|
Canada16217 Posts
|
tasteless is in there too?
|
|
Haha that would make sense. He can't leave his best buddy that easily.
|
Now people are gonna make topics for casters team hopping? Zzz.
|
This must be that agency Tasteless mentioned on Real Talk
|
People care way too much about casters in Starcraft II.
|
Canada16217 Posts
On August 03 2012 20:15 SMMN wrote: tasteless is in there too?
He joined when they originally started back in June.
|
It's a management agency. Artosis and Tasteless are clients of said agency. I assume they handle things like bookings, promotion, contracts, etc. In most other industries, everyone of their calibre is represented.
|
On August 03 2012 20:37 Champloo wrote: People care way too much about casters in Starcraft II. This is not a news article. I could write about an ant I once had named Roger, would responses to that mean that people care a lot about ants? Someone brought up something that he thought people would like to know about on a forum, no need to be like that. On topic: I don't really see why casters affiliate themselves with teams apart from the people who cast their teams own tournaments :/
|
On August 03 2012 20:38 naggerNZ wrote: It's a management agency. Artosis and Tasteless are clients of said agency. I assume they handle things like bookings, promotion, contracts, etc. In most other industries, everyone of their calibre is represented.
that would make them agents, and the people they manage would be clients.
|
On August 03 2012 20:41 Xcobidoo wrote:Show nested quote +On August 03 2012 20:37 Champloo wrote: People care way too much about casters in Starcraft II. This is not a news article. I could write about an ant I once had named Roger, would responses to that mean that people care a lot about ants? Someone brought up something that he thought people would like to know about on a forum, no need to be like that. On topic: I don't really see why casters affiliate themselves with teams apart from the people who cast their teams own tournaments :/ Because "eSports Management Group" clearly sounds like a team...they're an agency
|
Yeah, casters getting agents does not exactly sound like a newsworthy thing but probably not everyone holds the same opinion.
|
This sort of thing should have happened a lot sooner. It's funny to me that Tumba and his lawyer friend were the ones to get the ball rolling.
|
This is good for Artosis, he needs more time for the baby and teaching me about hotkeys. If people can help him book flights, set up hotels and explain how google works, its better for all of us.
|
On August 03 2012 20:37 Champloo wrote: People care way too much about casters in Starcraft II.
Yeah because people totally don't talk about John Madden.
|
yeah they are an agency for sure. glgl Artosis! <3<3<3
|
On August 03 2012 20:15 SMMN wrote: tasteless is in there too?
Yes, Tasteless was the first caster in their stable. He mentions this in his real talk episode. I would reccommend watching that, not just because he talks about this, but its interesting in general as there usually isnt much about the personal life of Tasteless. For instance he says that he hasn't lost his passion as many have speculated. Since he also talks about the Tastetosis brand its not surprising to see Artosis get picked up as well.
|
Is this the thing that Tasteless talked about in his Real Talk?
|
Joined? I think he hired them, not joined them.
|
On August 03 2012 20:41 ReachTheSky wrote:Show nested quote +On August 03 2012 20:38 naggerNZ wrote: It's a management agency. Artosis and Tasteless are clients of said agency. I assume they handle things like bookings, promotion, contracts, etc. In most other industries, everyone of their calibre is represented. that would make them agents, and the people they manage would be clients.
No, it's the other way around. eMG represents Artosis and Tasteless. Tasteless and Artosis are the clients.
|
On August 03 2012 22:00 The Final Boss wrote: Is this the thing that Tasteless talked about in his Real Talk?
Probably. Good luck to Artosis & Tasteless.
|
|
Cool idea, but I have a pet peeve with that website: some words are spelled in an incorrect way, for example, "Twenty two year-old Scott Lussier has been apart of Professional Gaming for nine years." It is just small things like these that reduce credibility and professionalism.
|
i thought it was emazing gaming lol
|
28057 Posts
Good job Artosis. Hopefully this will be an amazing fit for you.
|
On August 03 2012 21:29 Butterednuts wrote:Show nested quote +On August 03 2012 20:37 Champloo wrote: People care way too much about casters in Starcraft II. Yeah because people totally don't talk about John Madden.
BOOM!!
@Champloo: Artosis is the omniscient sage of SC2's foreign scene; he'd be a big pickup for any team. He could coach, he could sponsor, or he could just continue to cast, lol. It's just getting his name even more out there. Heck, just by doing this, he's indirectly sponsoring this organization.
I don't see the problem with this at all....
|
On August 03 2012 20:37 Champloo wrote: People care way too much about casters in Starcraft II.
IMO SC2's great casters are one of the biggest reasons the viewing scene has grown so big over the past couple years. They don't get enough credit for being able to provide commentary that has something for both hardcore players and casual interlopers.
I just showed two of my non-SC2-player friends Game 3 of Ryung vs Stephano at the MLG Summer Arena and they loved it. The fact that a game as complicated as SC2 can be digestible and fun to watch for extreme beginners is due almost entirely to Apollo and MrBitter doing an awesome job casting. djWHEAT, Tasteless, Artosis, and Day[9] all do a phenomenal job as well.
Especially when compared to something like EVO. From what I've seen, the casters in most fighting games just do a lot of shouting with hardly any analysis.
|
Old news? We already had a dJWheat cast or SOTG on it a couple of weeks ago.
It's not really joining their group as you would a Team, but more like allowing them to represent you with the condition of sending off a few percent of revenue to them on gigs they garner for you (the client). I hardly hear of people joining public relations firms or joining talent agencies or record labels. You sign with them.
Minor point, but I'm happy for them. Hope it becomes profitable for all involved.
|
lol I thought this was a team haha.
|
On August 03 2012 20:41 Xcobidoo wrote:Show nested quote +On August 03 2012 20:37 Champloo wrote: People care way too much about casters in Starcraft II. This is not a news article. I could write about an ant I once had named Roger, would responses to that mean that people care a lot about ants? Someone brought up something that he thought people would like to know about on a forum, no need to be like that. On topic: I don't really see why casters affiliate themselves with teams apart from the people who cast their teams own tournaments :/
I don't think Xcobidoo is being too dismissive of the topic, derail a bit maybe, but at least his comment is about casters, just a bit negative. Some people care about this move for Artosis, some don't, still an opinion about the general topic in a broader sense. At the very least, a good starting point for another discussion.
|
On August 03 2012 21:29 Butterednuts wrote:Show nested quote +On August 03 2012 20:37 Champloo wrote: People care way too much about casters in Starcraft II. Yeah because people totally don't talk about John Madden.
Never, ever heard of John Madden. So i dont get what you are talking about.
|
On August 04 2012 14:47 sertas wrote:Show nested quote +On August 03 2012 21:29 Butterednuts wrote:On August 03 2012 20:37 Champloo wrote: People care way too much about casters in Starcraft II. Yeah because people totally don't talk about John Madden. Never, ever heard of John Madden. So i dont get what you are talking about. How come euros get to brag about being ignorant of US culture but we get shat on for not knowing about euro culture?
|
On August 04 2012 15:07 Blennd wrote:Show nested quote +On August 04 2012 14:47 sertas wrote:On August 03 2012 21:29 Butterednuts wrote:On August 03 2012 20:37 Champloo wrote: People care way too much about casters in Starcraft II. Yeah because people totally don't talk about John Madden. Never, ever heard of John Madden. So i dont get what you are talking about. How come euros get to brag about being ignorant of US culture but we get shat on for not knowing about euro culture?
So you know what our swedish commentators names are? I didnt know that and i dont belivie you do.
|
On August 04 2012 15:07 Blennd wrote:Show nested quote +On August 04 2012 14:47 sertas wrote:On August 03 2012 21:29 Butterednuts wrote:On August 03 2012 20:37 Champloo wrote: People care way too much about casters in Starcraft II. Yeah because people totally don't talk about John Madden. Never, ever heard of John Madden. So i dont get what you are talking about. How come euros get to brag about being ignorant of US culture but we get shat on for not knowing about euro culture?
