Guest Big Time Software Posted October 17, 2000 Share Posted October 17, 2000 Well, I think this is a clear case of "if you can't stand the heat, get out of the kitchen". Henri started a legit topic about MW, then had great difficulties supporting his case. He then started to attack anybody with a differing point of view, dodged all rational and well presented points, and then blamed his own debating falures on everybody else. This is the same behavior that had the Gamey Recon thread last to about 500 posts BTW. But this is the most classic of all statement from Henri: <BLOCKQUOTE>quote:</font><HR>I have come to the conclusion that it is not possible on this forum to have an intellectual discussion that has any hint of criticism towards, Combat Mission, and therefore I respectfully bow out.<HR></BLOCKQUOTE> Funny enough, Henri came out and abusively accused me of this in the Gamey Recon thread. The really funny thing was that I was arguing that there IS a problem with CM and that he was the one defending our mistakes. After I posted that he chose not to respond. So now he perpetuates the myth that if anybody disagrees with him they are blindly supporting CM or BTS. The thought that he might be wrong, or someone else might have an equally valid point of view, has apparently never popped into his mind. It is no surprise to me that the only two people that have come to Henri's defense are Jeff and M.Bates. Frist to Jeff: <BLOCKQUOTE>quote:</font><HR>It is amazing that people like you guys will actually refuse to debate in a reasonend manner, and then feel superior when people get sick of it and leave.<HR></BLOCKQUOTE> Name me one thread that fits this discription that I have participated in. I bet you can't find one. However, I can find more than a few where you have been flaming away and not even attempting to have a rational discussion. This is not an attack on you Jeff, just pointing out that your attack on me is rather groundless, while the same time you are quite "guilty" of the things you accuse me of. Now for M.Bates' well supported example: <BLOCKQUOTE>quote:</font><HR>Well I started a thread about PBEM being inherently easier for the German player, and all these brown-nosers start to pile in.<HR></BLOCKQUOTE> So... people that construct logical arguments that do not support your offhand and unsupported comments are "brown-nosers"? Interesting. In noticed that as soon as people started offering different opinions in that thread (none of which were abusive) you bowed out. I guess you can't be wrong if you duck the ensuing discussion, eh? That thread was quite productive and non-abusive, but the majority of people disagreed with your point of view. Perhpas it angered you that they chose to support their positions with rational discussion, but I found it quite refreshing. I am sorry that someone feels that they don't belong here. But if the person can't engage in a two way dialog of give and take, but instead expects the other side to simply agree with him, then the departure is probably a good thing. There is no room for people that argue for argument's sake, then cry foul when they have come up short in an intellectual discussion. So, thanks to all you "brown-nosers" out there that can't think on their own and just blindly flame and abuse anybody that disagrees with us. It is truly welcomed and we wish to publically ask for even more ass kissing in the future, since we rather not make the game any better than it is now. But I do ask that you think of how time and energy could be saved driving off other critical thinkers by just calling them poo-poo heads. All that well constructed, researched, and non-partisan debating stuff is just so time consuming. Much better speding all the time and energy you spend on this stuff telling us how great we are and that all decisions we make are perfect. Steve Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest Big Time Software Posted October 17, 2000 Share Posted October 17, 2000 Just so we can make sure this thread is put into context, here is what set Henri off: http://www.battlefront.com/discuss/Forum1/HTML/011651.html I think the record is clear. Henri has a very strong concept of what Manuever Warfare is and found that nobody else (at least in that thread) agreed with him. In fact, they cited plenty of expert opinions, including their own first hand military experience, to counter Henri's conception of Manuever Warfare. When it became clear that he couldn't support his position, he bailed out and started this thread. I am sure he had a lot of problems with somethings that I said. The following is a quote from me when Henri started to dodge issues and attack the others: <BLOCKQUOTE>quote:</font><HR>The problem with the way you argue is that you assume a very high and lofty position (i.e. you are right and everybody else is wrong). In the process you belittle and at times insult people that have done nothing more than express a different opinion than yours, even if it is from first hand experience and better supported by documentation. You rather poorly support your own arguments, then claim you have cited infallible "examples" which are often either irrelevant or at best open to different interpretation. When these examples are either challenged or in some way countered (no matter how honestly and politely), you neatly dodge and sidestep the critical analysis. When the other side rightly calls foul, you then claim that they are attacking you in some personal way and use this as a further excuse to remove yourself from introspection. I have seen you do this several times now, so the pattern is rather well established. You are probably going to take this as a personal attack, but that is not the intent. The purpose of the above is to try and explain why it is that when you get into a "serious debate" it winds up like this thread has. It is VERY frustrating having a debate with someone who shows little desire to think about what is being discussed.