of my friend is my enemy" or "an enemy of my enemy is my friend". Too many variables. So the best choice is to find out for yourself. You can have a gut reaction, but before you do something drastic (like voting for someone or cursing them for killing their friend), you should get more information. If we get back to the voting topic, the reasoning put forth by Xan, Kraco, and others is that because their friends said someone was a certain way, then he must be that way.

[Assertn]

Kai, that's a pretty awful example.

Now what you're trying to do is use a scenario where a person is objectively identified from a third person omniscient perspective.

Since none of us are third person omniscient here, none of us can absolutely confirm that the man in question is a "bad man." As creatures who only see things from first person, we have no choice but to comprehend the world through our own perceptions.

How about we take things to a more real-world example. Many news stations have been accused of showing signs of favoritism between candidates when they present news that pertain to specific presidential parties. Just as the credibility of a reporter might sway you into believing that man is in fact, a "bad man," the credibility of a news station might sway you to sympathize with their political preferences. If a news anchor man goes on live television and tells you that candidate A is a "bad man" without justification for it, then it's nothing more than an opinion, and should not be regarded.

Nonetheless, the whole ordeal is deceptive and wrong.

[rockmanj]

Kai, that's a pretty awful example.

Now what you're trying to do is use a scenario where a person is objectively identified from a third person omniscient perspective.

Since none of us are third person omniscient here, none of us can absolutely confirm that the man in question is a "bad man." As creatures who only see things from first person, we have no choice but to comprehend the world through our own perceptions.

How about we take things to a more real-world example. Many news stations have been accused of showing signs of favoritism between candidates when they present news that pertain to specific presidential parties. Just as the credibility of a reporter might sway you into believing that man is in fact, a "bad man," the credibility of a news station might sway you to sympathize with their political preferences. If a news anchor man goes on live television and tells you that candidate A is a "bad man" without justification for it, then it's nothing more than an opinion, and should not be regarded.

Nonetheless, the whole ordeal is deceptive and wrong.

heh...i was just about to use almost that exact example...beat me to it (darn youse!!)

[Kraco]

If we get back to the voting topic, the reasoning put forth by Xan, Kraco, and others is that because their friends said someone was a certain way, then he must be that way.

Now you are misinterpreting what I've been saying. I have written too long in the past, so I'll keep this shorter: My message was that if you don't want to use time to do first hand research (experience), then just listen to what others say before voting (reputation). But vote nonetheless. That's all I'm saying: If you aren't interested in doing any research before voting, then don't, but use your right to vote in any case.

Even I confess that's hardly enlightened, but my stance (as subjective as the opposing view for sure) is that people should vote, even with limited knowledge. Though even I wouldn't go as far as saying people should take a dice with them to the booth...

Like so many people here, I have a university education. I don't consider what people say as objective truth by default. But if you have to do something that matters little to you to begin with, I don't see why not listen to them.

[Animeniax]

My message was that if you don't want to use time to do first hand research (experience), then just listen to what others say before voting (reputation). But vote nonetheless. That's all I'm saying: If you aren't interested in doing any research before voting, then don't, but use your right to vote in any case.
I still stand by the principle that you should not participate if you aren't going to take the time to become informed about who and what you are voting for, at least in important situations like public office, though your stance is admirable if not realistic

As far as a poll on these forums, relying on reputation in the absence of personal experience isn't such a bad thing. However, letting others' opinions override your own personal experience is bad, unless you are dumb or crazy, in which case you should listen to others.

[kAi]

So, have you guys never taken into consideration of what has been said by other people?
Another way of gaining information is from word of mouth, I think it's a good way to receive simple informaton and get an understanding of things about certain events, etc. All the information that you receive from other people, is the first thing you do go look up everything about it, to know more? (I know sometimes you would because it interests you more)I think many times you don't need to go get more, because the word of mouth is sufficient information to get a quick understanding about someone or something, and if the information is coming from a source that you deem ok, what's wrong with what they say? or to make a decision based on what they say?

This poll is about who is a bigger e-dick, you don't need every little bit of information to make an informed decision, alot of the time it can be answered by someone who has seen it, whether that be on the forums, irc, etc.

[Assertn]

So, have you guys never taken into consideration of what has been said by other people?
Another way of gaining information is from word of mouth, I think it's a good way to receive simple informaton and get an understanding of things about certain events, etc. All the information that you receive from other people, is the first thing you do go look up everything about it, to know more?


If you need to rely on the input of others, you should opt for the objective details or references that others might wish to emphasize, rather than just their opinions.