I think it's totally fine for US not to know about euro culture. Most culture comes out of the US nowadays, and what comes out of the EU is mostly local to be honest. I do call people ignorant when they say with 100% certainty that Sweden is a state in Germany though. It's happened a lot of times... Isn't John Madden a handegg player though? It's even less reasonable for us to know about him than it is for US people to know about Beckham, since handegg is such a local sport in the colonies. I've never seen a game of it being played on any sports channel here.
Anyway, glad for Artosis. I don't quite see how he needs promotion though, as he's pretty much considered the hands down best caster for starcraft 2, and in my opinion sports in general to be honest. Holy shit he's brilliant at what he does.
|
On August 04 2012 15:10 sertas wrote:Show nested quote +On August 04 2012 15:07 Blennd wrote:On August 04 2012 14:47 sertas wrote:On August 03 2012 21:29 Butterednuts wrote:On August 03 2012 20:37 Champloo wrote: People care way too much about casters in Starcraft II. Yeah because people totally don't talk about John Madden. Never, ever heard of John Madden. So i dont get what you are talking about. How come euros get to brag about being ignorant of US culture but we get shat on for not knowing about euro culture? So you know what our swedish commentators names are? I didnt know that and i dont belivie you do. Of course not. And I'm not bragging about it. Nor did I imply that because I haven't heard of someone that they aren't famous. Nor did I fail to do a simple google search that would have clearly demonstrated to you that John Madden, despite you not having heard of him, is in fact an incredibly famous and talked about commentator of American football. What do you think the reaction of euros would have been if someone had made the same post using a famous European commentator as an example, and an American said "Never heard of him, don't know what you're talking about?"
|
On August 04 2012 15:20 Blennd wrote:Show nested quote +On August 04 2012 15:10 sertas wrote:On August 04 2012 15:07 Blennd wrote:On August 04 2012 14:47 sertas wrote:On August 03 2012 21:29 Butterednuts wrote:On August 03 2012 20:37 Champloo wrote: People care way too much about casters in Starcraft II. Yeah because people totally don't talk about John Madden. Never, ever heard of John Madden. So i dont get what you are talking about. How come euros get to brag about being ignorant of US culture but we get shat on for not knowing about euro culture? So you know what our swedish commentators names are? I didnt know that and i dont belivie you do. Of course not. And I'm not bragging about it. Nor did I imply that because I haven't heard of someone that they aren't famous. Nor did I fail to do a simple google search that would have clearly demonstrated to you that John Madden, despite you not having heard of him, is in fact an incredibly famous and talked about commentator of American football. What do you think the reaction of euros would have been if someone had made the same post using a famous European commentator as an example, and an American said "Never heard of him, don't know what you're talking about?"
There are no famous European commentators afaik. Each country obviously have their own, as English is second language if even that in all countries but UK.
|
On August 03 2012 21:29 Butterednuts wrote:Show nested quote +On August 03 2012 20:37 Champloo wrote: People care way too much about casters in Starcraft II. Yeah because people totally don't talk about John Madden.
Terrible argument. Just because other people do it, doesn't make it correct.
|
|
On August 04 2012 15:07 Blennd wrote:Show nested quote +On August 04 2012 14:47 sertas wrote:On August 03 2012 21:29 Butterednuts wrote:On August 03 2012 20:37 Champloo wrote: People care way too much about casters in Starcraft II. Yeah because people totally don't talk about John Madden. Never, ever heard of John Madden. So i dont get what you are talking about. How come euros get to brag about being ignorant of US culture but we get shat on for not knowing about euro culture?
Thinking that TV sports commentators are part of culture is a pretty big part of the divide between US and European culture ^^
|
On August 04 2012 15:49 Euronyme wrote:Show nested quote +On August 04 2012 15:20 Blennd wrote:On August 04 2012 15:10 sertas wrote:On August 04 2012 15:07 Blennd wrote:On August 04 2012 14:47 sertas wrote:On August 03 2012 21:29 Butterednuts wrote:On August 03 2012 20:37 Champloo wrote: People care way too much about casters in Starcraft II. Yeah because people totally don't talk about John Madden. Never, ever heard of John Madden. So i dont get what you are talking about. How come euros get to brag about being ignorant of US culture but we get shat on for not knowing about euro culture? So you know what our swedish commentators names are? I didnt know that and i dont belivie you do. Of course not. And I'm not bragging about it. Nor did I imply that because I haven't heard of someone that they aren't famous. Nor did I fail to do a simple google search that would have clearly demonstrated to you that John Madden, despite you not having heard of him, is in fact an incredibly famous and talked about commentator of American football. What do you think the reaction of euros would have been if someone had made the same post using a famous European commentator as an example, and an American said "Never heard of him, don't know what you're talking about?" There are no famous European commentators afaik. Each country obviously have their own, as English is second language if even that in all countries but UK. Ok, so imagine an argument about political figures then. Do you think the spirit of my argument still holds true? I mean correct me if I'm wrong, but it seemed to me like the original replier thought he was super fucking cool for not knowing who John Madden was. Was the original comment being presumptuous in expecting people to have heard of John Madden? Perhaps. But I'm pretty sure a better response would be to just google John Madden and the worst thing that can happen is you learn something new. Being a snotty little shit about it isn't going to help anything, and in my experience, Americans ALWAYS get called out for being snotty little shits on culture issues (as they should), and the standards seem much more lax for Europeans. Maybe it's my own bias though.
|
What... he's not a lawyer.
If he's a client... who cares? How could anyone conceive this as news?
|
Let's talk about ants. I have one named Adam.
|
On August 04 2012 16:18 Dracolich70 wrote: Let's talk about ants. I have one named Adam.
Can you actually keep a pet ant? Like just a single little guy? How do you feed him? Is he in a cage, or have you built a place for him to live? I've seen a couple walking about in the apartment, and I've always felt like I should get to know them better.
|
On August 04 2012 14:13 Danglars wrote: Old news? We already had a dJWheat cast or SOTG on it a couple of weeks ago.
SOTG is not TL forums. If there's no thread discussing this it's probably still relevant news for a lot of people.
|
On August 03 2012 20:30 Technique wrote: Now people are gonna make topics for casters team hopping? Zzz.
I don't understand why people think that if too many topics are made that are only vaguely interesting we might run out of internet?!? As long as it is information that a lot of people want to have what is the problem?
Good for them. Hopefully this helps them manage their time.
|
I hope they train him to not get Artosispylowned in this clan.
|
Hmm... not sure what the outcome of this will be, but on a side note(slight off-topic), whats up with casters joining teams; like Rotterdam and Axeltoss joining ROOT? I don't see the purpose of this... on the other hand Athene joined ROOT too... –_–? maybe it's just ROOT.
|
On August 04 2012 15:51 DecisionTheory wrote:Show nested quote +On August 03 2012 21:29 Butterednuts wrote:On August 03 2012 20:37 Champloo wrote: People care way too much about casters in Starcraft II. Yeah because people totally don't talk about John Madden. Terrible argument. Just because other people do it, doesn't make it correct. That might be true, but who are you to say that giving casters a lot of attention is incorrect? The "everybody's doing it" argument actually makes a lot of sense when you don't have an argument to go against it. In every sport you have casting personalities, whether it's American football, baseball, hockey, basketball, or whatever else. Casters are incredibly important to sports; think back to when sports were broadcasted over the radio and all there was was the caster's voice. Casters deserve attention, they get attention, getting mad that they get attention is stupid. Plus having a thread about arguably the most famous caster joining eMG deserves attention as much as if not more than some of the stuff that gets attention on this site.
|
Canada16217 Posts
On August 05 2012 02:30 The Final Boss wrote:Show nested quote +On August 04 2012 15:51 DecisionTheory wrote:On August 03 2012 21:29 Butterednuts wrote:On August 03 2012 20:37 Champloo wrote: People care way too much about casters in Starcraft II. Yeah because people totally don't talk about John Madden. Terrible argument. Just because other people do it, doesn't make it correct. That might be true, but who are you to say that giving casters a lot of attention is incorrect? The "everybody's doing it" argument actually makes a lot of sense when you don't have an argument to go against it. In every sport you have casting personalities, whether it's American football, baseball, hockey, basketball, or whatever else. Casters are incredibly important to sports; think back to when sports were broadcasted over the radio and all there was was the caster's voice. Casters deserve attention, they get attention, getting mad that they get attention is stupid. Plus having a thread about arguably the most famous caster joining eMG deserves attention as much as if not more than some of the stuff that gets attention on this site.
