Ragdollmaster wrote:In other news, Venatir is dumb beyond belief. Maybe he's one of those new arsenic-based lifeforms? I understand that the toxicity of their DNA can lead to severe mental retardation.
Calling names makes you seem SO much more clever than him.
Renegade_Turner wrote:
I wouldn't expect you to have respect for anyone over the internet, so the fact that I now have some respect is exceptional.
How could I not respect someone who can change his behaviour based on logical reasons? Most people seem to just go along with things, adjusting to the outward pressure of their environment.
Ragdollmaster wrote:
Yeah, no. He bought the game in the past. Pirating it later doesn't lose the game maker any profit- it's not like now, Valve won't get any money from Renegade that they normally would have gotten.
>If he got "your" copy of hl2 on his account, it is his now. One account and one user.
You DO know the Subscriber Agreement, since you've read it all before playing hl2, right?
Ps: It's called common sense
You are arguing technicalities and semantics, thus ignoring the bigger picture. Stop being a special child and move on, please.
What you are trying to say, is that you can both have your cake and eat it too?
It doesn't work that way. Unless you steal another cake
Renegade_Turner wrote:
You should know I've put the trolling behind me. Of course, if someone prods I will still probably bite, but I'd be pleased if you could give your opinion of me a fresh start.
And you still use bold and coloured text like an attention whore? Sure you are not a troll.
Unwarranted Self-Importance (USI) is a disease that gives you the feeling that you are actually worth something despite not having made any contributions to anything at all, and actually making the world a much shittier place, thus making yourself look like a complete douche.
Me, however, is kinda of a big deal.
Endoperez wrote:
Regeneration (Ex)
Unlike normal trolls, Super Serial Trolls are immune to acidic attacks. Only strong flames deal normal damage to them.
Silly you. I am immune to flaming attack. Otherwise I would have been dead long ago.
Renegade_Turner wrote:You should know I've put the trolling behind me. Of course, if someone prods I will still probably bite, but I'd be pleased if you could give your opinion of me a fresh start.
And you still use bold and coloured text like an attention whore? Sure you are not a troll.
Unwarranted Self-Importance (USI) is a disease that gives you the feeling that you are actually worth something despite not having made any contributions to anything at all, and actually making the world a much shittier place, thus making yourself look like a complete douche.
Me, however, is kinda of a big deal.
I'm sorry you feel that way. I hope you can see past your vendetta you seem to have against me. The hatred will eat you up inside.
I won't rise to random trolling. Can't troll the troll. You're just being silly now. You didn't even provide any adequate retort to the points I made. And you're not half as good at this as I was.
There's the sideline trolls, the guys that throw something in every half year or so to enrage the discussion. And there's resident trolls, they're the guys that troll relentlessly so that they eventually reach about 5,800 posts of trollage.
At some point, you learn to live with the resident trolls; you even learn to appreciate them, like you learn to appreciate a squeaking door, or the time it takes your TV to warm up. They're also so persistent in their trolling that it becomes sort of a seal of baseline quality when they post in a thread — you know that if you said something that made the resident troll grunt, you did something right!
Endoperez wrote: Calling names makes you seem SO much more clever than him.
I'm not sure if it's name calling so much as it is scientific classification.
>What you are trying to say, is that you can both have your cake and eat it too?
The thing is, games aren't perishable food items that can be consumed and crapped out two days later: they're reusable pieces of equipment. You cannot use an analogy like that to accurately compare something corporeal with electronic data. Losing a game and then pirating it later is not the same as stealing a tangible copy of the game that somebody else may have bought in the future- which would be an example of the game developer losing money. Pirating a game outright, without ever paying the developer anything, is contextually different than what R_T did.
Now, once again, stop being so literal and move on with your life.
Endoperez wrote: Calling names makes you seem SO much more clever than him.
I'm not sure if it's name calling so much as it is scientific classification.
Venatir is arguing technicalities and semantics trying to defend his opinion. You're arguing the claim is false because it's made by Venatir. The only scientific term that comes to my mind is argumentum ad hominem, a type of logical fallacy.
>What you are trying to say, is that you can both have your cake and eat it too?
The thing is, games aren't perishable food items that can be consumed and crapped out two days later: they're reusable pieces of equipment. You cannot use an analogy like that to accurately compare something corporeal with electronic data.
Stop being so literal.
You can't pirate a game (that is, eat a cake) and call it legal (still have a whole cake).
In this case it might not be morally wrong to use illegal means to access the service that was paid for. It is, however, still illegal, and the breaking of a law is a moral wrong in itself.
Endoperez wrote:You're arguing the claim is false because it's made by Venatir.
I'm actually just observing that he's stupid because his opinion (and defense thereof) is stupid, not that his opinion is stupid because he is stupid. Get it right Now, he might not be innately stupid, but the point stands for this isolated incident.
Endoperez wrote:You can't pirate a game (that is, eat a cake) and call it legal (still have a whole cake).
