BuzzerBeater Forums

English managers were complaining about some GMs (not you) for some decisions they took. GMs said they don't take things personally and review cases. Someone mentioned you as a (bad) example of the opposite for something you did in the past (without discussing the case obviously), Perpete or someone else tried to defend you and other users came out with the same bad opinions of you. It was about GMs favouring and 'helping' friends or specific users and hammering others, even to the point of persecution (which was the word I think someone used saying he knew a GM was out to get him).

I would really like to know what are you talking about, so if you want to talk about this, I would appreciate a private message. If it's related to what I think, you would be very surprised when you know the details.

I was in favor of adding a PA part in the boycott, but I only have one vote. With an OK team, it is supposedly possible to win at least one game by going harder into it. Also, as Foto said, the boycott will also depend on the capacity of the manager to strenghten his team. If you can add one/two/three players to win games and don't, fans will not be fooled. If you can't, they'll accept they are indeed the weakest link of the league.

This is what really surprises me from you. What about those lines? Where does it say what I've voted (if I even did) or what was my opinion or how was the discussion previous to the release? You read one sentence and you inmediately launch a theory about a whole conversation. I can't fight against someone who call facts things that are just assumptions.
In fact, I don't see Perpetet contradicting me. Anyway, I leave Perpete the option to explain this matter if he decides it's worth to do it.

1) You seem to be unable to see the difference between "I" and "We". Based on what?

When someone is part of a group, the I and the We are sghlitly different, unless you are one of those who leave a group if they take a decision you don't like or critizise all that is not made the way you want to.

I believe part of what Lemon refers to includes me, and I know exactly what he's talking about.

In quite a few of these threads I have pointed out that staff do not like to debate. What happens is once a user states a negative opinion we see a flurry of staff posts supporting each other and following that, the staff start then arguing about pedantics. (Who said what to whom and why and blah blah). Once that happens the orginal problem becomes forgotten in a flurry of nonsense.

As on all the previous occassions I ask, can the staff please stay on topic. That would be the changes, the probability (certainty if you're as confident as me), the changes to attendance and why they don't focus on tanking, and why we were lied to (yes I use that word carefully, I've seen it too often now to accept as a mere changing of minds) about the changes to salary which was originally stated as being part of anti-LI measures. (Reducing the importance of high IS on guards.)

Last edited by Gully Foyle at 12/25/2016 5:59:20 PM

Personally I try to keep out of as many discussions as possible these days. I have limited time and don't want to spend it in an endless discussion over details or commenting on a bunch of quotes that are misunderstood or what ever it may be.
I also don't like the overly negative tone that is present in many threads and from some users. They have a set mind on something and often so do I. So a long argument have done nothing but waste time for me. There's hardly ever any agreement to be found.
As for the part about other staff, they are free to have their own thoughts on everything just as I am or any other user. I will agree with whoever it is as long as their thought about something are the same as mine. Just being part of the staff doesn't automatically lead to that I need to think the same about stuff.

+1

Its too easy to dismiss users as negative and again, staff and their supporters are guilty of often doing this. I've given reasons why I believe the changes I've commented on are a bad idea, and not good for the game. Its is not negative for me to say something isn't in the best interests of the game and everyone who plays it. I see that as a positive thing. By dismissing me, and everyone else who comments as merely negative, it shows clearly that what's being said by clearly intelligent people like Robard, Lemonshine and others is not being read properly.

I'm not getting at you specifically, as I don't believe you were getting at me in your post. Nor just the staff. There are other users who blithely wave around the instruction to not be negative.

Personally I comment because I care, and don't want to see what I regard as huge mistakes being made.

Seriously, this game is getting way to complicated for newbies.. there are just way to many rules for this and for that..