News: "Newly received or noteworthy information, esp. about recent or important events."
@Everyone
There is no reason not to qualify this as "news" I don't see why there's even an argument about it, it seems silly. If someone doesn't like it then don't respond, and quite simply ignore it.
|
On August 04 2012 20:05 Sorkoas wrote:Show nested quote +On August 04 2012 14:13 Danglars wrote: Old news? We already had a dJWheat cast or SOTG on it a couple of weeks ago.
SOTG is not TL forums. If there's no thread discussing this it's probably still relevant news for a lot of people. I'm surprised it wasn't discussed to death already on SOTG thread (maybe it has). It's just I'm used to these things coming to prominence the second they're announced, having opinions weighed in from all sectors, and then fizzling out as interest fades. I assumed it was done to death somewhere I missed, or just not interesting to enough people to make a topic.
|
On August 05 2012 02:30 The Final Boss wrote:Show nested quote +On August 04 2012 15:51 DecisionTheory wrote:On August 03 2012 21:29 Butterednuts wrote:On August 03 2012 20:37 Champloo wrote: People care way too much about casters in Starcraft II. Yeah because people totally don't talk about John Madden. Terrible argument. Just because other people do it, doesn't make it correct. That might be true, but who are you to say that giving casters a lot of attention is incorrect? The "everybody's doing it" argument actually makes a lot of sense when you don't have an argument to go against it. In every sport you have casting personalities, whether it's American football, baseball, hockey, basketball, or whatever else. Casters are incredibly important to sports; think back to when sports were broadcasted over the radio and all there was was the caster's voice. Casters deserve attention, they get attention, getting mad that they get attention is stupid. Plus having a thread about arguably the most famous caster joining eMG deserves attention as much as if not more than some of the stuff that gets attention on this site.
That's cool and all but I never stated that casters should get attention or should not. All I was stating was that argument was a fallacy, therefore invalid.
|
On August 03 2012 20:30 Technique wrote: Now people are gonna make topics for casters team hopping? Zzz.
wow dat post ...
1. you didn't click the link in the thread 2. you didn't read the other thread introducing emg 3. why so negative?
emg is not a team it's an organization that represents (and manages) e-sport personalities...
|
Oh jesus, people in this thread are idiots.
This is in the FORUM section, therefore if someone feels he has something he wants to share he is allowed to post it so long as it follows the forums rules. If TL had released an official news release for this then sure, shit on it all you want. But this is some guy sharing something he thought others would want to know.
Also, this is an agency who now represents a major person in the SC2 world. I think this is nice to know.
|
On August 04 2012 16:09 Blennd wrote:Show nested quote +On August 04 2012 15:49 Euronyme wrote:On August 04 2012 15:20 Blennd wrote:On August 04 2012 15:10 sertas wrote:On August 04 2012 15:07 Blennd wrote:On August 04 2012 14:47 sertas wrote:On August 03 2012 21:29 Butterednuts wrote:On August 03 2012 20:37 Champloo wrote: People care way too much about casters in Starcraft II. Yeah because people totally don't talk about John Madden. Never, ever heard of John Madden. So i dont get what you are talking about. How come euros get to brag about being ignorant of US culture but we get shat on for not knowing about euro culture? So you know what our swedish commentators names are? I didnt know that and i dont belivie you do. Of course not. And I'm not bragging about it. Nor did I imply that because I haven't heard of someone that they aren't famous. Nor did I fail to do a simple google search that would have clearly demonstrated to you that John Madden, despite you not having heard of him, is in fact an incredibly famous and talked about commentator of American football. What do you think the reaction of euros would have been if someone had made the same post using a famous European commentator as an example, and an American said "Never heard of him, don't know what you're talking about?" There are no famous European commentators afaik. Each country obviously have their own, as English is second language if even that in all countries but UK. Ok, so imagine an argument about political figures then. Do you think the spirit of my argument still holds true? I mean correct me if I'm wrong, but it seemed to me like the original replier thought he was super fucking cool for not knowing who John Madden was. Was the original comment being presumptuous in expecting people to have heard of John Madden? Perhaps. But I'm pretty sure a better response would be to just google John Madden and the worst thing that can happen is you learn something new. Being a snotty little shit about it isn't going to help anything, and in my experience, Americans ALWAYS get called out for being snotty little shits on culture issues (as they should), and the standards seem much more lax for Europeans. Maybe it's my own bias though. I'm pretty sure every european knows who barrack obama is but I'm pretty sure very few americans know who the president of sweden or most other european countries is... (sorry for continuing this totally offtopic disussin btw )
|
On August 05 2012 07:03 DecisionTheory wrote:Show nested quote +On August 05 2012 02:30 The Final Boss wrote:On August 04 2012 15:51 DecisionTheory wrote:On August 03 2012 21:29 Butterednuts wrote:On August 03 2012 20:37 Champloo wrote: People care way too much about casters in Starcraft II. Yeah because people totally don't talk about John Madden. Terrible argument. Just because other people do it, doesn't make it correct. That might be true, but who are you to say that giving casters a lot of attention is incorrect? The "everybody's doing it" argument actually makes a lot of sense when you don't have an argument to go against it. In every sport you have casting personalities, whether it's American football, baseball, hockey, basketball, or whatever else. Casters are incredibly important to sports; think back to when sports were broadcasted over the radio and all there was was the caster's voice. Casters deserve attention, they get attention, getting mad that they get attention is stupid. Plus having a thread about arguably the most famous caster joining eMG deserves attention as much as if not more than some of the stuff that gets attention on this site. That's cool and all but I never stated that casters should get attention or should not. All I was stating was that argument was a fallacy, therefore invalid. And why is that argument "invalid?" Please stop posting generic statements that apply in some circumstances, but not all.
Let's look at a completely different argument and try to apply the argument "everybody does it so you should do it too"
When you're talking about smoking cigarettes, the argument "Well everybody smokes cigarettes" is a pretty bad argument, but there are reasons why that argument does not work in that scenario. For starters, not everybody smokes cigarettes. Therefore, the argument is inherently flawed because it is based around a statement that is simply not true. Another argument against smoking cigarettes is that it is known that there are medical drawbacks to smoking cigarettes. Regardless of whether or not the original statement "everybody smokes cigarettes" is true or not, there are reasons against doing what the hoi polloi is doing.
Now let's apply this same logic to the argument of whether or not StarCraft 2 casters should get attention or not, but instead of the statement "everybody smokes cigarettes," we're going to say "every other sport gives attention to casters." First let's ask ourselves, is the statement true at all? The answer: yes; for the most part, just about every televised sport has it's various casting personalities. In American football, for example, you have John Madden. Now we come to our second point, which is to say, is there an argument against it? Is there a negative effect to giving casters like Artosis attention? Some people might say that there is a negative side effect, but as long as the players are getting as much attention (@LiquidRet), I think it's fair to say that there is no negative side effect to giving Artosis attention. There are threads about players joining teams and leaving teams all the time and this thread does not detract from those threads, so I really see no negative side effect.