<HR></BLOCKQUOTE> The nature and substance of Henri's departure from this BBS is consistant with what I wrote above. As is his likely bad mouthing us in USENET and other forums. I'm sorry it had to end this way, but those that can not enter into a debate with the notion others might disagree and do a better job supporting themesleves (i.e. that they might be wrong) then best to not debate at all. Steve [This message has been edited by Big Time Software (edited 10-16-2000).] Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
jshandorf Posted October 17, 2000 Share Posted October 17, 2000 I guess it all just boils down to that some people just rub other people's fur the wrong way...consistently. I understand this, that is why I hardly take anything personal and when I see someone mostly flushing those feathers of pride and arrogance I just roll my eyes and click to another topic. It is true that when you ARE right you have a superior position. I just think people let that go to thier heads way too often sometimes. *sigh* Lets all be truthful with each other and just admit that some people cut with the snide comments a little too deep aroud here sometimes, and most brow beating is VERY subtle, but it is there. You can argue with someone and prove they are wrong. That's fine, but puting the coupe-de-graw in them and making them feel small is sometimes too much. Mind you I am not talking about just this one instance and I am not defending Henri. Sometimes people go looking for a battle and they get a war. That is what happened to Henri in the end. That's too bad. All I am trying to say is lets try not to have too many Henri days around here. I can think of few people, who were around when I first got here, and now are gone and honestly, I miss them. Jeff Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
M. Bates Posted October 17, 2000 Share Posted October 17, 2000 Brown-nosers was a bit strong and I regret that, even printing it twice. It's difficult to converse using just the electronic word sometimes, I just wish people wouldn't rile others so much, myself included, I still stand by what I said in that I feel the Germans have an advantage, especially at the start of the game when their armour in "overwatch" can give them a headstart. Instead of replying immediately to someone and letting rip, everyone should wait for a few seconds and think about what they are going to say, obviously this only applies for people like me who have a problem with holding tone and temper, but also CavScout et al Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Aussie Smith Posted October 17, 2000 Share Posted October 17, 2000 Look I have now read all the articles associated with Henri's departure and while I'm not sure he was treated woefully I also think that perhaps the opening lines on some of the responses could have been rephrased to perhaps be a little less confrontationist. Lets all look at one thing - reading the emotion between the lines is difficult on a forum - I think we should all go to extreme lengths to ensure that when we are responding that we relay to the person we are responding to that it is not a personal attack but that we have a difference of opinion. This would save a lot of grief I believe. Henri - if you are lurking out there in Cyber Space I for one appreciate your posts - be they right or wrong - because it invigorates discussion, which is good for the game IMO. Craig [This message has been edited by Aussie Smith (edited 10-16-2000).] Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Jadayne Posted October 17, 2000 Share Posted October 17, 2000 Henri's leaving?! Who's gonna be in charge of the smilies? ------------------ This space for rent. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Jadayne Posted October 17, 2000 Share Posted October 17, 2000 Henri's leaving?! Who's gonna be in charge of the smilies? ------------------ This space for rent. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Jadayne Posted October 17, 2000 Share Posted October 17, 2000 Henri's leaving?! Who's gonna be in charge of the smilies? ------------------ This space for rent. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest Big Time Software Posted October 17, 2000 Share Posted October 17, 2000 M.Bates, thanks for the clarification. You have an opinion that differs with ours and (apparently) the majority of CM players. But that does not mean you are off the wall or inherently wrong. <BLOCKQUOTE>quote:</font><HR>Aussie Smith wrote: ve now read all the articles associated with Henri's departure and while I'm not sure he was treated woefully I also think that perhaps the opening lines on some of the responses could have been rephrased to perhaps be a little less confrontationist.<HR></BLOCKQUOTE> I do understand this point and agree with it for the most part. But sometimes a thread is started up for reasons that are not readily apparent. Anybody that read through the 500 posts in the Gamey Recon thread knew WHY Henri started that topic and, more importantly, the way he was going to argue his point of view. I gave him the benefit of the doubt with my first post, but he soon made it clear what the thread was really about: <BLOCKQUOTE>quote:</font><HR>Replying in detail to the above misconceptions would require more space that I care to take up for the moment, but let me just say that you and Steve are dead wrong when you claim that maneuver warfare is limited to the operational level, and others who identify maneuver warfare with movement are simply confused by the word "maneuver".