Hot or Not: Week 5

[Nosey]

replace randedl, hes slow and ugly

[Ephemeral]

As I posted a while back, these ‘reviews’ are useless without criteria understood by both the author and the readers. It becomes as inane as the worthless threads about ‘who is the best player’. Without defining what the fuck ‘best players’ means, it merely becomes a flame fest. What is ‘hot’? Is it some spider who slinks around behind his team-mates as a shield, never pushing, but racking up a good record? Or is it the player whose record isn’t good at all but scored a terrier kill late in the game that contribute greatly to his team winning? Gee, do you think that their might be a chance that the authors might only actually see a few of the games and that they might have to rely on stats for the rest of the games? Doh.

I venture to say that the vast majority of people first read this stuff to see if they got mentioned. They also enjoy the flame-fest, the “Days Of Your Lives” soap-opera, the useless rumor gossip-mill dribble that is solely based without criteria. Then they enjoy even more arguing about for the next week since without criteria, they can argue every possible angle.

The obvious answer is to define the criteria of what makes a player ‘hot’ or ‘not’.
Or
Just rename the thing to “Baseless Crap Opinions To Argue Over” and post it Trash Talk or Useless Crap forums and be done with it.

[genocidal]

For fuck's sake everyone, do you have to bitch about every goddamn thing? Hot or Not is listed under FEATURES on the TWL website. Therefore you're lucky someone is taking the time to make a goddamn article about our 2D spaceship leagues. Just because you weren't mentioned or you disagree with the author doesn't mean they are wrong - after all it's a subjective article anyway. Like an editorial. So everyone, just grow the fuck up.

[Galleleo]

Eph, there aren't certain guidelines when reviewers review a play/ movie, whatever either. It's also their opinion of that "thing". The one reviewer can say: Good movie because, bla bla bla. The other one can say: My god, the crappiest movie I have ever seen, because, bla bla bla.

Nothing anyone ever types about something can be objective, everyone puts his opinion in what he/she writes, and everything written can be discussed, I give credit to fit/undy and rand for even taking the time to do this.

[Underground]

For fuck's sake everyone, do you have to bitch about every goddamn thing? Hot or Not is listed under FEATURES on the TWL website. Therefore you're lucky someone is taking the time to make a goddamn article about our 2D spaceship leagues. Just because you weren't mentioned or you disagree with the author doesn't mean they are wrong - after all it's a subjective article anyway. Like an editorial. So everyone, just grow the fuck up.

Here's my man .

[Dabram]

Here's my man .

FAG

[Broly]

UG 4 prez

[Ephemeral]

Eph, there aren't certain guidelines when reviewers review a play/ movie, whatever either. It's also their opinion of that "thing". The one reviewer can say: Good movie because, bla bla bla. The other one can say: My god, the crappiest movie I have ever seen, because, bla bla bla.

Nothing anyone ever types about something can be objective, everyone puts his opinion in what he/she writes, and everything written can be discussed, I give credit to fit/undy and rand for even taking the time to do this.

The issue I raise is about criteria. Of course a ‘review’ is opinionated and subjective.

But first, you can't review a properly if you have not seen it. You can't review it properly from looking at a few still pictures or reading about it. You have to see it, in it's entirety.

Second, they aren’t simply reviewing a single movie. What they are doing is basically comparing a bunch of movies to each other and then trying to pick out the outstanding oness (good or bad). For this to be done correctly, then it should be 'apples to apples'. The same reasons used against each movie. For example, you would compare and consider things like the story line, quality of acting, theme, directing, etc. You don’t flame one for shitty directing and then ignore another one that has outstanding directing. Nor should you start reviewing the theater, the quality of the popcorn or the fact that some little whiny asshole is sitting behind you in the theater talking through the entire movie. That is why you establish the criteria and remain consistent.

Again, if nobody cares about doing it right, and it is simply meant to open a flame fest and be on the level of a 12 y.o. girl’s soap opera and romantic novel, then keep it the way it ist. I don’t hold it against anyone for liking that kind of stuff, but people shouldn't get all pissy when someone points out that it is not being legitimately and correctly done (ala' genocidal's post).

[genocidal]

The issue I raise is about criteria. Of course a ‘review’ is opinionated and subjective.

But first, you can't review a properly if you have not seen it. You can't review it properly from looking at a few still pictures or reading about it. You have to see it, in it's entirety.

Second, they aren’t simply reviewing a single movie. What they are doing is basically comparing a bunch of movies to each other and then trying to pick out the outstanding oness (good or bad). For this to be done correctly, then it should be 'apples to apples'. The same reasons used against each movie. For example, you would compare and consider things like the story line, quality of acting, theme, directing, etc. You don’t flame one for shitty directing and then ignore another one that has outstanding directing. Nor should you start reviewing the theater, the quality of the popcorn or the fact that some little whiny asshole is sitting behind you in the theater talking through the entire movie. That is why you establish the criteria and remain consistent.

Again, if nobody cares about doing it right, and it is simply meant to open a flame fest and be on the level of a 12 y.o. girl’s soap opera and romantic novel, then keep it the way it ist. I don’t hold it against anyone for liking that kind of stuff, but people shouldn't get all pissy when someone points out that it is not being legitimately and correctly done (ala' genocidal's post).

It is like an editorial column. They put what they want because, at the end of the day, it's all opinions anyway. If you don't like it or don't think they're qualified, then don't read it.