So this still makes me wonder, what is wrong with using the argument "everybody does it" in this scenario? Also please stop using a thesaurus when you're posting, it makes the words you look up stand out really badly lol
|
hmh pretty interesting to see further professionalisation in the sc2 section.
|
On August 05 2012 08:28 The Final Boss wrote:Show nested quote +On August 05 2012 07:03 DecisionTheory wrote:On August 05 2012 02:30 The Final Boss wrote:On August 04 2012 15:51 DecisionTheory wrote:On August 03 2012 21:29 Butterednuts wrote:On August 03 2012 20:37 Champloo wrote: People care way too much about casters in Starcraft II. Yeah because people totally don't talk about John Madden. Terrible argument. Just because other people do it, doesn't make it correct. That might be true, but who are you to say that giving casters a lot of attention is incorrect? The "everybody's doing it" argument actually makes a lot of sense when you don't have an argument to go against it. In every sport you have casting personalities, whether it's American football, baseball, hockey, basketball, or whatever else. Casters are incredibly important to sports; think back to when sports were broadcasted over the radio and all there was was the caster's voice. Casters deserve attention, they get attention, getting mad that they get attention is stupid. Plus having a thread about arguably the most famous caster joining eMG deserves attention as much as if not more than some of the stuff that gets attention on this site. That's cool and all but I never stated that casters should get attention or should not. All I was stating was that argument was a fallacy, therefore invalid. And why is that argument "invalid?" Please stop posting generic statements that apply in some circumstances, but not all. Let's look at a completely different argument and try to apply the argument "everybody does it so you should do it too" When you're talking about smoking cigarettes, the argument "Well everybody smokes cigarettes" is a pretty bad argument, but there are reasons why that argument does not work in that scenario. For starters, not everybody smokes cigarettes. Therefore, the argument is inherently flawed because it is based around a statement that is simply not true. Another argument against smoking cigarettes is that it is known that there are medical drawbacks to smoking cigarettes. Regardless of whether or not the original statement "everybody smokes cigarettes" is true or not, there are reasons against doing what the hoi polloi is doing. Now let's apply this same logic to the argument of whether or not StarCraft 2 casters should get attention or not, but instead of the statement "everybody smokes cigarettes," we're going to say "every other sport gives attention to casters." First let's ask ourselves, is the statement true at all? The answer: yes; for the most part, just about every televised sport has it's various casting personalities. In American football, for example, you have John Madden. Now we come to our second point, which is to say, is there an argument against it? Is there a negative effect to giving casters like Artosis attention? Some people might say that there is a negative side effect, but as long as the players are getting as much attention (@LiquidRet), I think it's fair to say that there is no negative side effect to giving Artosis attention. There are threads about players joining teams and leaving teams all the time and this thread does not detract from those threads, so I really see no negative side effect. So this still makes me wonder, what is wrong with using the argument "everybody does it" in this scenario? Also please stop using a thesaurus when you're posting, it makes the words you look up stand out really badly lol
It is invalid because it's illogical.(ad populum). "It is logically fallacious because the mere fact that a belief is widely-held is not necessarily a guarantee that the belief is correct; if the belief of any individual can be wrong, then the belief held by multiple persons can also be wrong." Cool once again a paragraph that means absolutely nothing towards the argument. One cannot simply defend a point by stating "others do it, so it's alright we can do it." They people could be right or wrong, it does not matter. You cannot make a logical argument by doing this.
What are you talking about, "using the thesaurus"? I did not use any word in my last sentence that was even remotely foreign. Nice ad hominen though. Seriously was this a troll, or were you serious?
|
On August 04 2012 14:47 sertas wrote:Show nested quote +On August 03 2012 21:29 Butterednuts wrote:On August 03 2012 20:37 Champloo wrote: People care way too much about casters in Starcraft II. Yeah because people totally don't talk about John Madden. Never, ever heard of John Madden. So i dont get what you are talking about. HEY HEY HEY, NONE OF THAT pls
|
All he did was hire a manager/agent..
|
On August 04 2012 19:58 Euronyme wrote:Show nested quote +On August 04 2012 16:18 Dracolich70 wrote: Let's talk about ants. I have one named Adam. Can you actually keep a pet ant? Like just a single little guy? How do you feed him? Is he in a cage, or have you built a place for him to live? I've seen a couple walking about in the apartment, and I've always felt like I should get to know them better.
Your signature is genius my friend
|
On August 05 2012 09:30 DecisionTheory wrote:Show nested quote +On August 05 2012 08:28 The Final Boss wrote:On August 05 2012 07:03 DecisionTheory wrote:On August 05 2012 02:30 The Final Boss wrote:On August 04 2012 15:51 DecisionTheory wrote:On August 03 2012 21:29 Butterednuts wrote:On August 03 2012 20:37 Champloo wrote: People care way too much about casters in Starcraft II. Yeah because people totally don't talk about John Madden. Terrible argument. Just because other people do it, doesn't make it correct. That might be true, but who are you to say that giving casters a lot of attention is incorrect? The "everybody's doing it" argument actually makes a lot of sense when you don't have an argument to go against it. In every sport you have casting personalities, whether it's American football, baseball, hockey, basketball, or whatever else. Casters are incredibly important to sports; think back to when sports were broadcasted over the radio and all there was was the caster's voice. Casters deserve attention, they get attention, getting mad that they get attention is stupid. Plus having a thread about arguably the most famous caster joining eMG deserves attention as much as if not more than some of the stuff that gets attention on this site. That's cool and all but I never stated that casters should get attention or should not. All I was stating was that argument was a fallacy, therefore invalid. And why is that argument "invalid?" Please stop posting generic statements that apply in some circumstances, but not all. Let's look at a completely different argument and try to apply the argument "everybody does it so you should do it too" When you're talking about smoking cigarettes, the argument "Well everybody smokes cigarettes" is a pretty bad argument, but there are reasons why that argument does not work in that scenario. For starters, not everybody smokes cigarettes. Therefore, the argument is inherently flawed because it is based around a statement that is simply not true. Another argument against smoking cigarettes is that it is known that there are medical drawbacks to smoking cigarettes. Regardless of whether or not the original statement "everybody smokes cigarettes" is true or not, there are reasons against doing what the hoi polloi is doing. Now let's apply this same logic to the argument of whether or not StarCraft 2 casters should get attention or not, but instead of the statement "everybody smokes cigarettes," we're going to say "every other sport gives attention to casters." First let's ask ourselves, is the statement true at all? The answer: yes; for the most part, just about every televised sport has it's various casting personalities. In American football, for example, you have John Madden. Now we come to our second point, which is to say, is there an argument against it? Is there a negative effect to giving casters like Artosis attention? Some people might say that there is a negative side effect, but as long as the players are getting as much attention (@LiquidRet), I think it's fair to say that there is no negative side effect to giving Artosis attention. There are threads about players joining teams and leaving teams all the time and this thread does not detract from those threads, so I really see no negative side effect. So this still makes me wonder, what is wrong with using the argument "everybody does it" in this scenario? Also please stop using a thesaurus when you're posting, it makes the words you look up stand out really badly lol It is invalid because it's illogical.(ad populum). "It is logically fallacious because the mere fact that a belief is widely-held is not necessarily a guarantee that the belief is correct; if the belief of any individual can be wrong, then the belief held by multiple persons can also be wrong." Cool once again a paragraph that means absolutely nothing towards the argument. One cannot simply defend a point by stating "others do it, so it's alright we can do it." They people could be right or wrong, it does not matter. You cannot make a logical argument by doing this. What are you talking about, "using the thesaurus"? I did not use any word in my last sentence that was even remotely foreign. Nice ad hominen though. Seriously was this a troll, or were you serious? Did you read the quote you wrote down or just copy/paste it. It literally backs my own point. Let's actually have a look and read said quote:
It is logically fallacious because the mere fact that a belief is widely-held is not necessarily a guarantee that the belief is correct; if the belief of any individual can be wrong, then the belief held by multiple persons can also be wrong.
You're talking about it in hyperbolic terms of either completely correct or completely wrong. What you fail to realize is that while the belief of a group can be wrong, it can also be right. If that were not the case, then the word "can" would not be used there.
What I am saying is that there are exceptions to the rule and therefore the argument works in certain cases, including the one we are talking about. Read the quote again and pay close attention to the words that I put in bold for you. What that quote is basically saying is that you have to examine each scenario and see how the argument applies to it. You have yet to actually prove how that argument is wrong other than pointing to highly generic statements that mean literally nothing.
And let's be honest, nobody who starts a sentence with the phrase "That's cool and all" finishes that same thought with the words fallacy and invalid. Also, it's just a poorly structured sentence. Anybody who reads that sentence aloud would realize that it just sounds weird to say. Also that was not at all the basis of my argument and as you mentioned there was a lot more to what I wrote than simply me making fun of your terrible post (also you probably took more time finding that quote than I spent writing this post haha).
Oh and you have still yet to explain to me how that argument is false. Stop pointing to quotes and phrases you have not even read or at the very least read to a point where you can understand it and--if you truly are so much more intelligent than me--actually explain why I am wrong.
|
I am curious how they will 'manage' Tasteless and Artosis "Ok, you keep talking about SC2 really really successfully"
|
On August 05 2012 13:19 Sub40APM wrote: I am curious how they will 'manage' Tasteless and Artosis "Ok, you keep talking about SC2 really really successfully" they will handle all the contract negotiations and endorsements that Tasteless and Artosis do. Manager in this case is more like agent.
|
On August 03 2012 21:45 StreetWise wrote:Yes, Tasteless was the first caster in their stable. He mentions this in his real talk episode. I would reccommend watching that, not just because he talks about this, but its interesting in general as there usually isnt much about the personal life of Tasteless. For instance he says that he hasn't lost his passion as many have speculated. Since he also talks about the Tastetosis brand its not surprising to see Artosis get picked up as well. link?
Cool beans topic.
|
On August 05 2012 12:48 The Final Boss wrote:Show nested quote +On August 05 2012 09:30 DecisionTheory wrote:On August 05 2012 08:28 The Final Boss wrote:On August 05 2012 07:03 DecisionTheory wrote:On August 05 2012 02:30 The Final Boss wrote:On August 04 2012 15:51 DecisionTheory wrote:On August 03 2012 21:29 Butterednuts wrote:On August 03 2012 20:37 Champloo wrote: People care way too much about casters in Starcraft II. Yeah because people totally don't talk about John Madden. Terrible argument. Just because other people do it, doesn't make it correct. That might be true, but who are you to say that giving casters a lot of attention is incorrect? The "everybody's doing it" argument actually makes a lot of sense when you don't have an argument to go against it. In every sport you have casting personalities, whether it's American football, baseball, hockey, basketball, or whatever else. Casters are incredibly important to sports; think back to when sports were broadcasted over the radio and all there was was the caster's voice. Casters deserve attention, they get attention, getting mad that they get attention is stupid. Plus having a thread about arguably the most famous caster joining eMG deserves attention as much as if not more than some of the stuff that gets attention on this site. That's cool and all but I never stated that casters should get attention or should not. All I was stating was that argument was a fallacy, therefore invalid. And why is that argument "invalid?" Please stop posting generic statements that apply in some circumstances, but not all. Let's look at a completely different argument and try to apply the argument "everybody does it so you should do it too" When you're talking about smoking cigarettes, the argument "Well everybody smokes cigarettes" is a pretty bad argument, but there are reasons why that argument does not work in that scenario. For starters, not everybody smokes cigarettes. Therefore, the argument is inherently flawed because it is based around a statement that is simply not true. Another argument against smoking cigarettes is that it is known that there are medical drawbacks to smoking cigarettes. Regardless of whether or not the original statement "everybody smokes cigarettes" is true or not, there are reasons against doing what the hoi polloi is doing. Now let's apply this same logic to the argument of whether or not StarCraft 2 casters should get attention or not, but instead of the statement "everybody smokes cigarettes," we're going to say "every other sport gives attention to casters." First let's ask ourselves, is the statement true at all? The answer: yes; for the most part, just about every televised sport has it's various casting personalities. In American football, for example, you have John Madden. Now we come to our second point, which is to say, is there an argument against it? Is there a negative effect to giving casters like Artosis attention? Some people might say that there is a negative side effect, but as long as the players are getting as much attention (@LiquidRet), I think it's fair to say that there is no negative side effect to giving Artosis attention. There are threads about players joining teams and leaving teams all the time and this thread does not detract from those threads, so I really see no negative side effect. So this still makes me wonder, what is wrong with using the argument "everybody does it" in this scenario? Also please stop using a thesaurus when you're posting, it makes the words you look up stand out really badly lol It is invalid because it's illogical.(ad populum). "It is logically fallacious because the mere fact that a belief is widely-held is not necessarily a guarantee that the belief is correct; if the belief of any individual can be wrong, then the belief held by multiple persons can also be wrong." Cool once again a paragraph that means absolutely nothing towards the argument. One cannot simply defend a point by stating "others do it, so it's alright we can do it." They people could be right or wrong, it does not matter. You cannot make a logical argument by doing this. What are you talking about, "using the thesaurus"? I did not use any word in my last sentence that was even remotely foreign. Nice ad hominen though. Seriously was this a troll, or were you serious? Did you read the quote you wrote down or just copy/paste it. It literally backs my own point. Let's actually have a look and read said quote: Show nested quote +It is logically fallacious because the mere fact that a belief is widely-held is not necessarily a guarantee that the belief is correct; if the belief of any individual can be wrong, then the belief held by multiple persons can also be wrong. You're talking about it in hyperbolic terms of either completely correct or completely wrong. What you fail to realize is that while the belief of a group can be wrong, it can also be right. If that were not the case, then the word "can" would not be used there. What I am saying is that there are exceptions to the rule and therefore the argument works in certain cases, including the one we are talking about. Read the quote again and pay close attention to the words that I put in bold for you. What that quote is basically saying is that you have to examine each scenario and see how the argument applies to it. You have yet to actually prove how that argument is wrong other than pointing to highly generic statements that mean literally nothing. And let's be honest, nobody who starts a sentence with the phrase "That's cool and all" finishes that same thought with the words fallacy and invalid. Also, it's just a poorly structured sentence. Anybody who reads that sentence aloud would realize that it just sounds weird to say. Also that was not at all the basis of my argument and as you mentioned there was a lot more to what I wrote than simply me making fun of your terrible post (also you probably took more time finding that quote than I spent writing this post haha). Oh and you have still yet to explain to me how that argument is false. Stop pointing to quotes and phrases you have not even read or at the very least read to a point where you can understand it and--if you truly are so much more intelligent than me--actually explain why I am wrong.
Where did I state once that I was more intelligent than you, or anything of that nature?
I will attempt to organize this in a more coherent fashion.
"The "everybody's doing it" argument actually makes a lot of sense when you don't have an argument to go against it. " It may make sense to you, but it is sure invalid to thy. "ad populum only proves that a belief is popular, not that it is true. In some domains, however, it is popularity rather than other strengths that makes a choice the preferred one."
"It is logically fallacious because the mere fact that a belief is widely-held is not necessarily a guarantee that the belief is correct; if the belief of any individual can be wrong, then the belief held by multiple persons can also be wrong. The argument that because 75% of people polled think the answer is A implies that the answer is A, this argument fails, because if opinion did determine truth, then there be no way to deal with the discrepancy between the 75% of the sample population that believe the answer is A and 25% who are of the opinion that the answer is not A. However small the percentage of those polled is distributed among any remaining answers, this discrepancy by definition disproves any guarantee of the correctness of the majority. In addition, this would be true even if the answer given by those polled were unanimous, as the sample size may be insufficient, or some fact may be unknown to those polled that, if known, would result in a different distribution of answers."
"it. In every sport you have casting personalities, whether it's American football, baseball, hockey, basketball, or whatever else. Casters are incredibly important to sports; think back to when sports were broadcasted over the radio and all there was was the caster's voice. Casters deserve attention, they get attention, getting mad that they get attention is stupid. Plus having a thread about arguably the most famous caster joining eMG deserves attention as much as if not more than some of the stuff that gets attention on this site" Awesome. I never stated that I had an opinion whether they should be given attention or they shouldn't, all I was stating was that argument was invalid.
"When you're talking about smoking cigarettes, the argument "Well everybody smokes cigarettes" is a pretty bad argument, but there are reasons why that argument does not work in that scenario. For starters, not everybody smokes cigarettes." Agreed, it's a terrible argument.
"Is there a negative effect to giving casters like Artosis attention? Some people might say that there is a negative side effect, but as long as the players are getting as much attention (@LiquidRet), I think it's fair to say that there is no negative side effect to giving Artosis attention" You think it's fair? That's not the best evidence for an argument.
"...so I really see no negative side effect" Just because you don't see it doesn't mean that there are not negative side effects. (Once again don't assume anything. I have not stated that there are negative, positive, side effects, or even a mixture of both)
" Also please stop using a thesaurus when you're posting, it makes the words you look up stand out really badly lol" Alright, don't know how you came to that conclusion.
"What you fail to realize is that while the belief of a group can be wrong, it can also be right" Never failed to realize that. Can you stop putting words in my mouth?
"What I am saying is that there are exceptions to the rule and therefore the argument works in certain cases" You can make exceptions to the rule if you want, but that doesn't make it a valid argument or less falliiou
"What that quote is basically saying is that you have to examine each scenario and see how the argument applies to it. You have yet to actually prove how that argument is wrong other than pointing to highly generic statements that mean literally nothing." My goal was never to prove the argument right or wrong for the premise of "should casters be given attention." My goal was simply to state that argument way back, was bad.
""That's cool and all" finishes that same thought with the words fallacy and invalid." Sorry, didn't feel like typing all that much, and nor did I feel like making a properly form response.
"Anybody who reads that sentence aloud would realize that it just sounds weird to say." That's simply not true.
"(also you probably took more time finding that quote than I spent writing this post haha)." Nice assumption.
I think we may have had some miscommunication. You definitely had some decent argument of why casters should receive some fame, but I was not arguing that. I was simply stating that argument was invalid in proving why casters should receive attention. I believe, if I am mistaken, you were using that argument in an inductive way, while I was interpreting it in a deductive manner.
"The argumentum ad populum can be a valid argument in inductive logic; for example, a poll of a sizeable population may find that 90% prefer a certain brand of product over another. A cogent (strong) argument can then be made that the next person to be considered will also prefer that brand, and the poll is valid evidence of that claim. However, it is unsuitable as an argument for deductive reasoning as proof, for instance to say that the poll proves that the preferred brand is superior to the competition in its composition or that everyone prefers that brand to the other."
|
wow some people have alot of time on their hands....
|
+ Show Spoiler +On August 05 2012 17:58 DecisionTheory wrote:Show nested quote +On August 05 2012 12:48 The Final Boss wrote:On August 05 2012 09:30 DecisionTheory wrote:On August 05 2012 08:28 The Final Boss wrote:On August 05 2012 07:03 DecisionTheory wrote:On August 05 2012 02:30 The Final Boss wrote:On August 04 2012 15:51 DecisionTheory wrote:On August 03 2012 21:29 Butterednuts wrote:On August 03 2012 20:37 Champloo wrote: People care way too much about casters in Starcraft II. Yeah because people totally don't talk about John Madden. Terrible argument. Just because other people do it, doesn't make it correct. That might be true, but who are you to say that giving casters a lot of attention is incorrect? The "everybody's doing it" argument actually makes a lot of sense when you don't have an argument to go against it. In every sport you have casting personalities, whether it's American football, baseball, hockey, basketball, or whatever else. Casters are incredibly important to sports; think back to when sports were broadcasted over the radio and all there was was the caster's voice. Casters deserve attention, they get attention, getting mad that they get attention is stupid. Plus having a thread about arguably the most famous caster joining eMG deserves attention as much as if not more than some of the stuff that gets attention on this site. That's cool and all but I never stated that casters should get attention or should not. All I was stating was that argument was a fallacy, therefore invalid. And why is that argument "invalid?" Please stop posting generic statements that apply in some circumstances, but not all. Let's look at a completely different argument and try to apply the argument "everybody does it so you should do it too" When you're talking about smoking cigarettes, the argument "Well everybody smokes cigarettes" is a pretty bad argument, but there are reasons why that argument does not work in that scenario. For starters, not everybody smokes cigarettes. Therefore, the argument is inherently flawed because it is based around a statement that is simply not true. Another argument against smoking cigarettes is that it is known that there are medical drawbacks to smoking cigarettes. Regardless of whether or not the original statement "everybody smokes cigarettes" is true or not, there are reasons against doing what the hoi polloi is doing. Now let's apply this same logic to the argument of whether or not StarCraft 2 casters should get attention or not, but instead of the statement "everybody smokes cigarettes," we're going to say "every other sport gives attention to casters." First let's ask ourselves, is the statement true at all? The answer: yes; for the most part, just about every televised sport has it's various casting personalities. In American football, for example, you have John Madden. Now we come to our second point, which is to say, is there an argument against it? Is there a negative effect to giving casters like Artosis attention? Some people might say that there is a negative side effect, but as long as the players are getting as much attention (@LiquidRet), I think it's fair to say that there is no negative side effect to giving Artosis attention. There are threads about players joining teams and leaving teams all the time and this thread does not detract from those threads, so I really see no negative side effect. So this still makes me wonder, what is wrong with using the argument "everybody does it" in this scenario? Also please stop using a thesaurus when you're posting, it makes the words you look up stand out really badly lol It is invalid because it's illogical.