User talk:Claret/Oh My Oh My

Anet and bugs

Please try not to be so accusative - it seems like every time someone comments about events that are rarely seen, you reply with something along the lines of "Anet won't admit to their bugs, so we can't know anything". Anet admits to bugs quite often. This is a prominent example, but there are many more. Just because they don't respond about the bugs the you are interested in is no reason to accuse them of never responding at all. —Dr Ishmael 23:57, 3 July 2013 (UTC)

That's my opinion. ANet are an MMO developer, I am sure they have a thick skin. I read the their forums often enough to see that they are poor at admitting errors. OTOH, I don't really expect them to be. --Claret (talk) 01:06, 4 July 2013 (UTC)

And, having re-read my comment that you took exception to, it's scarecely a condemnation of ANet. It's an aside. I have been far more robust at times but, again, I can't see the problem. It's an opinion and the Internet is full of opinions, if people want to accept them or not is up to them. --Claret (talk) 01:11, 4 July 2013 (UTC)

You only have to look at GW1 for evidence that ANet hates admitting bugs. Shit isn't opinion when it's true. -Auron 02:21, 4 July 2013 (UTC)

Claret has been complaining about it in almost every post. We get it. Events are bugged and don't get fixed on the spot. Doesn't mean you have to mention it in every discussion involving events :3 Mention the bugs on the event articles and move on. We have more things to complain about, like how release content is full of grind, there's no endgame, dungeons suck, and we don't get dolls named Polla.--Relyk ~ talk < 02:30, 4 July 2013 (UTC)

Thank you Relyk, that's pretty much what I was trying to say. It may be opinion, but when you repeat it every chance you get, it becomes accusatory. —Dr Ishmael 02:45, 4 July 2013 (UTC)

@ Auron - Elegantly and succinctly put. I think, and I am not the only one, that all software ships with bugs, no problem, waiting until stuff is bug free = bankruptcy. MMOs are no different. But then MMO developers want to go, go, go to the next cool part. No one wants to be bothered devoting much time or resources to getting bugs out. Oh, they devote some. It's irritating. And retuning the "only when high local population" events, it's getting on a bit, should have been done.

If there's a problem, and only a fool or an apologist would say there is not, then ignoring it doesn't make it less true. If that problem is more significant to me and some others than it is to you commenters then who's to say that you're right and I am wrong or vice versa.

@ Relyk - It's an absolutely typical thing to hear on the Internet. Another person's complaints are whining and excessive, but your complaints are reasoned and proportional. Says who? Who's the arbiter? "complaining about it in almost every post". That's arrant nonsense.

@ Eveyone. If you don't like the comments, ignore then. I don't like a lot of things I read here but I don't feel obliged to comment on everything. I try to deal with others with who I have a disagreement in a polite manner. If I repeat my perception of a problem then surely I am not the only one.

My comments to Musha, which prompted this, was reasonable, accurate and not overstated. Quite frankly, you have stepped over the line. When I am racist/sexist etc then please feel free to interfere. Until then, if you really feel the pressing need to act as the wiki's version of PRISM and/or its thought police, don't be surprised if you don't like everything that you find. If it's not directed at you then… . And don't tell me to calm down, Relyk. No wonder I feel obliged to e-mail people to avoid this kind of thing.

I suggest you people stop reading my pages. If I have something to discuss then I will ask the person to post on my page to avoid this kind of thing. --Claret (talk) 03:03, 4 July 2013 (UTC)

I pay attention to your comments because I value them as much or more so than any post, you've invested more time into these events than pretty much anyone. And it's helped with developing the event infobox and templates. So I have a really hard time ignoring you. I don't want to sound irritated (neither does ishmael). You can bring up event issues without pointing out that they're bugged and Anet needs to fix them. I don't like bugged events either, but we can't do anything about it. It helps with discussion to avoid issues that we can't address and focus on what we can do about it. If you make a rant about all the bugged events, what ArenaNet should do about them, and how ArenaNet's philosophy should change on your userpage, I will gladly read it there and provide feedback; but not on discussion pages of articles.--Relyk ~ talk < 03:15, 4 July 2013 (UTC)

(Edit conflict) I think as per the recent discussion, we should only be dunking on people for comments that consistently and intentionally derail conversations. Since that was presumably not Claret's intent, and I don't recall seeing any flaming wreckage in recent changes, we can probably leave well enough alone. Furthermore, I don't see bringing bugs to ArenaNet's attention as a bad thing. If I were on Anet's development team, I would want to prioritize the bugs that people (in aggregate) complain about the most, because those are the bugs that have the greatest impact on their enjoyment. That being said, Claret, there is a point beyond which you're simply beating a dead horse, and you need to judge for yourself exactly when that poor horse corpse (horpse) has been punished enough. 03:18, 4 July 2013 (UTC)

