Lets Talk About 'Skill-Based Matchmaking'?

---

@DarthVaapar wrote:
@JiboTVGood grief guy, do you even read what you post? Everything you just said was a disingenuous attempt to misrepresent your earlier posts. If you don’t care how well someone writes, then why bring it up in criticism, only to later pretend that it wasn’t you yourself who brought such a silly thing up to begin with?

Crave attention? Seriously? You know what? This is a public forum, so I’m going to just let your words and attitude speak for themselves. I realize that I’m in the minority opinion in this issue, at least here on the forum, but there enough quality people here that can see that you’ve moved way past general discussion and into the realm of emotionally driven rants.

I didn’t apologize because I thought you needed it. Wow... And you speak to me of ego? Laughable. I apologized because it was appropriate. Perhaps you seek “brownie points” when you apologize. Frankly, I’ve never even heard of that line of logic.

I’m not going to pick apart what you say line-by-line, as you seem want to do. Your posts are already verging on TL;DR as it is. Besides, what good would come of it. Such tactics are petty anyway.

Look, I disagree with you. I told you you were wrong. Looking back on all this I wish I hadn’t chosen those words. But it’s ok if people disagree with you, man. It’s not a slight or offense that you must suddenly chase down seeking retribution.

It’s real simple. Players playing against others of their skill level are not being punished, regardless of how they may “feel” about it. The only players who might even have this position are the ones at the highest skill level. For everyone else, this is just standard gameplay.

I’m fairly certain that you’ll likely submit yet another dissertation on the flaws of both my position, and my character, but I warn you, other intelligent people are reading this. They will see drivel for what it is, regardless of how well articulated it may be.

---

It's crazy man, it's almost like when someone misrepresents and asserts they know your position, writes in a confusing way, refuses to justify their points or acknowledge criticisms, and is pretty consistently passive-aggressive in their replies that you need to correct and focus in on almost every individual sentence. I wonder why? Maybe those intelligent people you keep referring to could help us both understand why that is and how you definitely are not doing those things, at all. 

I'm sorry, I got distracted, did you respond to my reply? I can only see you trying to avoid (Multiple times now.) responding to the key points in my response calling out your responses. I am calling out what you wrote and how you wrote it as I see it and you seem to be giving every excuse to avoid actually discussing that. You can stop responding to my post if that's the case. You are also not free to attempt and convince people viewing this that I am committing an intellectually devoid attack on your character as my main argument against your position, because my responses have been opposite.

You need to stop conflating minor points for major ones or misrepresenting them, such as where I suggested you may be a troll at the beginning of my response and that you crave attention because you decided to suggest I was "Coming after you." for responding / referring to you on my post. I believe that assessment to be quite fair especially given your smarmy or condescending responses like you saying nothing short of "I apologize for you being upset.". You also conflate me explaining that I do not believe you wrote your point well or as well as you or others might believe for an ad hominem, despite me explaining further in detail as I respond to what you wrote, line by line, while even initially addressing what I believe you could have just as easily been saying - "You're wrong and should suck it up. You're just being challenged. Why should we cater to such a small number of players anyway? Your feedback / perspective doesn't matter because you make up such a small percentage of the community. I think it's fair, and I think a majority of the community thinks it's fair too. You just want to dominate noobs! Wrong!". My responses aren't an 'emotionally driven rant' like you are trying to assert in order to claim some imaginary intellectual high ground or attempt to diffuse the discussion and avoid genuinely responding to main point of my replies. My responses are an address to you misconstruing or misrepresenting my position, cherry-picking parts from my replies, asserting to know my motive in making this discussion post, and also an assessment of what your replies have been so far. You suggesting otherwise is another case of you making leaps when you seem to disagree with people.

You just said "I didn't apologize because I thought you needed it.". I agree, and I already said your apology was fake, I don't recall suggesting anywhere that you actually meant it? I do recall saying you constructed a fake apology to insinuate I was upset with your response. That is what you did. Why you did that, I have no exact clue. Which is why I suggested you were doing it for 'brownie points' or as a troll, 'brownie points' meaning for some imaginary point game where you think you earn more points to feel like a winner by suggesting my arguments are emotionally rash and without facts or logic. I think you made that clearly fake apology the way you did because you thought making me seem to be upset with you would make my argument seem less valid. Kind of like what you are trying to do now, just without the apology part.

You have mimicked my word use and positions enough times, at best I don't think you understand my positions or how to appropriately use terms like petty, disingenuous, misrepresent, etc. You seem to suggest you could go through my responses line by line as if they don't make sense, I'd love to see you do that because I am fairly confident that they made sense as I wrote them. However, I did go through the effort of taking a concise look at what you wrote and came out clearly with where I disagreed and why, addressing what I found to be some pretty clear underlying presuppositions too. Sure, that's what I'm doing, just chasing you down and trying to get one up on you. Dude, you expected to disagree and reply the way you did and not get your position picked apart or expect a followup? I'll refer to what I have already said - I think you have an unrealistic idea as to how people should respond to you when you are wrong or write poorly.

Reading this out, I feel like I've just been baited by a dumb internet troll into an argument. So we're done discussing this. If you think your replies make perfect sense despite my responses, fine, we're done discussing it and I think you are being unreasonable. I have wasted enough time and energy responding to you, enjoy posting elsewhere and thanks for your response, hopefully people can learn something from it.