(ad populum). "It is logically fallacious because the mere fact that a belief is widely-held is not necessarily a guarantee that the belief is correct; if the belief of any individual can be wrong, then the belief held by multiple persons can also be wrong." Cool once again a paragraph that means absolutely nothing towards the argument. One cannot simply defend a point by stating "others do it, so it's alright we can do it." They people could be right or wrong, it does not matter. You cannot make a logical argument by doing this. What are you talking about, "using the thesaurus"? I did not use any word in my last sentence that was even remotely foreign. Nice ad hominen though. Seriously was this a troll, or were you serious? Did you read the quote you wrote down or just copy/paste it. It literally backs my own point. Let's actually have a look and read said quote: It is logically fallacious because the mere fact that a belief is widely-held is not necessarily a guarantee that the belief is correct; if the belief of any individual can be wrong, then the belief held by multiple persons can also be wrong. You're talking about it in hyperbolic terms of either completely correct or completely wrong. What you fail to realize is that while the belief of a group can be wrong, it can also be right. If that were not the case, then the word "can" would not be used there. What I am saying is that there are exceptions to the rule and therefore the argument works in certain cases, including the one we are talking about. Read the quote again and pay close attention to the words that I put in bold for you. What that quote is basically saying is that you have to examine each scenario and see how the argument applies to it. You have yet to actually prove how that argument is wrong other than pointing to highly generic statements that mean literally nothing. And let's be honest, nobody who starts a sentence with the phrase "That's cool and all" finishes that same thought with the words fallacy and invalid. Also, it's just a poorly structured sentence. Anybody who reads that sentence aloud would realize that it just sounds weird to say. Also that was not at all the basis of my argument and as you mentioned there was a lot more to what I wrote than simply me making fun of your terrible post (also you probably took more time finding that quote than I spent writing this post haha). Oh and you have still yet to explain to me how that argument is false. Stop pointing to quotes and phrases you have not even read or at the very least read to a point where you can understand it and--if you truly are so much more intelligent than me--actually explain why I am wrong. Where did I state once that I was more intelligent than you, or anything of that nature? I will attempt to organize this in a more coherent fashion. "The "everybody's doing it" argument actually makes a lot of sense when you don't have an argument to go against it. " It may make sense to you, but it is sure invalid to thy. "ad populum only proves that a belief is popular, not that it is true. In some domains, however, it is popularity rather than other strengths that makes a choice the preferred one." "It is logically fallacious because the mere fact that a belief is widely-held is not necessarily a guarantee that the belief is correct; if the belief of any individual can be wrong, then the belief held by multiple persons can also be wrong. The argument that because 75% of people polled think the answer is A implies that the answer is A, this argument fails, because if opinion did determine truth, then there be no way to deal with the discrepancy between the 75% of the sample population that believe the answer is A and 25% who are of the opinion that the answer is not A. However small the percentage of those polled is distributed among any remaining answers, this discrepancy by definition disproves any guarantee of the correctness of the majority. In addition, this would be true even if the answer given by those polled were unanimous, as the sample size may be insufficient, or some fact may be unknown to those polled that, if known, would result in a different distribution of answers." "it. In every sport you have casting personalities, whether it's American football, baseball, hockey, basketball, or whatever else. Casters are incredibly important to sports; think back to when sports were broadcasted over the radio and all there was was the caster's voice. Casters deserve attention, they get attention, getting mad that they get attention is stupid. Plus having a thread about arguably the most famous caster joining eMG deserves attention as much as if not more than some of the stuff that gets attention on this site" Awesome. I never stated that I had an opinion whether they should be given attention or they shouldn't, all I was stating was that argument was invalid. "When you're talking about smoking cigarettes, the argument "Well everybody smokes cigarettes" is a pretty bad argument, but there are reasons why that argument does not work in that scenario. For starters, not everybody smokes cigarettes." Agreed, it's a terrible argument. "Is there a negative effect to giving casters like Artosis attention? Some people might say that there is a negative side effect, but as long as the players are getting as much attention (@LiquidRet), I think it's fair to say that there is no negative side effect to giving Artosis attention" You think it's fair? That's not the best evidence for an argument. "...so I really see no negative side effect" Just because you don't see it doesn't mean that there are not negative side effects. (Once again don't assume anything. I have not stated that there are negative, positive, side effects, or even a mixture of both) " Also please stop using a thesaurus when you're posting, it makes the words you look up stand out really badly lol" Alright, don't know how you came to that conclusion. "What you fail to realize is that while the belief of a group can be wrong, it can also be right" Never failed to realize that. Can you stop putting words in my mouth? "What I am saying is that there are exceptions to the rule and therefore the argument works in certain cases" You can make exceptions to the rule if you want, but that doesn't make it a valid argument or less falliiou "What that quote is basically saying is that you have to examine each scenario and see how the argument applies to it. You have yet to actually prove how that argument is wrong other than pointing to highly generic statements that mean literally nothing." My goal was never to prove the argument right or wrong for the premise of "should casters be given attention." My goal was simply to state that argument way back, was bad. Oh and you're still wrong. Simply put, you can use that argument so long as you analyze the situation in which you are using it. ""That's cool and all" finishes that same thought with the words fallacy and invalid." Sorry, didn't feel like typing all that much, and nor did I feel like making a properly form response. "Anybody who reads that sentence aloud would realize that it just sounds weird to say." That's simply not true. "(also you probably took more time finding that quote than I spent writing this post haha)." Nice assumption. I think we may have had some miscommunication. You definitely had some decent argument of why casters should receive some fame, but I was not arguing that. I was simply stating that argument was invalid in proving why casters should receive attention. I believe, if I am mistaken, you were using that argument in an inductive way, while I was interpreting it in a deductive manner. "The argumentum ad populum can be a valid argument in inductive logic; for example, a poll of a sizeable population may find that 90% prefer a certain brand of product over another. A cogent (strong) argument can then be made that the next person to be considered will also prefer that brand, and the poll is valid evidence of that claim. However, it is unsuitable as an argument for deductive reasoning as proof, for instance to say that the poll proves that the preferred brand is superior to the competition in its composition or that everyone prefers that brand to the other." It's painfully easy to tell what you copy/paste and what you actually write yourself because what you write yourself is written like an 8th grader. Simple put, that argument can actually be used and make sense so long as you analyze the situation in which you are using it. So please stop pasting quotes of stuff that you clearly don't even understand and also refrain from posting. Thanks! ^^
|
On August 05 2012 16:49 TRaFFiC wrote:Show nested quote +On August 03 2012 21:45 StreetWise wrote:On August 03 2012 20:15 SMMN wrote: tasteless is in there too? Yes, Tasteless was the first caster in their stable. He mentions this in his real talk episode. I would reccommend watching that, not just because he talks about this, but its interesting in general as there usually isnt much about the personal life of Tasteless. For instance he says that he hasn't lost his passion as many have speculated. Since he also talks about the Tastetosis brand its not surprising to see Artosis get picked up as well. link? Cool beans topic. + Show Spoiler + Table of Contents: http://reddit.com/r/starcraft/comments/wr1j3/real_talk_with_nick_tasteless_plott/c5fp3kq
I hope EMG picks up. The SC2 scene has needed some moderation for quite some time, imo.