Holy crap, every time I try to make a polite criticism to you it turns into a bloody shitstorm. Fine, I'll stop. —Dr Ishmael 03:28, 4 July 2013 (UTC)

That's not the case at all. People often do not realize they've fallen into a pattern until someone points it out. You certainly were not wrong in letting Claret know you thought her criticisms were becoming repetitive. 03:45, 4 July 2013 (UTC)

*sigh* You're right as always, Felix, and I overreacted. Again. And that was before my wife fixed me a martini. Yeesh. —Dr Ishmael 05:08, 4 July 2013 (UTC)

Ishmael, you criticise me and it's fine. I respond and you take exception. I was merely trying to point out that that your perception of "repetition" is skewed.

You and several of the others who have commented here are among the small number of people who read large numbers of pages. Of course you'll see repetition. What seems to have triggered your comment was my communication to someone else which you chose to read. The subject is interesting to us. Quite possibly less fascinating to others. That's the Internet, that's a wiki. If I write to someone about a problem with flakey events on their user page, [[1]] (not on a "public" page) then it's so painfully obvious that I'll mention an aspect of the problem to someone who quite probably had not seen my "rant" before. You have seen it before, quite possibly they had not. The comment was not directed at you. It was a reasonable thing to say under the circumstances, and extremely pertinent to the difficulty in establishing the truth. If I were to repeat that "rant" on more public pages, then an accusation of being accusative and repetitive might well be valid. If you read my contributions on other people's pages, you will be bound to see repetition. I make the assumption that they don't spend several hours a day reading wiki pages unless I have gathered from conversation that they do so.

You say or imply that every time you try to make a polite criticism to me, it turns into a conflict - oh, come on, you and others have made many points to me and I have thanked them for doing so and modified my behaviour appropriately. I don't agree with every point made to me, but generally I do. I found the sudden interest in altering the format, which I thought had been agreed, after I had reformatted a fairly large number of pages to be irritating. I made the mistake of saying so. Somewhat later you made a comment that I felt less than polite on a cludge I had used in experimental event list formatting and I responded though jokingly, or so I thought. There may have been another occasion that I didn't immediately toe the line, if so, it escapes me. Seems to me that a discussion that uses arguments that you don't agree with is poorly regarded. It seems to me that your use of "every time" is just a bit exaggerated.

I read your page, Relyk's and a few others. Not as many as I would like. I skim over the parts that are of no interest to me and those parts that are too technical. Not infrequently I raise my eyebrows and mutter "idiot", "what a prat" and sometimes less polite things. But I don't feel it good manners to point out other's idiosyncrasies and what I feel are their failings, maybe that's a cultural thing. I could certainly list several things that I find irritating in other people's writing but, again, that's their business. If there's something factual to point out then I may or may not comment, depending on if I feel that I have something useful to say. It's also true that if a statement irritates you or otherwise jars, then if you see it again then it will irritate/jar more.

I do communicate with ANet through the forums, their one-on-one support, and in-game bug notices. They've never complained at the volume. Maybe they have a special wastebasket just for me. --Claret (talk) 05:40, 4 July 2013 (UTC)

"on their user page, (not on a "public" page)" Every page on the wiki is public. "You say or imply that every time you try to make a polite criticism to me, it turns into a conflict" That was an overreaction, which I admitted to. —Dr Ishmael 13:29, 4 July 2013 (UTC)

Indeed every page is public, but there's a degree of exposure to some pages that isn't shared by others. I would have thought that obvious. There's a context to communication. The context that I was using my criticism of ANet was valid, reasonable and mild, IMHO. Musha had exhibited certain clues as to not having fully read all the material available. I was chatting with him/her. I honestly can't see why you felt obliged to make that comment. Musha's talk page, although interesting, is not one of the mainstream wiki pages. I doubt that many people would have it on their lists. On the other hand, Guild_Wars_2_Wiki_talk:Location_formatting is a more public place as is the template discussion page, and if I were to be repetitive there, your comment might be valid. But basically, you made a comment which I considered out of line, out of context and just plain wrong. I replied to your criticism. This obviously disturbed you. We're at an impasse. You can't agree with my point of view, I can't agree with yours. Probably it's best that this conversation peters out. --Claret (talk) 13:49, 4 July 2013 (UTC)

Since people comment on talk pages as well as read them in addition to article talk pages, you can see how some users might feel you are beating a dead horse on the subject when the topic of events comes up. May I very politely ask you avoid bringing it up in the future? We can talk events without mentioning Anet needs to fix whatever.--Relyk ~ talk < 22:35, 4 July 2013 (UTC)