What's the point of having a cake and not eating it? That's like buying a game and not playing it. Pirating doesn't fit into that illustration. Is having the cake playing the game? Then where does the buying come in? His little anecdote is illogical. There are three major actions which need to be defined, and with the use of the "cake" analogy, only two are. I'm not being literal at this point, I'm pointing out the obvious.
Endoperez wrote:It is, however, still illegal, and the breaking of a law is a moral wrong in itself.
I take issue with this statement. I completely disagree. That is not always the case. I don't even think I need to explain myself, you're clever enough so you can probably guess what I'm getting at. The Law =/= Moral Perfection.
rudel_ic wrote:There's the sideline trolls, the guys that throw something in every half year or so to enrage the discussion. And there's resident trolls, they're the guys that troll relentlessly so that they eventually reach about 5,800 posts of trollage.
At some point, you learn to live with the resident trolls; you even learn to appreciate them, like you learn to appreciate a squeaking door, or the time it takes your TV to warm up. They're also so persistent in their trolling that it becomes sort of a seal of baseline quality when they post in a thread — you know that if you said something that made the resident troll grunt, you did something right!
I can't help but feel subtlely referenced to and insulted by all of this. I'm still not entirely sure whether or not it was even insulting.
Renegade_Turner wrote:I can't help but feel subtlely referenced to and insulted by all of this. I'm still not entirely sure whether or not it was even insulting.
If you go through it, I didn't actually mention you by name. I guess the 5,800 posts thing is an indicator of sorts, but YOU GOT NO PROOF SON.
Ragdollmaster wrote:I'm actually just observing that he's stupid because his opinion (and defense thereof) is stupid, not that his opinion is stupid because he is stupid. Get it right Now, he might not be innately stupid, but the point stands for this isolated incident.
I disagree with his opinion, but not the methods he used to defend it.
Idiom is an expression whose meanings cannot be inferred from the meanings of the words that make it up. You cannot have your cake and eat it means that you cannot enjoy two desirable things at the same time, "you can't have it both ways".
A reason why GOG is doing so well. They advertise DRM free.
I don't really care about DRM, as long as it doesn't interfere with my playing, like longer loading time, extra checks if the copy is legal, disconnects just because my internet is slow/dropped.
Out of this whole topic, this frustrated me the most:
Grayswandir wrote:
Ozymandias wrote:
Grayswandir wrote:I love consoles, especially portables. They're like acorns, that you can take OUTSIDE.
Portables are nice I suppose, since they're pretty unique. Though, I only have a DS and I don't really use it much.
I always figured acorns were outside to begin with.
When i first read Grayswandir's post I immediately got it and snickered to myself, then Ozymandias had to go and ruin it by not getting the damn reference! Why are people around here so slow at getting references! It totally ruins the self satisfaction when you have to explain the joke ...
rudel_ic wrote:
Renegade_Turner wrote:I can't help but feel subtlely referenced to and insulted by all of this. I'm still not entirely sure whether or not it was even insulting.
If you go through it, I didn't actually mention you by name. I guess the 5,800 posts thing is an indicator of sorts, but YOU GOT NO PROOF SON.
Just let it go, man. Let it go.
I admittedly laughed ... but really you can't expect people to just forget about months of trolling, when you made that decision to troll, you basically tarnished the reputation of "Renegade_Turner" permanently.
I knew a guy who had this really long streak in which he was crashing game servers by basically ddosing them with player join requests. He basically crushed online play in every server for the entire game for a solid week doing this (the game was old so the company who made it didn't give a shit and took no actions). And every few weeks or months he would start back up again using some new method to crash servers after the server admins would develop ways (usually horribly botched ways, like de-listing themselves from the main server tracker or using passwords within the server name) to counter his attacks.
Anywho, a year or so later, another guy started developing anti-cheat, security patch, versions of the game and he started making versions of anti-cheat software as well ... problem is no one trusted him enough to use them. Even though his version was much less intruding overall ...
Renegade_Turner wrote:
Endoperez wrote:It is, however, still illegal, and the breaking of a law is a moral wrong in itself.
I take issue with this statement. I completely disagree. That is not always the case. I don't even think I need to explain myself, you're clever enough so you can probably guess what I'm getting at. The Law =/= Moral Perfection.
There is truth here ... I break laws all the time and have absolutely no moral problem with it ... they're stupid laws ...
such as the FDA putting a ban on alcohol and caffeine mixes ... fuck that! *sips his newly invented grape soda / captain morgan concoction*
Endoperez wrote:... and the breaking of a law is a moral wrong in itself.
Wow.
You really believe that?
Just wow.
Allow me to present the painfully obvious counter-argument. During WWII the people in Germany who protected Jewish friends and neighbours from the Nazis were breaking the law.
Calling names makes you seem SO much more clever than him. 
Now, he might not be innately stupid, but the point stands for this isolated incident. 
Why are people around here so slow at getting references! It totally ruins the self satisfaction when you have to explain the joke 
...
...