Gem availability sucks for self found

"

Jennik wrote:

"

mark1030 wrote:

You can't expect people to interpret what you mean by context.

I assume this is about the Burning Arrow example I gave earlier, which was about a side conversation unrelated to the main topic, and which I didn't explain because, as I've repeatedly stated, it's fucking irrelevant? Yeah, I didn't expect people to have to interpret that in the context of what I'd written, because I (foolishly) expected people not be distracted by irrelevant details.

Hopefully you'll carry this forward to other posts at least? If it's truly irrelevant to the point you're making then there's no reason to have included it in the first place. It'd probably be worth removing from the OP just to avoid other people jumping on that point and further screwing with the thread.

As far as condescending versus angry goes, it can be quite difficult to figure out what a person's intended tone is when the other person only has text to go by. Repeatedly and emphatically denying one is angry tends to have the opposite effect and only confirm to others that one is angry because it is not uncommon for an angry person to be in denial about it, or at the very least that sort of person seems to be quite common on the internet.

"

mark1030 wrote:

Dude, at post number 12 you start talking about everybody shitting on you:

"

Jennik wrote:

Amazingly, not a single person has provided an argument as to why poor gem availability is better than good gem availability. Quite a few people have shown up to shit on me and the thread while contributing nothing of value to the discussion, though.

Keep being you, POE forum. Never fucking change.

Post 12!!! And 5 of those first 12 posts are YOU!!!

Okay, I lied. One last post to help this poor, oblivious soul with an unhealthy fascination with exclamation points (the late Terry Pratchett had things to say about people like you) potentially achieve even the slightest grasp on reality. I'm not even checking the thread for future idiocy after this.

Mark, you have made quite a few terrible mental errors here. I'll cover some in the hopes that you can maybe devote your effort into avoiding them in the future.

1. What you quoted was me wondering why you believe that I don't believe that I have an attitude. What you quoted in response to that was a post about some people shitting all over the thread. I'm not sure what went wrong here, but you have clearly not done things right.

You're already lost at this point. I don't know exactly what you're trying to say, and you're clearly not good at expressing your ideas. I'll give it my best shot, though.

2. "Post 12!!!" I assume you bring this up to somehow prove your claim that I'm acting "like everybody who has a different opinion than [me] is shitting on [me.]"

a. This is post 12. There is quite a bit of thread after that. Even if I concede that you are correct at this point of the thread (which you are not), it would still not prove that I have done this after post 12 in the thread (which I have not).

b. scale_e had posted multiple times by post 12. I don't agree with what he said or the ridiculous way in which he said it, but I'd never accuse him of shitting on the thread.

"

mark1030 wrote:

And why are you saying I'm not objective in this thread.

For starters, that was not my claim. Here is what you said:

"

mark1030 wrote:

People thought you sounded mad and were raging because that's what it looks like from an objective point of view.

For starters, I don't believe an objective point of view would lead one to believe that I'm angry or "raging," whatever you even mean by that. I've already covered how difficult it is to ascertain how angry someone is via words.

Secondly, I did not say you're not being objective in this thread (though I would, and if you disagree we're almost certainly using different definitions of the word). I clearly mocked the idea that the points of view leading people to believe I'm angry are objective (most specifically, the point of view of the troll). At most, this would mean that I don't believe you're being objecting about this one very specific thing (me being mad bro).

"

mark1030 wrote:

I read through 7 pages, most of which was you overreacting before I made any posts at all. i fucking agreed with your topic but you were too busy finding ways to be butthurt by my post that you don't even care. But please, show me how my reading 7 pages before posting is not being objective. Especially when I fucking agreed with you.

Clearly I'm overreacting and butthurt. Woe is me, life is misery. Is it okay if I promise only to react to things in ways that you personally deem appropriate in the future? Great! I mean, I fucking won't, obviously, but great!

Now that that's out of the way, reading seven pages of a thread does not make you objective. Agreeing with me does not make you any more likely to be objective. No, seriously, how could you possibly think that either one of those things has any relevance whatsoever to your level of objectivity? I'm not joking. That's a serious question. You really need to dig down deep and answer that question, since the fact that you can believe either one of those things means that your thinking is so flawed here that you're in serious danger of believing all sorts of ridiculously dumb bullshit in the future. Those are the sorts of traps of terrible thinking that let anti-vaccination bullshit worm its way into your brain. Kick that shit as fast as possible.