Relyk, you're good at digging stuff up. Just how many times have I mentioned this? A few, many, a huge number of times? And am I warned off using the comment in context? Is ANet upset? It's their wiki, if they don't like it then they can block/ban me. So, the answer is no. I will not refrain from bringing it up if it's relevant. As I said, if you don't like it, ignore it. If you don't want to see it, don't read my posts. You're blowing this out of all proportion. I can and do take criticism, I admit to my errors, but if I feel that the criticism is unwarranted then I am going to kick back. If the cabal finds it annoying, tough. --Claret (talk) 22:48, 4 July 2013 (UTC)

I don't think the criticism of bugged events is ever relevant to discussion. I think it was a reasonable request of Ishmael for you to avoid mentioning it. It's fine if you disagree and don't find it's a problem, but it would be conciliation to users who do have a problem with it, in the spirit of the wiki. I'm not going to broach this anymore because I agree it's unfortunately become a circular argument and should die.--Relyk ~ talk < 23:56, 4 July 2013 (UTC)

(Reset indent) Okay, this has gotten a bit twisted from my original intent. My first sentence sums it up perfectly: "Please try not to be so accusative." I never told Claret to stop mentioning the issue completely, I simply wished for her to frame her complaints in a less negative fashion. —Dr Ishmael 01:04, 5 July 2013 (UTC)

I thought we were dropping this. But, Okay. If you really think that "Also, ANet don't admit their bugs - hopefully they quietly fix them." in the middle of a paragraph, mostly as an aside, is being accusative, then you're <words fail me>. C'mon now, list all these repetative occurences of me ranting on about ANet and their bugs. Just list them. Back up your accusation with facts. Otherwise, point me to the person that I can make a complaint to about harassment. You went over the line and now you're compounding it. Ishmael et al, your opinion on this matter is not of any interest to me, neither pro nor con. --Claret (talk) 01:21, 5 July 2013 (UTC)

I definitely respect your ability to hold a conversation, Claret. You don't back down or give ground, but you also aren't overly confrontational. A rare mix! Your points are definitely valid here. You will get a lot of flak for disliking ANet or their changes to the game - and the best thing to do is precisely what you've been doing. You haven't created a shitstorm, you haven't edited a ton of mainspace pages with "anet sux," you've just kept your opinion in mind and only voiced it when it was relevant or you felt another user could benefit from it or find it interesting. That's basically perfect.

I hate to have to remind other users to stop their witch hunts. Polite dissent is fine; I'd go so far as to say it's encouraged. It's kind of how wikis work. Claret's messages weren't spammed, weren't vandalism, and it certainly wasn't in bad faith. Every user is entitled to have their own view, and is equally entitled not to be needlessly harassed about it on their talk page. Claret's views are obviously not those the majority hold, and calling a developer out on their failures is accusatory. And that's fine. We aren't the accusatory-comments-police. We aren't the stamp-out-any-negative-opinion-of-ANet police. Our job is to maintain and protect the wiki project - that is the goal above all else. Now ask yourselves - is pestering Claret maintaining the wiki project? Are you doing some really beneficial shit here, making mountains out of molehills and trying to bully a user into not speaking their mind just because the message might be "accusative?" Is this really a benefit to the wiki project? -Auron 15:17, 5 July 2013 (UTC)

I grew up as a female MD in the days when we were less than 15% of the new graduates. I wanted a career in hospital medicine. If I had given an inch (or centimetre) when someone confronted me then I would never have got (gotten to Americans) where I am today. I avoid confrontation until it's inevitable. But when I feel unjustly accused of something by a cabal of ANet apologists then, by God, I'm going to react. Being unpopular by standing up for yourself against the mass is not being confrontational. Being confrontational is looking for trouble. It's hypocritical to confront someone and then accuse them of being confrontational.

(1) Guild Wars 2 is software.

(2) all software ships with bugs - every single bit

(3) observably all MMO developers seem to spend little time fixing boring stuff, like minor bugs, spelling and grammar eg the Text error pages.

(4) there is a perfectly acceptable explanation from ANet that some of the seemingly bugged events are not bugged but population dependant and that they will - sometime - retune these. Bit late IMHO.

(5) there are multiple bugged events that are patently obviously NOT population dependant. Any list would be long.

(6) There's a easy solution for ANet, publish a list of "population dependent" events. It's easy - really - information stops speculation.

(7) Publish a list of "known bugged" events. Again, it's easy, again, information stops speculation.

As for the people who feel so inclined to confront me. I refer you to [[2]], particularly the line regarding Ad hominem arguments.

If I am having a conversation with someone on their user talk page then that conversation is between us. If someone wants to interject, fine. But otherwise it's crassly stupid to take a comment out of context and to start throwing accusations around. And then act "Oh, my, aren't you being unreasonable" when the person answers your criticism.