<HR></BLOCKQUOTE> To show himself a superior thinker to me personally, as well as anybody else that has a differing opinion about MW. When he failed to do this (and he did) he got personal and eventually fled the debate in a huff. He set himself up for it, so it doesn't surprise me that it ended this way. At least this "debate" didn't drag out for 500 tedious posts Steve P.S. He is already on USENET bad mouthing us Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Jadayne Posted October 17, 2000 Share Posted October 17, 2000 holy crap! triple post! sorry -my computer belched. ------------------ This space for rent. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Aussie Smith Posted October 17, 2000 Share Posted October 17, 2000 Steve Bud, wasn't singling you out mate - just a comment for general consumption (you know me ). As to Henri badmouthing - oh well - I hope he comes to his sences *sigh* Craig oh and you still up for that game Steve? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
aka_tom_w Posted October 17, 2000 Share Posted October 17, 2000 <BLOCKQUOTE>quote:</font><HR>Originally posted by Jeff Heidman: I don't blame him. I don't always agree with him, but he is correct in his assessmnet of this board. There are people who will absolutely flame anyone who hints at any kind of criticism of CM. Steve is one of them. The sad part is that Steve will on one hand flame away where a flame is not warranted, make personal attacks, etc. , and then have his little sycophants immediately show up and accuse everyone else of being personal and not debating the point. This doublespeak is amusing, at best. The level of intellectual dishonesty displayed by people on this board is sometimes staggering. It is amazing that people like you guys will actually refuse to debate in a reasonend manner, and then feel superior when people get sick of it and leave. It is not sour grapes, it is getting tired of dealing with a bunch of people incapable of putting an argument together without getting personal. Henri is not the first, or the last, to leave because of this board intolerance for anything but the party line. Pravda! Jeff Heidman<HR></BLOCKQUOTE> I guess I can take issue with that.... "It is not sour grapes, it is getting tired of dealing with a bunch of people incapable of putting an argument together without getting personal. Henri is not the first, or the last, to leave because of this board intolerance for anything but the party line." I have spoken out against the party line and about some problems I would like to see fixed in CM. Steve and Charles have openly and directly disagreed with me, I have openly dissagreed with them. BUT there is still dialogue. Steve knows I have been outspoken about some issues like LOS thru Live AFV's, lack of modeling for (?questionable) "superior" German Optics, and Accuracy at long range of the 88 mm german weapon. So What!? We disagree, they know my position I know their position and we move on or keep talking. The situation is not at all like you describe it, Pzkfpw1 (John Waters) and I have both been openly critical of some things in CM but we have not been banned or flammed off the board. OK, so One of my long rants was "labeled JUST plain silly", by Steve, (I didn't think it was ) but that is about as close to a "personal attack" I've ever seen from BTS. (BTW, I know it was not a personal attack , it was just a silly response ) SO what the real problem, here? Well Might I say it is BIG ego's and lack of personal growth and interpersonal communication skills! Simple, some people can't stand to be proven wrong, some how wargaming in general seems to attract these kinds of people like swarms of flies to honey. How many times have we all sat down to play 2D card board wargames with folks who have the rule book in one hand and and a beer in the other and as the night goes on the rules change? Its nothing more than big ego's and sore losers. There are folks here who seriously lack mature communication skills and could not debate their way out of a paper bag! When these folks start to verbally (in writting on the BBS) duke it out with folks who have more wisdom, Maturity, and WW II techincal expertise, with regard to historical accruacy, and when these folks can't get everyone else to see THEIR way, they just LOOSE IT! ( In Toronto on the Radio we have a guy called "The Champ" He's a boxer and he says things like "... and So I LOOOOOOSE IT! , Flurry to the midsection, and right hook to the lower jaw!) sorry I digress, jsut thought I'd add some humour for those who've heard of the Champ. Any way. I have found this BBS to have a REMARKABLE, and exceptional tolerance for mature debate and the presentation of thoughts, ideas, concepts, suggestions, and even complaints and critisiscms that go all the way against the BTS party line. Seriously. SO no, I don't believe desenters and complainers are banned or ostricized. ITs only those folks with BIG ego's that need some work on their listening and inter personal comunication skills and who lack experience in mature scholarly debates, and intolerance for actual facts that might be in other folk's opinions, that choose to voluntarily remove themselves from this forum. I guess I'm ranting again... With resignation.... Go ahead flame Away at me, I've gotten used to it, (Spoken in the Tone of Eeyore (that monotone Donkey) from Whinny the Pooh) if you need the appropriate audio cue. -tom w [This message has been edited by aka_tom_w (edited 10-16-2000).] Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest KwazyDog Posted October 17, 2000 Share Posted October 17, 2000 "It's difficult to converse using just the electronic word sometimes" M Bates, that is an excellent point and one which I think has been at the root of most of the misunderstandings on both this forum and the internet in general. Something we need to keep in mind whilst reading the written word is that a post that may have been typed with a sly grin on ones face may be interpreted by another with a scowl. I find it best to sit back and reread posts two or three times before replying, especially if they pull on emotions that may not have originally been intended by the author. I know I myself have type things in the past only to realise later conveyed a different message from my original intentions, and am more than happy to apologise if that is so. In fact, in my whole time on this forum after hundreds of posts I can only think of one post that came across as a deliberate personal attack upon me, which I think damn good considering the sometimes heated nature of the forum. On top of that I have a feeling that even that person had an agenda, not a point Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Hamstersss Posted October 17, 2000 Share Posted October 17, 2000 When I opened up the most recent thread on full squad representation, I felt that a lot of people were negative toward the issue for no good reason. Many of the responses were of the, "Why would you ever want that," catagory and that bothered me. It was not, however, unexpected or something that caused significant or lasting damage and I'll tell you why. In a debate, the burden of proof is upon the challenger, not the status quo. Anyone who wants to challenge the way CM does things has all the work and if they fail to do so, it's their fault. If their case is only a little less convincing than that of the status qou, they have still failed. Many people start these debates with the idea that it's civil court, he who provides the best argument at the time wins. Well, it's not, it's criminal court, with the burden to prove beyond the shadow of a doubt your case, because Steve and Charles have all ready created the status quo. We are not equals here and it's more than a little childish to pretend like we are. Those who stand up and demand change had sure as hell better have compelling evidence to gain it, otherwise Steve and Charles, and the old-timers (The brown-nosers) will say, "Sorry, don't buy it" and be perfectly justified in doing so. ------------------ Did someone compare this to the Ealing comedies? I've shot people for less. -David Edelstein Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest *Captain Foobar* Posted October 17, 2000 Share Posted October 17, 2000 You know, I have been watching this whole thing, and I find these heated debates to be totally bizarre. There is nothing in the world you guys could write in a post that fnord would emotionally wreck me. I don't understand this emotional investment in winning forum arguments, and maybe thats because when I post something, I am usually trying to find out IF I am right. We are starting to sound like a bunch of women.(no offense women..) Just look at us! Now, lets just banter about turret rotation, tungsten, and drink beer. Enough of this silly horse-crap.... Again, if this post inspires an emotional reaction in you, you should probably stop reading the forum for a little while. Rant over.... Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
PeterNZer Posted October 17, 2000 Share Posted October 17, 2000 Sorry, who was leaving? O well, plenty more where that came from. Seriously tho. CM is like a piece of academic or scientific work. Once it's 'out there', sure, you can tear it appart, but you better have some damn good evidence to back up assertions. That's where the optics thread came to the stalemate where BTS agreed the optics were better, but stated that quantifying how much better german optics were was beyond them, and noone else provided much more than annecdotes to show the for optics case. Earlier, I've seen good debates which ended up with BTS admiting they had made an error and changed stuff. Back in November (?) last year there was the smoke trails on 'zooks. Lots of folks said 'not historical, remove' and BTS oblidged, (although I liked them, hehe, they looked cool ). A case of clear evidence pointing to a 'fault' (I can't really call it that.. the BTS guys thought it looked cooler that way too hehe), and it was rectified. Thing is, at this point in the game, faults are fewer and fewer, changes are harder and harder to implement. So feel free to post you don't like something, but if you post, be prepared for those who GENUINELY know more to tell you you're wrong. Happens to me all the time! PeterNZ ------------------ <BLOCKQUOTE>quote:</font><HR>Hamsters Wrote: PeterNZ: He hasn’t proven to be particularly valiant but I think he’d make a good doorman<HR></BLOCKQUOTE> Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