In other words, instead of voting for candidate A over candidate B because more of your friends like A, you should vote for candidate A because A supports issues C, D, and E, which you have discovered through the cases your friends have brought up.
Yes.....what I said before.....
But your previous post did not at all imply this.

@Kraco: What's so important about voting that it takes precedence over actually educating yourself on the subject? If there is a good candidate and a bad candidate, and your uninformed contribution turns out to be in favor of the bad candidate, then didn't you just hurt the system more than help it?

[Kraco]

@Kraco: What's so important about voting that it takes precedence over actually educating yourself on the subject? If there is a good candidate and a bad candidate, and your uninformed contribution turns out to be in favor of the bad candidate, then didn't you just hurt the system more than help it?

Well, if people had the mentality they would feel an obligation to vote, eventually they might start to look at facts little by little. But if they never bother to even consider voting, thinking they wouldn't even know whom to vote for, they will just never vote, never learn and never affect the future of their own country / state / community. And that means giving more power to those who do vote every time, regardless of what manner of people they might be.

And besides, one big reason why I vote is that if you don't vote, you have no right to complain afterwards.

[Board of Command]

And besides, one big reason why I vote is that if you don't vote, you have no right to complain afterwards.
You can also argue that from the other side. If you have no knowledge of the candidates you're voting for, then you have no right to complain about an unfavorable outcome.

[Kraco]

You can also argue that from the other side. If you have no knowledge of the candidates you're voting for, then you have no right to complain about an unfavorable outcome.

The kind of complaining I meant is mainly along the lines: I voted but my candidate failed to make it to the x and now the fools are doing this and that or if a miracle happens and (s)he's in: I voted the scumbag but he's doing absolutely nothing... Damn all lying politicians.

But if you didn't even vote? What can you say? You can't complain about the people in because you didn't even try to affect who got in, and because you had no interest in who's in, you can't complain about the decisions they make or fail to make.

That's my simple-minded moral reasoning.

[SK]

The name SK just creates classic threads.

[Board of Command]

The kind of complaining I meant is mainly along the lines: I voted but my candidate failed to make it to the x and now the fools are doing this and that or if a miracle happens and (s)he's in: I voted the scumbag but he's doing absolutely nothing... Damn all lying politicians.

But if you didn't even vote? What can you say? You can't complain about the people in because you didn't even try to affect who got in, and because you had no interest in who's in, you can't complain about the decisions they make or fail to make.

That's my simple-minded moral reasoning.
That's an entirely different issue. The same "rights to complain" don't apply if you don't know anything about the candidates. Like I said, you don't get the right to complain if you're just voting blindly. You shouldn't vote because you want the right to complain later. You vote because you want a say in your country. You vote because the party you're voting for benefits yourself. You're not voting for that purpose; you're just voting because you want a scapegoat in case you don't like the outcome.

Since you really have no interest in who wins, I guess going by your criteria that you also don't get the right to complain. Affecting the outcome and caring about the outcome are two completely different things. Many people recycle garbage. How many of them actually give a crap about the environment?

[Kraco]

That's an entirely different issue. The same "rights to complain" don't apply if you don't know anything about the candidates. Like I said, you don't get the right to complain if you're just voting blindly.

I can't go that far in my reasoning. Maybe you are right. I have never voted blindly and with zero interest so I wouldn't know from personal experience. Maybe if such a thing happened then it would void the right to complain. But on the other hand, why would such a voter even want to complain? I'm not really talking about absolute extremes here, for in the end you can't force people to vote, as the voting rates reveal, and thus zero interest people don't end up voting. It's hard to say whether they would still want to complain or not.

[Jadugar]

I want a re-match of Kraco vs BOC... I mean Kraco vs SK.

[Board of Command]

I can't go that far in my reasoning. Maybe you are right. I have never voted blindly and with zero interest so I wouldn't know from personal experience. Maybe if such a thing happened then it would void the right to complain. But on the other hand, why would such a voter even want to complain? I'm not really talking about absolute extremes here, for in the end you can't force people to vote, as the voting rates reveal, and thus zero interest people don't end up voting. It's hard to say whether they would still want to complain or not.
I don't know. You're the one who admits to voting for the sake of voting in case you want to complain about it afterwards. I have no idea how much interest/care you had in the votes and I don't think that's even relevant.

For the record, I've never voted because I turned 18 just last year.


I want a re-match of Kraco vs BOC... I mean Kraco vs SK.
I'll kindly refer you to this post:

http://forums.gotwoot.net/showthread.php?p=340345&postcount=26