[Ephemeral]

It is like an editorial column. They put what they want because, at the end of the day, it's all opinions anyway. If you don't like it or don't think they're qualified, then don't read it.

You know where the sayings 'pig in a poke' and 'letting the cat out of the bag' came from?

Back around the 1500's or so in Europe, people would travel very far to come into the town to trade goods on the weekends. It was a common trick to substitute a cat for a sucking-pig, and trying to palm it off on people who didnt know any better. They would stuff this cat in a sack (poke) and hope that the unknowing person would travel all the way back home before 'letting the cat out of the bag'.

So if I understand your point correctly, you are saying 'don't talk about it, just be thankful someone is selling cats, if you don't like it, just don’t buy anything'

Sorry if I am offending anyone by being the messenger and standing in the town square and pointing out that cats are being sold.

[Nickname]

there wasn't near this much bitching when it was me and fit.

[Stabwound]

But you only did like 2 articles.

[Randedl]

NOT hot; Week 5

Hey, sorry for the lack of punctuality on my behalf. Website problems and then problems with sobriety have ensured that I haven't been able to get around to this until now! Anyways, barring any further ado, here is my list of shame in the world of trashtalking spaceships:

TWLD: Well, the one big game of week 5 saw Venom face off against -FINAL-. These pre-season favorites were lookin well matched until the game was 5 minutes in. I know he won't be impressed, but this journalist-wannabe feels inclined to point out Audit's 3-10 as a major factor in Venom's eleven point loss. See what happens when you abandon your Grapevine roots?!?! Even more lacking in coolness this week however, was the bot that was assigned to the Pallies/Sk8 game. . . 3 times in a row. Sk8 has got to be getting annoyed at having a game well in hand, only to lose it to an automated malfunction. I give you guys my salute, and I assure you we'll be more inclined to kick your ass week 11.

TWLJ: Once again, -FINAL- was front and centre - this time in TWLJ. The Finlandian supercrew matched up against Merce, Annul, Cape, Mess and HOTLAVAKING. . . Yes, Shriek was back at it! Wait, nono, they aren't Shriek, they are Dice and don't you forget it! Anywho, some guy named Hindrance and some guy named Maybe Exit combined for a 3-10 game for -FINAL-, which ended up on the wrong side of the win column in this one. Better luck better lucking it guys. In another game that looked good on paper, Sk8 got destroyed by Pirates. Sky and Tsunami managed to equal the aforementioned 3-10 as did Zeimonster and Jamil. I'm pretty sure when two fifths of your team goes 3-10, you aren't going to win. And finally, in my obligatory Pallies reference, my main man Jeem started in TWLJ against Venom. The guy goes 2-7 and gets subbed. He then proceeds to do the huff and leave the squad. Yes, I too would be insulted to a point of leaving a squad that had just started me when i managed an impressive 2 kills and got subbed by that slackass Banzi-the mother-Fuq. To reiterate, you got subbed by Banzi and left the squad because of it. Kuddos.

TWLB: Well, Venom failed to show enough people to their game, and lost by forfeit. I think that is the first of the season in any league, a job well done. Efforts to locate Amputate proved fruitless as he was out of touch searching for Easter Eggs in his back yard. On to games that were actually played: Sk8 managed to lose handedly to Pirates, one week after beating up on Spastic. At the front of the pack of bad stats for them was Asmodeus. Only 5 kills in shark you say? That's not bad. No, maybe not. But doubling that number in teamkills is pretty suckworthy. Sk8 terrier Chino finished with 14 deaths. Maybe his shark should have paid more attention to protecting him, and less to killing his own team. In another game of big-named squads, Spastic terrier Pure_Luck also managed 14 deaths in a lopsided loss. You're probably the same guy who axed Necromotic? And if you hadn't noticed, your squad is 0-2 since then. In other news: I have played terrier in week 4 and 5. And I haven't died in either game. I rock.

To finish up this week, I leave you with some wise words that somebody else said: You can tell a lot by the order in which a person eats their Smarties.

-Randedl

[Dabram]

Lol why would you start Jeem over Banzi in the first place? Who is this Jeem-character anyway...?

Anyway, enjoyable as always Randedldl

[Asmodeus]

lol, glad to see I'm making the list. $ I should say though, Pirates's sharks are a lot smarter than most. I'd mine where their terr was, the opposite side of where our terr was, and they'd rep the mines up and then over...hence tk-ing my own teammates. And I don't get many kills, I'm mainly a defensive shark, if anything. But yea...kudos to Pirates.

TWLB: Well, Venom failed to show enough people to their game, and lost by forfeit. I think that is the first of the season in any league, a job well done. Efforts to locate Amputate proved fruitless as he was out of touch searching for Easter Eggs in his back yard. On to games that were actually played: Sk8 managed to lose handedly to Pirates, one week after beating up on Spastic. At the front of the pack of bad stats for them was Asmodeus. Only 5 kills in shark you say? That's not bad. No, maybe not. But doubling that number in teamkills is pretty suckworthy. Sk8 terrier Chino finished with 14 deaths. Maybe his shark should have paid more attention to protecting him, and less to killing his own team. In another game of big-named squads, Spastic terrier Pure_Luck also managed 14 deaths in a lopsided loss. You're probably the same guy who axed Necromotic? And if you hadn't noticed, your squad is 0-2 since then. In other news: I have played terrier in week 4 and 5. And I haven't died in either game. I rock.

To finish up this week, I leave you with some wise words that somebody else said: You can tell a lot by the order in which a person eats their Smarties.

-Randedl