|
On August 06 2012 00:22 The Final Boss wrote:+ Show Spoiler +On August 05 2012 17:58 DecisionTheory wrote:Show nested quote +On August 05 2012 12:48 The Final Boss wrote:On August 05 2012 09:30 DecisionTheory wrote:On August 05 2012 08:28 The Final Boss wrote:On August 05 2012 07:03 DecisionTheory wrote:On August 05 2012 02:30 The Final Boss wrote:On August 04 2012 15:51 DecisionTheory wrote:On August 03 2012 21:29 Butterednuts wrote:On August 03 2012 20:37 Champloo wrote: People care way too much about casters in Starcraft II. Yeah because people totally don't talk about John Madden. Terrible argument. Just because other people do it, doesn't make it correct. That might be true, but who are you to say that giving casters a lot of attention is incorrect? The "everybody's doing it" argument actually makes a lot of sense when you don't have an argument to go against it. In every sport you have casting personalities, whether it's American football, baseball, hockey, basketball, or whatever else. Casters are incredibly important to sports; think back to when sports were broadcasted over the radio and all there was was the caster's voice. Casters deserve attention, they get attention, getting mad that they get attention is stupid. Plus having a thread about arguably the most famous caster joining eMG deserves attention as much as if not more than some of the stuff that gets attention on this site. That's cool and all but I never stated that casters should get attention or should not. All I was stating was that argument was a fallacy, therefore invalid. And why is that argument "invalid?" Please stop posting generic statements that apply in some circumstances, but not all. Let's look at a completely different argument and try to apply the argument "everybody does it so you should do it too" When you're talking about smoking cigarettes, the argument "Well everybody smokes cigarettes" is a pretty bad argument, but there are reasons why that argument does not work in that scenario. For starters, not everybody smokes cigarettes. Therefore, the argument is inherently flawed because it is based around a statement that is simply not true. Another argument against smoking cigarettes is that it is known that there are medical drawbacks to smoking cigarettes. Regardless of whether or not the original statement "everybody smokes cigarettes" is true or not, there are reasons against doing what the hoi polloi is doing. Now let's apply this same logic to the argument of whether or not StarCraft 2 casters should get attention or not, but instead of the statement "everybody smokes cigarettes," we're going to say "every other sport gives attention to casters." First let's ask ourselves, is the statement true at all? The answer: yes; for the most part, just about every televised sport has it's various casting personalities. In American football, for example, you have John Madden. Now we come to our second point, which is to say, is there an argument against it? Is there a negative effect to giving casters like Artosis attention? Some people might say that there is a negative side effect, but as long as the players are getting as much attention (@LiquidRet), I think it's fair to say that there is no negative side effect to giving Artosis attention. There are threads about players joining teams and leaving teams all the time and this thread does not detract from those threads, so I really see no negative side effect. So this still makes me wonder, what is wrong with using the argument "everybody does it" in this scenario? Also please stop using a thesaurus when you're posting, it makes the words you look up stand out really badly lol It is invalid because it's illogical.(ad populum). "It is logically fallacious because the mere fact that a belief is widely-held is not necessarily a guarantee that the belief is correct; if the belief of any individual can be wrong, then the belief held by multiple persons can also be wrong." Cool once again a paragraph that means absolutely nothing towards the argument. One cannot simply defend a point by stating "others do it, so it's alright we can do it." They people could be right or wrong, it does not matter. You cannot make a logical argument by doing this. What are you talking about, "using the thesaurus"? I did not use any word in my last sentence that was even remotely foreign. Nice ad hominen though. Seriously was this a troll, or were you serious? Did you read the quote you wrote down or just copy/paste it. It literally backs my own point. Let's actually have a look and read said quote: It is logically fallacious because the mere fact that a belief is widely-held is not necessarily a guarantee that the belief is correct; if the belief of any individual can be wrong, then the belief held by multiple persons can also be wrong. You're talking about it in hyperbolic terms of either completely correct or completely wrong. What you fail to realize is that while the belief of a group can be wrong, it can also be right. If that were not the case, then the word "can" would not be used there. What I am saying is that there are exceptions to the rule and therefore the argument works in certain cases, including the one we are talking about. Read the quote again and pay close attention to the words that I put in bold for you. What that quote is basically saying is that you have to examine each scenario and see how the argument applies to it. You have yet to actually prove how that argument is wrong other than pointing to highly generic statements that mean literally nothing. And let's be honest, nobody who starts a sentence with the phrase "That's cool and all" finishes that same thought with the words fallacy and invalid. Also, it's just a poorly structured sentence. Anybody who reads that sentence aloud would realize that it just sounds weird to say. Also that was not at all the basis of my argument and as you mentioned there was a lot more to what I wrote than simply me making fun of your terrible post (also you probably took more time finding that quote than I spent writing this post haha). Oh and you have still yet to explain to me how that argument is false. Stop pointing to quotes and phrases you have not even read or at the very least read to a point where you can understand it and--if you truly are so much more intelligent than me--actually explain why I am wrong. Where did I state once that I was more intelligent than you, or anything of that nature? I will attempt to organize this in a more coherent fashion. "The "everybody's doing it" argument actually makes a lot of sense when you don't have an argument to go against it. " It may make sense to you, but it is sure invalid to thy. "ad populum only proves that a belief is popular, not that it is true. In some domains, however, it is popularity rather than other strengths that makes a choice the preferred one." "It is logically fallacious because the mere fact that a belief is widely-held is not necessarily a guarantee that the belief is correct; if the belief of any individual can be wrong, then the belief held by multiple persons can also be wrong. The argument that because 75% of people polled think the answer is A implies that the answer is A, this argument fails, because if opinion did determine truth, then there be no way to deal with the discrepancy between the 75% of the sample population that believe the answer is A and 25% who are of the opinion that the answer is not A. However small the percentage of those polled is distributed among any remaining answers, this discrepancy by definition disproves any guarantee of the correctness of the majority. In addition, this would be true even if the answer given by those polled were unanimous, as the sample size may be insufficient, or some fact may be unknown to those polled that, if known, would result in a different distribution of answers." "it. In every sport you have casting personalities, whether it's American football, baseball, hockey, basketball, or whatever else. Casters are incredibly important to sports; think back to when sports were broadcasted over the radio and all there was was the caster's voice. Casters deserve attention, they get attention, getting mad that they get attention is stupid. Plus having a thread about arguably the most famous caster joining eMG deserves attention as much as if not more than some of the stuff that gets attention on this site" Awesome. I never stated that I had an opinion whether they should be given attention or they shouldn't, all I was stating was that argument was invalid. "When you're talking about smoking cigarettes, the argument "Well everybody smokes cigarettes" is a pretty bad argument, but there are reasons why that argument does not work in that scenario. For starters, not everybody smokes cigarettes." Agreed, it's a terrible argument. "Is there a negative effect to giving casters like Artosis attention? Some people might say that there is a negative side effect, but as long as the players are getting as much attention (@LiquidRet), I think it's fair to say that there is no negative side effect to giving Artosis attention" You think it's fair? That's not the best evidence for an argument. "...so I really see no negative side effect" Just because you don't see it doesn't mean that there are not negative side effects. (Once again don't assume anything. I have not stated that there are negative, positive, side effects, or even a mixture of both) " Also please stop using a thesaurus when you're posting, it makes the words you look up stand out really badly lol" Alright, don't know how you came to that conclusion. "What you fail to realize is that while the belief of a group can be wrong, it can also be right" Never failed to realize that. Can you stop putting words in my mouth? "What I am saying is that there are exceptions to the rule and therefore the argument works in certain cases" You can make exceptions to the rule if you want, but that doesn't make it a valid argument or less falliiou "What that quote is basically saying is that you have to examine each scenario and see how the argument applies to it. You have yet to actually prove how that argument is wrong other than pointing to highly generic statements that mean literally nothing." My goal was never to prove the argument right or wrong for the premise of "should casters be given attention." My goal was simply to state that argument way back, was bad. Oh and you're still wrong. Simply put, you can use that argument so long as you analyze the situation in which you are using it. ""That's cool and all" finishes that same thought with the words fallacy and invalid." Sorry, didn't feel like typing all that much, and nor did I feel like making a properly form response. "Anybody who reads that sentence aloud would realize that it just sounds weird to say." That's simply not true. "(also you probably took more time finding that quote than I spent writing this post haha)." Nice assumption. I think we may have had some miscommunication. You definitely had some decent argument of why casters should receive some fame, but I was not arguing that. I was simply stating that argument was invalid in proving why casters should receive attention. I believe, if I am mistaken, you were using that argument in an inductive way, while I was interpreting it in a deductive manner. "The argumentum ad populum can be a valid argument in inductive logic; for example, a poll of a sizeable population may find that 90% prefer a certain brand of product over another. A cogent (strong) argument can then be made that the next person to be considered will also prefer that brand, and the poll is valid evidence of that claim. However, it is unsuitable as an argument for deductive reasoning as proof, for instance to say that the poll proves that the preferred brand is superior to the competition in its composition or that everyone prefers that brand to the other." It's painfully easy to tell what you copy/paste and what you actually write yourself because what you write yourself is written like an 8th grader. Simple put, that argument can actually be used and make sense so long as you analyze the situation in which you are using it. So please stop pasting quotes of stuff that you clearly don't even understand and also refrain from posting. Thanks! ^^
No shit sherlock. Those sentences are quoted for a reason;because I didn't write them. Funny how you write like you are some superior being, while being wrong on almost everything stated. And the time your weren't wrong was miscommication on my part or both out parts. It seems that do not understand anything that I have posted, nor have you ever studied logic. Go grab a logic textbook, and indulge yourself. Also, your really good at ad hominem arguments.
Then go read the original argument from which we started from and not tell me that, that is terrible argument for trying to prove something true.
"On August 03 2012 20:37 Champloo wrote: People care way too much about casters in Starcraft II.
"Yeah because people totally don't talk about John Madden."
|
next up... tasteless and artosis are signed by Ari Gold, Trimaster will be their Turtle.
|
|
|
|