dumbo Posted October 17, 2000 Share Posted October 17, 2000 Burnout. One of the reasons I have become more and more of a board lurker rather than a poster here is burnout. My opinion runs like this. Combat Mission is complete, done, finished. Its a great game I love playing it. Many of the posts here tend to end up talking up what perceived flaws there are in the product. These snowball and snowball until the game is pereceived as "broken" by some players. This burns me out as I dont have anything left to discuss about the game. I am a completely satisfied customer. However I have been in communties for games which I did "keep at it" constantly asking for minor tweaks until my requests were ignored or refuted and I got angry at the makers. I dont intend to make that mistake again In actual fact I usually come here now to check out the OT threads just becuase this is a remarkably well informed community about military matters and just generally nice folks. I intend to lurk more and more often until CM2 comes along the horizon. I am not sure this is useful to anyone but you might want to consider if you are getting irritated coming here or getting angry at the game you used to enjoy maybe its time to take a break or wait for CM2? Just a thought. Cheers _dumbo Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Bastables Posted October 17, 2000 Share Posted October 17, 2000 <BLOCKQUOTE>quote:</font><HR>Originally posted by *Captain Foobar*: You know, I have been watching this whole thing, and I find these heated debates to be totally bizarre. There is nothing in the world you guys could write in a post that fnord would emotionally wreck me. I don't understand this emotional investment in winning forum arguments, and maybe thats because when I post something, I am usually trying to find out IF I am right. We are starting to sound like a bunch of women.(no offense women..) Just look at us! Now, lets just banter about turret rotation, tungsten, and drink beer. Enough of this silly horse-crap.... Again, if this post inspires an emotional reaction in you, you should probably stop reading the forum for a little while. Rant over.... <HR></BLOCKQUOTE> Dammit Foo. Are you impugning my character again? I’ll kill you, you filthy swine! (Its a joke for those to high strung, dammit I feel like a tosser feeling the need to make such a note, almost as stupid as all those people that make quote marks with their hands while talking. I mean what the hell is all that about.) Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest *Captain Foobar* Posted October 17, 2000 Share Posted October 17, 2000 LOL you are indeed a tosser Bastardbles, I am relieved to see that you have reflected upon what is perfectly obvious to the rest of us..... Ahh, the cesspool has sprung another leak...here comes the lock... (tee hee) Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Silver Fox Posted October 17, 2000 Share Posted October 17, 2000 I do not post very often but on this issue I do have some thoughts(maybe not good ones).As someone relatively new to CM but not to wargaming as a hobby I have already stated my opinion of CM as the best game in my experience.However I agree with those who's opinion of this forum is that often some posters use ridicule as a tool of debate.Also I have seen some posts that do posit the argument on the basis of who read the most books.I have also seen an attitude that seems to hold that only veterans(of which I am one(Korea)) know what the REAL story is (in fact one thread held that unless you LED men in combat you really didn't understand.For these reasons I seldom post opinions on this forum.Still love the game though! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
TeAcH Posted October 17, 2000 Share Posted October 17, 2000 Here's my example of someone (Simon Fox) being rude for no reason whatsoever. I use this example to plead an end to the flaming. Its a short discussion: http://www.battlefront.com/discuss/Forum1/HTML/010941.html Thanks Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
IntelWeenie Posted October 17, 2000 Share Posted October 17, 2000 <BLOCKQUOTE>quote:</font><HR>Originally posted by KwazyDog: Something we need to keep in mind whilst reading the written word is that a post that may have been typed with a sly grin on ones face may be interpreted by another with a scowl.<HR></BLOCKQUOTE> Well said. It's the reason why I choose to use smileys a lot. (See, they DO serve a useful purpose to humanity!) ------------------ Cats aren't clean, they're covered with cat spit. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Grognerd_Fogman Posted October 17, 2000 Share Posted October 17, 2000 <BLOCKQUOTE>quote:</font><HR>Originally posted by Big Time Software: M.Bates, thanks for the clarification. You have an opinion that differs with ours and (apparently) the majority of CM players. But that does not mean you are off the wall or inherently wrong. To show himself a superior thinker to me personally, as well as anybody else that has a differing opinion about MW. When he failed to do this (and he did) he got personal and eventually fled the debate in a huff. He set himself up for it, so it doesn't surprise me that it ended this way. At least this "debate" didn't drag out for 500 tedious posts Steve P.S. He is already on USENET bad mouthing us <HR></BLOCKQUOTE> Just a clarification. Smoker started the Gamey Recon thread...cheers! ------------------ Thanks for Athskin! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Darwin Posted October 17, 2000 Share Posted October 17, 2000 I am glad to see this thread aimed where it is as it looked to be turning into a pity drive when I last checked it. Seconding spooks comment to blackhorse, I think quite a bit of tolerance was displayed in the manuever thread. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest Big Time Software Posted October 17, 2000 Share Posted October 17, 2000 I think it is about time to close this up. Enough has been said about the matter. Time to move on Steve Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts