Just a couple tips for all the retard melee classes

[Grieve]

vang, shine my shoes bitch. thats right, get on your knees where you belong. Ive never said i was anybody. You said you were Everybody that mattered. I rarely play this game anymore, when i do i have fun. the idea that i would be jealous of you is pitiful, youre dirt to me. I'm intellectually fascinated with both you and tiyas mindsets, and youre right. my generation SHOULD have taken responsibility for yours. We should have bent your ps2 asses over a fucking barrel and beaten you raw the 1st time you begged for gil, the 1st time you begged for armor, the 1st time you DEMANDED we help with af genkai whatever else it is you think we owe you. You are our fault. But after the ps2 release there was SO much of that, everyone i knew at that time just /blisted most of you fucks, after the 3rd war/whm that day had told them "stfu im plyin mi game mii wey!!!!111one" when offered constructive advice. shit kid, not only are you new gamewise, your new to these boards. go dig into the archives and youll find that everything youve posted about has been posted before, you are as unoriginal as a new york hooker, and all these people who are agreeing with you agreed with the other people who posted it. So your point is sad and moot, much like you. Oh, in case you didnt notice, ive gotten over my altruistic fit of yesterday, so go choke on shit and dont let the ride home on the short bus get you down, at least you have your shi-tzu for company ^^

 

[Direwolf]

I like Jellyfish, they look neat.

The lil bastards sting... I SCUBA dive and damn can they hurt... Vinigear works real good on the stings... Not sure... That aside I realy like upside down jellyfish... they litteraly bob upside down and only hurt like a misquito bite... Which is good cause I have swam into numerues schools of the lil suckers.

 

[Grieve]

Oh, i almost forgot to mention, thanks vang for getting this back into a good flaming. I was getting kinda tired of that deep analytical crap, dont want to tax tiyas mind too much. theres so little of it to go around.
take care champ ^^

 

[vang]

just a quick note tiya, on a question you asked syn about where the basis for his thinking vang bought gil. I think i can tell you where that came from, i had the same thought at the time. I recall vaguely vang posting about how he would not level without his ebow and that he was currently saving up for it. then 2 days or so later his name is on the buy list. I check things like that for no real reason every now and again, i like to keep track of price changes in high-selling items with an eye for a chance at a long term investment. looking through all the other high list items, i noticed the lack of vang under a seller list for peacock charm or crosscounters or anything of the like, any way to raise several million in the course of a few days. Therefore immediate assumption: IGE. Not totally unreasonable, given those rather exacting circumstances, but i am glad to hear it was an untrue assumption. But how can one know without asking?

Good question, and at that time pre - Ebow I had even posted to Dowzer somewhere that if everything went well i should have it by the weekend. How was anyone to know how much gil i had saved up on my person at that time? The fact is no one did, thus, Syn did not bring up your point. Which i confess is valid, he just out and out accused me of buying with no real explanation.

 

[TiyaKelth]

Oh, don't worry Grieve. Your mention of me liking to use quotes didn't bother me at all, it just gave me something to mock you for - you know, kind of like I mock your amazingly clever insults.

hey, tiya. Weird thing i noticed. why is it that the only point you ever have to make is how badly vang just owned someone?

Ah, now I understand why you don't quote. If you quoted you'd risk showing for yourself that you're now twisting your own words to serve your purpose. You're right, you're right, I did say that Vang has owned someone, and I do give the general impression that I feel I've proven someone wrong/myself right in certain posts (Hey - you just did the same thing, go figure!) but you left out the part where you said that was all I do in my posts, which is the only real thing I had a problem with. You see, if you had said it how you did in your last post "Tiya you often make the point that you or Vang have just owned someone" and then elaborated that that to you means having the general attitude of 'I'm right you're wrong' (when you're arguing with someone that's generally going to be the attitude you put across, you realise that, right?) I wouldn't have disputed it in the first place.

Your next bit is about the wonderful pioneering metaphor wherein i suggested you carve for yourself a personality aside from vangs watchdog. to this fairly clever and nicely worded personal insult, you responded with a shockingly inoffensive technical insult implying that i dont know how to click a link. btw. i didnt click the link. did you really think i would? Cant you think of anything original to type in your own defense? You'd rather just save yourself the time and effort of trying to make a point, and then call That making a point? /shrug, and you call ME lazy.

Grieve, you expect people to respect your posts and what you're trying to say, and even atleast give a little tiny shit about you, but you don't even know what you're talking about, as You're right, I'm not going to be original everytime someone repeats someone else about something that's already been covered many times before, when I can simply link them to where it was covered last. Infact, this means that you aren't original, for bringing up a point thats already been beaten to death, and then not looking at where it was last brought up.

Of course posting a random insult and nothing else against the one person being flamed by everyone else wasn't jumping on the bandwagon, eh Grieve? I wasn't friends with Vang before that thread btw. I agreed with what he was saying, if not the way he said it, and I stood up for what he said. I'm sorry, I didn't realise that bringing forth new, valid arguments was jumping on a bandwagon when there's only two people on that side of the argument, aswell as being unoriginal. Of course posting a random insult and nothing else against the one person being flamed by everyone else wasn't jumping on the bandwagon, eh Grieve?

One thing I want to take a moment to point out here. You judged Vabg by how he responded. I agree, he reacted harshly when he was flamed. Now that you're being flamed, are you being nice and calm about it? Doesn't seem that way.

I'm not surprised, oh well. Yeah, that was condescending of me wasnt it? It was supposed to be. You have nothing to say to that so you didnt even bother to quote the whole thing. damn shame, it was funny. And your marginal response thereto pretty much validates my point, that you are vangs dog, as that part of my post was directed....... at.......YOU, and had no bearing on vang.

Nono, I realise what you're saying. I act as an enabler for Vang by agreeing with him, which makes me his pet watchdog. Now I was showing you that I wasn't the only one that agrees with him these days. Does that mean we're all his pets? With no mind of our own? See, I thought you'd be smart enough to put two and two together and realise that. It's a shame really, I too was hoping for better from you.

[quote="Grieve]
However. In this instance i did not make myself look like a tool,
[/quote]

Yes you did. 8) It's time for you to show how you're different from me and Vang, and admit that you're wrong. Don't worry, I won't mock you for it, and Vang and I will leave you alone when you do, and stop "tiring you out".

Also, on the topic of you admitting you're wrong, and that being what sets you apart from Vang and I, I think you better go to another thread where we had a small argument about who the first to 75 was. 8)

I say "tiya why are you such an unoriginal fuck?"
Tiya directs me to old posts. And old threads. Thats not original. thats the behavior of an unoriginal fuck who cant be bothered to think up anything clever or marginally interesting

Old posts where I said something original!! Don't forget that, it's a rare occurance for a brain-washed follower like me to say something of my own accord, you should really check it out!

You: cant dont wont would rather choke to death on a burning rat and light yourself on fire than ever even consider the fact that you maybe just might possibly oh so terrifyingly..........be wrong.

Fortunately I never am wrong. Fewph.

 

[TiyaKelth]

Grieve, you expect people to respect your posts and what you're trying to say, and even atleast give a little tiny shit about you, but you don't even know what you're talking about, as you showed by opennly admitting you didn't click on the links. You're right, ....

Oops. Edit {Can I have it?}

 

[Bigboy]

I like Jellyfish, they look neat.

I agree.

 

[Lanien]

I like Jellyfish, they look neat.

The lil bastards sting... I SCUBA dive and damn can they hurt... Vinigear works real good on the stings... Not sure... That aside I realy like upside down jellyfish... they litteraly bob upside down and only hurt like a misquito bite... Which is good cause I have swam into numerues schools of the lil suckers.

I hear peeing on a sting works too ... Never tried it though. I guess anything that is acidic would work. :lol:

 

[Direwolf]

If I had to guess I would say the Venom is basic and kinda maybe like an oil. That would make sense. Oh well I hate chem.

 

[vang]

Oh, i almost forgot to mention, thanks vang for getting this back into a good flaming. I was getting kinda tired of that deep analytical crap, dont want to tax tiyas mind too much. theres so little of it to go around.
take care champ ^^

As long as I could break you from your half ass Syn wannabe "so deep it confuses even the person posting it" type flames, I am all the more happy to oblige. ^^

As your above flame pointed out I just wanted you to get back on the "Grieve track" making bad third grade insults that further prove you're an idiot. :wink:

 

[Direwolf]

A few years back some dude at my SCUBA diving camp had a Jellyfish swim into his bathing suite... Yea he was in alot of pain...

 

[Synical]

Let me start off by saying very good post Syn. That's what I wanted you to do from the start (though I wasn't expecting such detail). Now I understand from your standpoint how it can be seen as relevant to the discussion at hand.

Also, after responding to the first few points I'm going to put a disclaimer here not to expect my usual perfect quoting... this is getting complicated

You agree with Pompidou, yet you point a finger at Vang and call him a gilbuyer because he has good gear, and you "highly suspect" it? Go go hypocrite!

(#1)first off, let me point out that YOU bring up the change of subject here, and look for a reply to a DIFFERENT topic.

Yes, I bring up something from a different thread. Something that completely pertained to the topic, and actually helped inspire said topic.

I believe the reason you said it came in the post after this original one - to deflate his ego. More on that later.

(#2)Here, in this thread, with that comment, im simply agreeing with his stance on gil buying, how it affects Me, and how the idea that someone with good gear better have the skill and Honor to back up their shit.

This is what I mean about offtopic. The blame half goes to Pom, yes, but he brought up these points in a way that pertains to his opinion about accusing someone of being a gilbuyer. But at this point you simply said I agree. So you agreed with the slightly offtopic part that was supporting his point that was ontopic, but not with his actual point. Gotcha.

(#4)No you are correct, but i never said vang was a crappy ranger. i pointed my finger at him because hes got a crappy approach.
nothing would have brought his ego down a notch faster than first spouting the crap he spews knocking people for bad gear, poor subs, etc.., then being exposed for buying gil.

Right, now that we see your reason for pointing your finger at him, the quote from me is irrelevant.

A question for you now. Did you think he'd respond, " You caught me?" and that would bring his ego down? Your point #6 would suggest that you were you hoping that rumor would travel fast that Vang buys gil? So you were spreading a lie to pull his ego down? I don't think that you'll say that was it, and it doesn't sound like you, but that's how #6 makes it sound. I'm just not seeing how else pulling a meaningless accusation out of thin air that is very obviously incorrect was supposed to pull his ego down. If anything I think it turned more people against you (as shown by all the posts agreeing that people who point fingers and say gilbuyer are annoying at best).

(#5)this entire argument of yours is Still based on the premice that i accused vang out of some kind of warped jealousy. Sadly, you shoot it down yourself in the same paragraph.
your origional post to this thread was about people being jealous of others gear

No, no it wasn't. My original post in the thread was about people pointing fingers at others accusing them of being gilbuyers. I said I assume that in Yoshindor's case it was jealousy. Then at the end of the post I ask why people can't grasp the fact its possible to make gil in this game without cheating. Keep in mind the post topic, and read that question again. I'm trying to find the reason people point their fingers and say "Gilbuyer".

all i wanted to do was agree with pompidou, you brought up all the other crap that forced me to reply to it....

I brought up that you accused Vang of gilbuying. You seem to think that that meant this thread was now the Vang thread.

everything, nothing. there is a disparaging difference in the way you think compared to me tiya. the world is not black and white, and a gil seller can no more exsist than a gil buyer without the other.

when i consider somthing, i consider all angles of it.

That's nice, I agree with you. But we weren't considering actual gilbuyers here either. We were considering people throwing it around as an insult (which it is). Now I understand what you were getting at about gilbuyers being a pain, and then you followed up with how discrediting being found out to be a gilbuyer would be. Again I agree. But throwing gilsellers into the mix isn't simply considering an angle of something, its considering an angle of an angle of your own thought. However, as you say, it was simply one line in a post, and I blew it out of proportion to show one way in which you trail off topic.

as for this "...people pointing fingers and calling "gilbuyer" whenever someone has good gear. You know, like you did in Vang's thread."
well, its obvious to me that you were still hopped up from the post previous to this one.
so i respond in kind.[/color]

Don't pull my posts out of context and twist the wording. What I actually said was:

"I will gladly continue to view you as a hypocrite, until you stop acting like one. Again, you agree with Pompidou, who says he wouldn't say anything about someone buying gil even if he knew it was fact, yet you throw out that accusation against someone that's easily proven to not buy gil. Tell me how that isn't hypocritical?"

Self explanatory.





I don't care that you're "probably" equipped as good as a rng can be. Does that mean I should point my finger at you and say, "I have a strong suspicion that he buys gil" inorder to discredit you? I don't think so.

"Why do some Poeple With Elite gear and Mils in gil Forget that there are Individuals behind the Toons, who maybe could bring interesting views to them, but never get the chance because they arent "Elite" enough to play"?

-My answer: Because people with elite gear and mils in gil are obviously dedicated to their job. They've done the research. They've looked into every nook and cranny of their job. What would some n00b in gear half as good as them who obviously doesn't care to be the best they can be have to offer?

A note: I'm not one of said people, I will take criticism in any form, and if I feel that it's good criticism, I will apply what I learnt. I simply understand the mindset.

you brought up the Other post refrencing vangs and my discussion more than once here, i simply replied to those

This, again, is where you're confused. Bringing up one point from another thread isn't the same as bringing up the whole thread. You replied to things going on in the thread, not to the point I brought up.

now for mine.
answer it. you didnt. just like i didnt answer yours.

I didn't answer yours because it was offtopic. You didn't answer mine because you were too busy trying to pull the Vang thread into that one. See the difference?

i do believe that was the first time ive ever "pointed a finger" for such a thing.

I'm guessing it will be the last time also. 8)

(no, ill use whatever i think is useful or appropriate)

now if i walked up to any random person in jueno (perfect stranger) and examined him, saw all of his mils in gear on, and began to accuse him of buying gil, or ask him how much real money he spent on all of it, if i did that Even Once, then yes, you would be correct. As it stands i have not. if you take me accusing vang Out of Context, and Remove Reason, then yes, from that particular standpoint i suppose i would be.

I have a question. What was the basis of your accusation? I now know the purpose, but what did you base it on? His gear and gil? Obviously. Then you accuse him of buying gil. The only difference between what you did and what you described is that one is ingame, and one is out of game. That's it, nothing else.

just to point out your first reply to me contained vangs name 5 times, the second one 3. -_- (me = 1)
nothing from that thread was any less irrelevant to this one, than it was to that one.

That's nice. I wasn't aware that I wasn't supposed to use his name when talking about something that directly involved him. You do realise that bringing up one point involving He Who I Shall Not Name isn't the same as bringing up every point involving him, right?

As for my very last post into That thread, yea, it had nothing to do with anything. but your so much like a child really.

Yeah, it was rather childish for me to break up your post in a logical way. It wasn't childish at all to purposely start posting way off topic (as you admit you did) just because you didn't want to reply. Not at all.

"arguing with people that Don't understand a life affirming mental change will tend to glance right over things."

It wasn't the thought itself that doesn't make sense, its the sentence structure that is illegible. Arguing with people like that (me, apparently) will what? Is what? Did what? Your sentence is incomplete. I understand the insult you're trying to throw at me, which I could easily reverse and throw back at you, but it sounded like you were getting at something else. Guess I was wrong.



I'm sure I missed some things, I tried not to repeat myself too often by responding to the same point multiple times in the post, but I'm pretty sure by cutting stuff out I missed one or two things that I should have responded to. Feel free to bring them to my attention so I can respond. Flame me for missing them, if you wish.

Time to read Grieve's post and respond to it in another post. Stay tuned :wink:

yes tiya you missed a few things.

"I brought up that you accused Vang of gilbuying. You seem to think that that meant this thread was now the Vang thread. "

"This, again, is where you're confused. Bringing up one point from another thread isn't the same as bringing up the whole thread. You replied to things going on in the thread, not to the point I brought up."


Incorrect.
the point you brought up in your intial reply was:
#1
"You agree with Pompidou, yet you point a finger at Vang and call him a gilbuyer because he has good gear, and you "highly suspect" it? Go go hypocrite!"

#2
You are the exact kind of person that this is thread is about Synical. Vang and you were arguing, and it became apparent that Vang had better gear than you. What do you do? You say: "I highly suspect he buys gil", and then flame him for the next few paragraphs of that post, based on your (false) suspicion. GJ Syn, I was hoping you'd show up in here so that you could shed light on the other side of the argument.

the tone here is personal. the innuendo, personal. what did you expect me to do, say "yes tiya im a fucking hypocrite, im so jealous of vang, i want to Be him?"

instead, following natural progression, and pulling into mind the Reasons your reply to my quite simple post were loaded with malice, we get this:


"you in fact Infer the entire past thread into this one. its simpe law, you present a piece of evidence, yet the manner in which it is presented takes it out of context and makes it look worse than it is. that opens the door to me, for bringing forth the situation behind the evidence."

heres a visual summary to help you see it a bit better:

old post <---New post--->i reply to pom--->you accuse me of being a hyppocrite and indirectly mention old post--->you force me to Defend with the idea that im a hypocrite, which requires Background to disprove.

in disproving, using the old post in that post, i bring up only a very few points that directly relate to you saying #1, & #2 above.
you opened the door, all i did was walk through.



as for this:
I'm trying to find the reason people point their fingers and say "Gilbuyer".
people or me?

you would like to know what my basis was then? let me see if i can remember, because astoundingly, you are reading far more into this than there ever was...you should do that for some other more interesting ideas.
but i said somthing along the lines of "thats what a guess is a shot in the dark." as in totally Not based On Shit.
what did i hope to gain?
a reaction.
Any reaction.
Of Course i never expected him to Admit to it, jesus. I never accused vang of being a fucking Nitwit, as one would have to be to say YES, I BUY GIL!
christ, the reaction didnt even matter, i just wanted to study his habits a bit more. just one more piece in the puzzle so to speak.
he doesnt need to admit to such things to aid me or others in pointing out his ego problems. hes adding enough to the fire on his own.
and providing enough material to accurately profile him, which was all i was doing at the time.

and you left out the last part of my reply. for simplicity sake i will not repost it here, they are already long enough, its easy enough to scroll up.
Vang sort of hints understanding, but continues to wrap himself up in his blankey on this page and the next in replies to grieve.


you say you dont quite see what i was getting at here:

"Arguing with people that don't understand a life affirming mental change will tend to glance right over things."

"It wasn't the thought itself that doesn't make sense, its the sentence structure that is illegible. Arguing with people like that (me, apparently) will what? Is what? Did what? Your sentence is incomplete. I understand the insult you're trying to throw at me, which I could easily reverse and throw back at you, but it sounded like you were getting at something else. Guess I was wrong.

insult? no, no insult.
i see three questions in your reply to this. thats GREAT! how is it incomplete? Reverse away!
heres the great thing about statements like this, and their sole purpose.
seriously, a statement such as that one is intentionally, and on a gigantic scale, one that has so many implications to a persons thoughts that its quite simply amazing how such a small twelve inch string of words can contain such unfathomably large ideas.
theres nothing incomplete about it.
its the reader that makes sense of statements like that by bringing their own considerations into the field.
it does apply to you and vang though, if you cant tell me How, then your eyes arent open enough to see yet.

(if the sentence structure is incorrect, please feel free to correct it and show me how? all ive done is added the correct punctuation above, fix away.)

im going to go eat my (now cold) bk burger now.
remember to retain Context if you quote back to me about anything in here. You Didnt, in this post, but im not interested in being picky.
~Syn

 

[TiyaKelth]

the tone here is personal. the innuendo, personal. what did you expect me to do, say "yes tiya im a fucking hypocrite, im so jealous of vang, i want to Be him?"

instead, following natural progression, and pulling into mind the Reasons your reply to my quite simple post were loaded with malice, we get this:


"you in fact Infer the entire past thread into this one. its simpe law, you present a piece of evidence, yet the manner in which it is presented takes it out of context and makes it look worse than it is. that opens the door to me, for bringing forth the situation behind the evidence."

It's interesting how you see me bringing forth one point opens a door for you to answer statements made in the other post.

heres a visual summary to help you see it a bit better:

old post <---New post--->i reply to pom--->you accuse me of being a hyppocrite and indirectly mention old post--->you force me to Defend with the idea that im a hypocrite, which requires Background to disprove.

Yeah, hearing about how people change after level 75 and such was some very nice background to the point I made, and had everything to do with the subject. Uh huh.. :roll:

as for this:
I'm trying to find the reason people point their fingers and say "Gilbuyer".
people or me?

you would like to know what my basis was then? let me see if i can remember, because astoundingly, you are reading far more into this than there ever was...you should do that for some other more interesting ideas.
but i said somthing along the lines of "thats what a guess is a shot in the dark." as in totally Not based On Shit.
what did i hope to gain?
a reaction.
Any reaction.
Of Course i never expected him to Admit to it, jesus. I never accused vang of being a fucking Nitwit, as one would have to be to say YES, I BUY GIL!
christ, the reaction didnt even matter, i just wanted to study his habits a bit more. just one more piece in the puzzle so to speak.
he doesnt need to admit to such things to aid me or others in pointing out his ego problems. hes adding enough to the fire on his own.
and providing enough material to accurately profile him, which was all i was doing at the time.

So you didn't even believe that there was any more chance he was a gilbuyer than any random other person? And you feel that pointing your finger at him and calling him one was in some way pointing out his ego problems? Well, thats between you and him, but I don't see how that would point them out. You said before that it was to deflate his ego, not point his ego out, and again I ask, did you expect the rumor being spread to deflate his ego, if not, what about having a ridiculous accusation thrown at him was supposed to deflate it?

and you left out the last part of my reply.

If you mean where you said I was condescending, and could be better than that, I'm glad you have faith in me

If you mean where you said once again that I look over points, I think we've been over that enough times now.

"Arguing with people that don't understand a life affirming mental change will tend to glance right over things."

You start by saying "Arguing with". Then you describe the people you're arguing with: "people that don't understand a life affirming mental change" and then you say what they do "will tend to glance right over things". Ok, now lets condense the type of people you're arguing with into simply "People". So your sentence would say, "Arguing with people will tend to glance right over things."

 

[CubsWoo]

I'm TOPICAL!

 

[Synical]

"Arguing with people that don't understand a life affirming mental change is futile, as they will tend to glance right over things."

there you go. now um.... as for this:

" Ok, now lets condense the type of people you're arguing with into simply "People". So your sentence would say,"

"Arguing with people will tend to glance right over things."

this explains your whole mindset in one line. its a fairly nice indication of how your mental processes work. yours btw, has more things wrong with it than the unedited version of mine.


~Syn

 

[Kat]

*hi-jacking thread for just a tad*

Question:

Has this melee thread beat out the whm thread yet?

:lol:

*back on topic*

:wink:

 

[Legomyeggo]

Couldn't have said it better myself.

 

[TiyaKelth]

"Arguing with people that don't understand a life affirming mental change is futile, as they will tend to glance right over things."

there you go. now um.... as for this:

" Ok, now lets condense the type of people you're arguing with into simply "People". So your sentence would say,"

"Arguing with people will tend to glance right over things."

this explains your whole mindset in one line. its a fairly nice indication of how your mental processes work. yours btw, has more things wrong with it than the unedited version of mine.


~Syn

Let me start off by saying it's official: You're a dumbass. {Congratulations!} :lol:

Yours was wrong from the start, despite you quoting it three times and saying it was fine. Mine also was wrong - on purpose. I condensed the description of what type of people you're talking about into one word to make it a little more clear for you how the sentence was wrong. I didn't try to correct the sentence, so obviously it wasn't going to make any more sense.

You're a tool Syn. That's all you ever were, and all you'll ever be. {Good bye.}

 

[Phraust]

Oh yeah?!

Well you're Canadian!

Take that!

 

[vang]

"Arguing with people that don't understand a life affirming mental change is futile, as they will tend to glance right over things."

there you go. now um.... as for this:

" Ok, now lets condense the type of people you're arguing with into simply "People". So your sentence would say,"

"Arguing with people will tend to glance right over things."

this explains your whole mindset in one line. its a fairly nice indication of how your mental processes work. yours btw, has more things wrong with it than the unedited version of mine.


~Syn

Let me start off by saying it's official: You're a dumbass. {Congratulations!} :lol:

Yours was wrong from the start, despite you quoting it three times and saying it was fine. Mine also was wrong - on purpose. I condensed the description of what type of people you're talking about into one word to make it a little more clear for you how the sentence was wrong. I didn't try to correct the sentence, so obviously it wasn't going to make any more sense.

You're a tool Syn. That's all you ever were, and all you'll ever be. {Good bye.}

Syn : Owned the fuck up, and peaced the fuck out.


...what a chump.