An evolution denier can read a thousand pages about evolution while still being the least objective person on the planet. They can also agree with the guy next to them, who also believes that evolution is a lie, a religion, and an affront to his god of choice. The does not make him objective.

Objectivity is about your ability to fairly evaluate all sides of an issue without your personal biases coloring your perceptions. I laughed at the idea that the people saying "u mad bro" were reading this thread with anything even resembling objectivity. I also don't believe an objective view would lead one to conclude that I'm angry, since, as I've repeatedly stated, anger is ridiculously hard to discern through writing.

Take this, for example:

If SSF was a league, the the OP might have a point. As it isn't if anything I'd say that gems dropping (that also can be bought from vendors) is a little on the high side, especially as any without XP/Quality that you already have some of are in effect worthless.

(The end of my post, was cut from the end of the last one)

Take this, for example:

"

mark1030 wrote:

Post 12!!! And 5 of those first 12 posts are YOU!!!

Did you overuse punctuation because you're angry? Did you start typing IN ALL CAPS because U MAD, BRO? It's possible, but I don't consider it likely. It would be massively foolish to reach that conclusion simply going by the way you communicate, just as it's massively foolish to reach that conclusion about me simply going by the way I communicate.

Instead of your rampant overuse of punctuation, I use italics and the word fuck. Does this make me angry? Fuck no. Maybe there's something else in my writing that you believe indicates anger. I assure you, based on the fact that you're completely fucking wrong about me being angry, that you are wrong about that particular thing indicating anger in me.

Stay in school. Do whatever you can to improve your critical thinking skills. Always strive to be a better person than you are right now.

And I'm out for good. I won't even read your posts since I know I'd get sucked right back in, but please do your best to provide good counterarguments for my position if you can think of any. Those are useful. If there actually is anything negative about my idea, it's worth pointing out. Don't rail against change purely for the sake of railing against change, as so many have done before you. You can be better than that.

didn't read most of the thread but in short I agree with the thread title and opening post.

"

I think we can stop the thread by saying this :


It would be nice to be able to buy (almost) all the gems without having to worry about the character's class. Not necessarily early, but when your character is already in the maps, it sure feels like a waste of time to need to either use an alt or ask someone else to buy a simple gem. Maybe enable the missing gems at the relevant merciless quests?

Anyways, it's not a major issue and isn't urgent (which is the main point of almost everybody in the thread, not that they think it's a bad idea).
It doesn't deserve the 7+ pages it got, and I urge Jennik to pm a moderator in order to close the thread (or use the report button, with the option "other" and explain that you simply want to close your own thread), rather than let us continue fighting for no real reason.

This. I want to keep the thread going because it's so funny, but really, of the words on this page >90% have nothing to do with "Gem availability sucks for self found". I agree with MrTremere's synopsis, there's no demonstrated urgency to change the gem system.

I used "!!!" because I was adding emphasis. Because it's kind of exclaiming "what?" It's disbelief that you acted like that. I pointed out the number of posts before you started saying people were shitting all over you. It was post 12. 5 posts of the first 12 were yours. 7 posts were others. 2 of those 7 were the same person. So by the time you had 6 people reading this, you already were overreacting. I know you can't see that because all you see is "people shit on me on this forum". Do you not see the correlation between your posts and the number of people who think you're reacting unreasonably. So unreasonably that it makes you look angry when you are not. At least you say you are not. I'm not convinced based on your inability to accept reasonable criticism.

Strawpoll: No way Jennik is real, right? Every response is just a bit too perfectly over-the-top.

"

Mephasm wrote:

Some classes, Witch, Ranger, Shadow, don't even get CWDT, and ironicaly enough, those are the classes that need CWDT the most.

Bro.. you serious? all gems in act 4 is available for all classes, CWDT included.

I always find it funny that the players who want to absolutely play SSF also want to remove all the hassles to play SSF, so I wonder what's the point to play SSF in the end.