If it is contextually useful, in my opinion not yours, to make negative statements about ANet then I will continue to do so. As I wrote before, if you don't like it, tough. --Claret (talk) 15:57, 5 July 2013 (UTC)--Claret (talk) 15:54, 5 July 2013 (UTC)

Well said, Claret. I would like to remind people that, for certain issues, if questions aren't asked, answers are never found. ANet would love it if everyone ignored their bugs and design problems - I haven't played in a while, but from what I can tell, elementalists are still bad to the point of being unplayed except by someone who shares my love of the class - so if these things are to be fixed, they need to be discussed. On the flip side of things, that doesn't mean a disproportionate amount of discussions should be about the bugs and flaws of GW2 - this is a documentation wiki, not a bugs and balance wiki, after all. I don't think that's what Claret's been doing, though. -- Armond Warblade 16:27, 5 July 2013 (UTC)

User:Relyk/sandbox/forsrs - wow - who's upset? 27 "fucks/fucking" on a page - is this a record? Again, list the times I have criticised ANet, please. There are apparently more than a few, or so you have stated/implied, so you shouldn't have much problem finding them. I notice that, despite previous invitations to do so, this has not happened. --Claret (talk) 18:02, 5 July 2013 (UTC)

→ moved from User:Relyk/sandbox/forsrs#Armond

I didn't start this conversation, Ishmael did and you all waded in to give your 2¢ worth. So, "so we can spend time discussing wiki-related topics", any waste of time is not down to me. Or am I supposed to apologis(z)e for your perceived problems? Basically, both you and Ishmael should keep your irrelevant and unwanted biases to yourselves. Or form a little club to back slap each other and say how stupid other people are. Jeez. I, believe it or not, do get out. Let me spell it out again. IT'S NO DAMN BUSINESS OF YOURS WHAT I SAY ABOUT ARENA NET. They're big boys. If they have a problem then they can say so. Any waste of time is in responding to your, Ishmael's and other officious, apologist and unwarranted interference. You are not going to wear me down with walls of crudity and false logic. I basically have no concern what you feel about me but I will not put up with attempts to bully me into acquiescing to your gagging "orders". If you can't see that pertinent, accurate and contextual comment is what free information flow is about then the Internet is not for you. Again, produce your list of me "complaining that ArenaNet hasn't fixed them yet", c'mon. Where's this list? --Claret (talk) 21:47, 5 July 2013 (UTC)

You were the one who blew it all out of perspective. All I said was "Could you tone it down a bit?" and you cried "OPPRESSION!" —Dr Ishmael 22:16, 5 July 2013 (UTC)

We're officially getting into shitstorm territory. There's absolutely no reason for the discussion to move off the page it's already on. (Related rants and non-serious responses are a completely separate thing.) -- Armond Warblade 22:19, 5 July 2013 (UTC)

Ishmael, from above, IT'S NO DAMN BUSINESS OF YOURS WHAT I SAY ABOUT ARENA NET. Again, "keep your irrelevant and unwanted biases to yourselves". Again, "produce your list of me 'complaining that ArenaNet hasn't fixed them yet'". It's well into the bloody stupid argument, usually lists of infractions are well underway by now. You can try to wear me down, dream on. As for me crying "Oppression", a response of "That's my opinion. ANet are an MMO developer, I am sure they have a thick skin. I read the their forums often enough to see that they are poor at admitting errors. OTOH, I don't really expect them to be." is scarcely that. Face it, you just can't take people not kowtowing to your opinion and prejudices. The rest is spin off from the absolutely silly interjection by Relyk and others.

Armond, I have several times asked for this conversation to cease, each and evey time one of the tag-team puts something else up. I didn't move it off my page, I'll give you one guess who did.

In Relyk's turn of phrase - show me the list or shut the .... up. Is there any administrator of this wiki that I can ask to stop this harassment? --Claret (talk) 22:32, 5 July 2013 (UTC)

Discussion below is after the move.

Relyk didn't move the discussion off this page - he made a rant about it in his userspace. Rants are generally recognized as not things to be responded to seriously - and, if they are, they're to be responded to elsewhere. That's why I made a joking comment there instead of discussing his logic. You and Ish began/continued/restarted/etc-d a discussion there.

If you truly don't want the discussion to continue (which I believe), simply stop responding. Don't even respond to this comment. It's that easy.

In fact, I'd like to ask everyone to simply stop responding. I think the original point was made, discussed, understood, and (hopefully) learned from on all sides. There's little enough reason for continued discourse. (Rants on separate pages, not being discourse, are reasonable, but remember to not be a douche.)

-- Armond Warblade 23:33, 5 July 2013 (UTC)

Okay, enough of this "Let me say one more thing and I'll be done" nonsense. This is the last word, and the last word is mine. Discussion is over. 23:38, 5 July 2013 (UTC)