HAS ANYONE SEEN THIS YET?!?!?!

[DÛke]

...to all those complainers, let me tell just one thing, THIS site is the ONLY site that supports everyone. Personally, I rarely play in tournies, but I LUVE it that way; I want it that way. I come here because I find many people who are like me, who like to just have fun and be casual about everything...I'm one of those who DOES NOT give a s**t about all those PTQ, or whatever the hell you call them.

Nobody is paying me to come here...it is my will that drags me here every morning, and if I don't like it, I could take my sorry a** and get the heck out of here. After all, it is not like a job or anything. THOUGH, if I have the will to come here, I will not insult the people who I talk to, and who are very supportive...otherwise, why the hell am I here? Why would I stay if I would go behind someone's back, and insult them (yes: INSULT) like there was no future? Why? I mean, I AM HERE WITH THEM, yet, I stab my own people in the back! WHY?

If one does not LUVE what is seen here, than the SAME way one came here, ONE could leave...it is that easy, ladies and genties...You came here upon your will, and YOU WILL leave that way too, no one will stop you, and no one will force you to read Ransac's COOL articles! You don't like it than keep it yourself, or don't come here...since WE ARE ALL LOSERS, "YA KNOW"?

If you come here, you have no right to insult us.

THERE!

[Edited by DÛke on 12-15-00 at 10:40 AM]

 

[Ransac]

AAAAAAAmen


Ransac, cpa trash man

 

[Baskil]

Originally posted by Ransac
One more thing. To publicly critisize my "work" on ccgprime is just childish. I spend a long time thinking about what to say and if people like me will like it, because, let's face it, I'm not going to write anything that I wouldn't read myself.

I don't believe it's childish. Of course, why would I say it is . You are correct, the purpose of writing on a public forum is not just to inform. The other half of that is to entertain. If you don't inform or entertain, you lose your readership, and people will press the back button.

Here's what you need to do Mark.
1.) Expand on your ideas. "How I anticipate its entry to the environment" could have been followed up with a few reasons why you think that. What makes you feel that way? What effect on the environment do you think 7th edition will make? These are the sort of questions you should be asking yourself after almost every sentence.
2.) When you're done writing the article, go over it with a fine comb. Add words where needed. Which do you think is better:

"Rd 2 vs some no-name playing some scrubby deck
Game 1: Forced out necro and won
Game 2: He can't handle negators
2-0"

OR

"Round 2, playing John Doe with something he calls CounterBoa
Game 1: We roll the dice, and he wins, and starts out with a Tropical Island. A land grant afterwards shows me a Force, River Boa, Elvish Lyrist, and Force Spike. I return with a Swamp and a Mox. He plays the Tropical Island and taps out to play the boa. I let is resolve, knowing that I can now safely put Necro on the board. I untap and do so. I counter his lyrist, took some more damage from the boa. That turn I laid an Illusions, and made sure I had the counter power to force the Donate through. I try it next turn, and after a suprisingly short counter-war, the Illusions was his.
I side in the Negators and the Masticores.
Game 2: Poor John. He mulliganed twice and decided to keep. He opened with a Land Grant (showing all 1cc cards). I force it, thinking he would still be screwed. I get a Negator out third turn, and John has yet to lay more than one land. He concedes after two more non-land draws.
2-0"

I hope you don't take offense to what I wrote. The idea was to inform you that your writing *could* and *should* be better.
(and no, I am NOT an English major)

Yes, DUke, you are right. No one forces me to read Mark's articles. However, it *is* my job to inform my readers what they might be better off not looking at. My readers are the judge of that. All I do is attempt to sort out the boundless amount of content on the internet.

"If you come here, you have no right to insult us"

Funny how the same people SCREAMING about free speech are attempting to limit the speech they don't like. Again, I'd like to thank you all for making my point for me.

 

[Baskil]

If you want, I will reply to the articles on the front page. I guarantee you probably won't like it any more than if I posted in on CCGPrime.

 

[Ransac]

How is it your job to critsize other people's work? Especially if they aren't even doing it for making themselves look good? I honestly don't care won't you think. I just care what you say.


Ransac, cpa trash man

P.S. You're never going to give up until you prove yourself right, aren't you? If so, you will never stop. You're making yourself look like a jerk.

 

[DÛke]

...but we ALL support Free Speech, bud...we just don't support False Free Speech. There's a difference right there...it should be easily seen since there's a big between the two.

By the way, I THINK while you were trying to "inform" your readers, IN THE WAY, you also LOST many of them...

Just an opinion...

 

[Dune Echo]

P.S. Dune Echo, or Baskil, you remind me of that whining, discriminative mayor from "The Grinch"

First of all, my initial comments express my negative emotion towards Baskil's article. Second, I HAVE NEVER BADMOUTHED YOUR ARTICLE IN ANY WAY, SHAPE, OR FORM! So, why the hell I remind you of a whiny character, I don't know. I suggest you edit your statements immediately. I brought this thread up because I felt there was an issue that the CPA needed to be made aware of. You have received a LOT of compliments since. Are you really paying attention to what's being written here?

And you have totally lowered yourself to Baskil's level of childishness with this comment.

-Dune Echo

 

[Ransac]

I'm sorry. Someone had mentioned to me that Dune Echo and Baskil were the same person. I apologize.


Ransac, cpa trash man

 

[Baskil]

"How is it your job to critsize other people's work? Especially if they aren't even doing it for making themselves look good? I honestly don't care won't you think. I just care what you say."

How is it my job? I'm contracted to write an article describing the best and worst of the net. I was given latitude with the descriptions, per my editor. If you have a problem with that decision, by all means voice that to him(ccgprime@aol.com). The reason we're doing it is because we feel it's important to hold people accountable for what they say.

"P.S. You're never going to give up until you prove yourself right, aren't you? If so, you will never stop. You're making yourself look like a jerk."

Not quite. I will stop defending myself when I feel the character assassination stops. I feel strongly about this topic, and I have a right to defend myself, as do you. I can not stand idle while I am being attacked.

As far as the Bottom 10 list goes, that will stop when people take the time to write intelligently, even if they are writing fluff.

Which is better?
http://www.magic-singles.com/cpa/article/get.php?action=getarticle&articleid=244
or
http://www.starcitygames.com/news/Magic/Zjip/001204zijp.html

I think it's fairly obvious. You must realize that anyone can write well, if they take the time to put in a good effort.

 

[Ransac]

Okay, now that I know WHY you do that, I won't ask that anymore. But, you just don't get it. What you are saying is that we have no right to voice our opinion in the form of articles unless we make it look professional. I don't have the patience to take hours on something that people will look at for seconds. The main problem I have with this is that yo have the audacity to humiliate me in front of my peers here at the CPA. That is what I won't stand. Post them on the Best and Worst page if you want, but it is just plain rude to say those things on a site like this. THIS site isn't paying you for critiques, so DON'T here!!!!!!


Ransac, cpa trash man

P.S. I am in no way trying to limit you right of speech. Just trying to bring decency to this site.

 

[Baskil]

"But, you just don't get it. What you are saying is that we have no right to voice our opinion in the form of articles unless we make it look professional."

You have the right to post whatever you want. Just don't expect 100% positive feedback. That's the liability of publishing opinions in a public place.

"I don't have the patience to take hours on something that people will look at for seconds."

If you don't feel like putting forth your best effort, that is not my problem. All I do is comment on what is presented.

"The main problem I have with this is that yo have the audacity to humiliate me in front of my peers here at the CPA. That is what I won't stand. Post them on the Best and Worst page if you want, but it is just plain rude to say those things on a site like this."

If you are offended by my words, I apologize. I had no intent attack you *personally*, and I have no agenda against the CPA.

"THIS site isn't paying you for critiques, so DON'T here!!!!!!"

And neither is CCGPrime. All the work done there is unpaid. So if you want to write a rebuttal to my list, by all means do so.

 

[DÛke]

That is WRONG!

Baskil, it is unfair to compare StarCity with the CPA. Do you compare Magic to video games, or other TCGs? Of course, I would think: "...other TCGs".

StarCity, although good to some, I HATE it. I just don't like it. It is serious, and, to MY opinion, unfun. It is GREAT to those who like that sort of thing...

The CPA is NOT to be compared to ANY other place of Magic on the net. It is one of a kind. It is the only one that does what it does...

You can't compare different things, and rate them as if they were alike. You seem to generalize; learn to discriminate.

In my opinion, the CPA is 100%, if NOT more, better than StarCity games...that IS, if you want me to compare two unlike things...

 

[Ransac]

Fine. Now that I know that this isn't a personal issue, I'll stop. But, one more thing. Like DUke said, this is the only site were we don't hate people. However, you have come close in several members's lists. By openly saying that my article sucks to everyone else, I'm sorry that you feel that way. But, most Top 10 lists on things I read deal with people who do those things posted on that list professionally. I, as one who doesn't plan on writing as a career, should not be included on these lists as I will not improve based on your critiques. They should be used to inform people that professionals are on the list for some reason. To take a stab and critisize an amateur, like me, only shows that you were either A)running out of people to put down or B)take pride in doing a half-a**ed job. You pick.


Ransac, done with this subject, unless it is neccassary.

 

[Baskil]

Actually read the thing... If it was posted on someone's homepage, it still would be worth the read.

Comparing similar things when critiquing is essential and valid. Comparing something like Mage Knight and Warhammer is totally valid, since they are both table-top mini games with similar mechanics.

Do you realize that I am referring to the TEXT on those pages, not the freakin SITES they're on? Jeez.

 

[Rando]

Let me let you all in on a little secret.

99% of ALL magic articles on the web suck.

I have never read a single one on ANY site in which the writer showed me that they can be a real writer. And trust me, I read a lot of them.

Go read an article on any Magic site, ANY, and then go pick up a NewYorker, Time or National Geographic and compare style, usage, grammer, tone, construction, and flow.

Why is this? Because the people that write Magic articles on the web are NOT real writers; ie, people that went to school for it and do it for a living. People that get a few bucks on an article for article basis are not doing it for a living. They're just regular magic players and fans writing about what they enjoy.

And now I can hear someone saying "Hey! I haven't seen you posting any articles anywhere!"

You're absolutly right, and I have not been unnessasarily flamed and ridiculed for it either.

 

[Ransac]

A very good point, Rando. Oops, I replied. Oh well.


Ransac, deciding to continue with replies as long as they continue

 

[Landkiller]

Make the anger stop :

Baskil did his thing first. He had every right to do so. What makes it look bad is that he applied strict standards of professionalism to amateur writing, and further, expressed himself in an insulting way. Also, there is something to be said that perhaps a more considerate way of addressing poor writing is to be constructive and suggest a better way of doing it.

Also, Baskil has done the final thing, after some pressure. But we have to ask ourselves : What is the goal? Do we want to shout "Baskil sucks" I hope not. That's pretty childish. We are trying to explain that Baskil was being unnecessarily judgemental in this case. First off, a tournement report is something with a low degree of interest, UNLESS it is written with professional skill or good attention to detail. Little information can be drawn from a tournament report that is both poorly written and sparse. BUT, an opinion piece is different. The goal of the writer is to share the opinion. In my opinion, both Ransac's articles expressed their opinions with clarity. Although they were not long, that is because the subject matter and opinion were insufficient to provide a long article.

In short, Baskil, it seems that there is no valid reason to reject the article, except that you dislike the writing style.

Basically, a poor article uses slang excessively, comments about personal issues in a mundane way, or reiterates a previously stated opinion using no new evidence.

Short articles are not inherently any worse than long articles. A long article can be poorly written, but most people who go to the trouble of writing a long article write well. Regardless, a short article is not a bad thing. It makes it's point, and shuts up. Rambling on would be a worse offense.

Basically, I believe that criticizing an opinion paper is an insult. You should focus more on the writing style, and directly reply to the article.

The VERY LEAST you should do is E-mail each writer to let them know you will SLOP them, so they have a chance to defend their writing.

But, also, you made many valid points. Maybe articles at the CPA need to be examined more rigorously. We can vote on that. And those tournament reports are meaningless to the reader.
They fail to communicate. Which you can't accuse Ransac of.

<Landkiller is pursuing law as a course of study>

[Edited by Landkiller on 12-15-00 at 01:51 PM]

 

[Istanbul]

I guess my chief point is that 'slops' are degrading to the author, where you're only judging what makes an article good by your own standards. These are standards to which the CPA doesn't necessarily hold itself, and it's therefore unfair to judge us by them.

There's also the question of what I, as an editor, should do if a perfectly good article isn't as in-depth and professional as it might otherwise be. I know that you don't know this, but when I access an article to edit it, I'm presented with two options: delete it, or accept it. In either case, the article is deleted from the submissions page. (I copy down the pertinent HTML text for later posting.)

Should I tell a person who submits a perfectly good article that perhaps isn't quite professional enough that he needs to try harder, and just delete all his hard work?

I say 'no'. I say that any article that's on-topic that isn't absolutely awful should go up. If you think that the person doesn't delve deeply enough into the topic, or that it's better off as a topic within the Forums, it falls to you to tell him so. Ransac isn't going to change his style just because you say 'he sucks'. In fact, saying that (or what amounts to it) has probably very effectively removed any way you had to get through to him. If you had instead contacted him with some constructive advice, I think you may have seen an upsurge in the quality of his articles (mind, I think they're perfectly good...but let's be honest, they could be better, so could everyone's).

If I see someone playing a bad deck, I don't just tell them 'your deck sucks' and laugh at them. I ask them why they use certain cards over certain other cards. I try to help. The analogy holds true.

 

[arhar]

Well, as a writer for CPA, I can't help it but express my views on this topic, althought I really don't want to get into flame wars.... I'll try to keep it as nonpersonal as possible.

First of all, everyone who says "CPA sucks compared to StarCity" is a complete freaking idio..... khhm, uninformed person. Did you know that some StarCity writers actually get PAID to do that? Do we? NO. StarCity is a commercial site, and it covers a much wider range of Magic (and not only) issues, as opposed to CPA, which focuses only on CASUAL Magic. And you know what that means? It means that we accept submissions from the beginner writers.

The REAL strength of CPA is in it's forums. I'll go as far as to say that CPA has the BEST Magic-related message board on the 'net. The only site that can come close (but still not really) is Beyond Dominia. I won't go into details, because I want to keep this short. I really like Gizmo's suggestion to put up a reminder on a front page, that the best "action" on this site is in it's forums.

As for Baskil... It's obvious that for the lack of other talents, you are just trying to gain cheap popularity at others' expense. If that's what you want to do, fine, but please don't post here. People like you disgust me, I've seen too many of you in real life.

 

[Zero]

Question to ask all CPA members:
Why the **** do we care!? Its an opinion of ONE dude, let the man be.

Question to ask Baskil:
Why didnt you talk to us about it first? I wish you had