: > [{quoted}](name=Busty Demoness,realm=NA,application-id=yrc23zHg,discussion-id=8A8co2cH,comment-id=0005,timestamp=2018-12-18T00:46:28.037+0000) > > Here's hoping it's not too serious. Kidneys. It's an absolute tossup right now and I'm trying so hard to keep calm. I'm coping by purging a bunch of unnecessary stuff from my computer.
> [{quoted}](name=Totally Not Jinx,realm=NA,application-id=yrc23zHg,discussion-id=8A8co2cH,comment-id=00050000,timestamp=2018-12-18T00:47:08.852+0000) > > Kidneys. It's an absolute tossup right now and I'm trying so hard to keep calm. > > I'm coping by purging a bunch of unnecessary stuff from my computer. Chronic Kidney Disease?
DerPunkt (EUW)
: > [{quoted}](name=DuskDaUmbreon,realm=NA,application-id=yrc23zHg,discussion-id=oExAMYTz,comment-id=0008,timestamp=2018-12-10T08:18:16.508+0000) > > The first clip was just terrible. > > The first 3 seconds are ability-based assassins just fucking autoing each other. > > Yeah. It looks more impressive because people then were fucking idiots. A low-gold player with good ping today could easily pull that shit off because **it's nothing special**. It's not "high skill", it's the fucking **minimum expectation of playing the champion** to be able to dodge shit with Zed's ult. > > There's nothing special about using your Zed R after the other Zed ults you. The first Zed might have well ulted a fucking minion for all the good that ult was going to do. > > The Akali clip also isn't really an outplay. She was just buying time. That's not an outplay by today's standards (except maybe that well-timed Zhonya's), that's just the announcer building hype. (If you notice in the first one, they call the QSS usage high-skilled as well. Yeah.) > > You know why old teamfights lasted ages? Why there was more "skill expression"? Because there **was** basically zero fucking skill. ***I*** could have done the same shit Faker did there, and I barely have any games on Zed. My Silver ~~5~~ 4 ass could have won that, and easily. There being so little actual skill meant that any difference was more apparent, so it just **looks** more skilled because you have a shittier player to compare it to. So What team are you going to start for this season?
> [{quoted}](name=DerPunkt,realm=EUW,application-id=yrc23zHg,discussion-id=oExAMYTz,comment-id=00080001,timestamp=2018-12-10T10:19:13.639+0000) > > So What team are you going to start for this season? Why don't you ask that to the OP since if this game takes no skill then everyone can easily become a pro
: > [{quoted}](name=DuskDaUmbreon,realm=NA,application-id=yrc23zHg,discussion-id=oExAMYTz,comment-id=0008,timestamp=2018-12-10T08:18:16.508+0000) > > The first clip was just terrible. > > The first 3 seconds are ability-based assassins just fucking autoing each other. > > Yeah. It looks more impressive because people then were fucking idiots. A low-gold player with good ping today could easily pull that shit off because **it's nothing special**. It's not "high skill", it's the fucking **minimum expectation of playing the champion** to be able to dodge shit with Zed's ult. > > There's nothing special about using your Zed R after the other Zed ults you. The first Zed might have well ulted a fucking minion for all the good that ult was going to do. > > The Akali clip also isn't really an outplay. She was just buying time. That's not an outplay by today's standards (except maybe that well-timed Zhonya's), that's just the announcer building hype. (If you notice in the first one, they call the QSS usage high-skilled as well. Yeah.) > > You know why old teamfights lasted ages? Why there was more "skill expression"? Because there **was** basically zero fucking skill. ***I*** could have done the same shit Faker did there, and I barely have any games on Zed. My Silver ~~5~~ 4 ass could have won that, and easily. There being so little actual skill meant that any difference was more apparent, so it just **looks** more skilled because you have a shittier player to compare it to. You probably couldn't even tell me everything faker did there without slowing the video down, lmao. I'm not going to even bother responding to the rest, because you're strawmanning my post, and putting words into my mouth, lol.
> [{quoted}](name=Japan Logan Paul,realm=NA,application-id=yrc23zHg,discussion-id=oExAMYTz,comment-id=00080000,timestamp=2018-12-10T09:00:43.182+0000) > > You probably couldn't even tell me everything faker did there without slowing the video down, lmao. I'm not going to even bother responding to the rest, because you're strawmanning my post, and putting words into my mouth, lol. Using abilities quickly doesn't make you good. Anyone with hands can smash all the keys quickly. And yes that clip is the most overrated play in history. When you actually look at it objectively you realize that all that really happened was that faker just used abilities to keep running away while Ryu ran into all his abilities. Then you also realize that faker had a Qss, ryu didnt, and Ryu also played that so poorly, porting away from faker when he was standing right next to him and just had to AA to kill him. And you picked an "iconic" moment thats looks even flashier than it is because its a 1v1, and both players are playing the same highly mobile champion which isn't even possible anymore. And the point is that you picked specif clips and claim they represent the level of skill expression possible at the time they happened, which obviously is not true. Anyone could easily do the same exact thing but in reverse and make it seem like the game took to skill back then and takes a lot of skill now.
: A weak heart would mean you went into cardiac arrest over someone tapping your shoulder.
> [{quoted}](name=Busty Demoness,realm=NA,application-id=yrc23zHg,discussion-id=xHcZ0B4e,comment-id=0001,timestamp=2018-12-05T23:39:55.711+0000) > > A weak heart would mean you went into cardiac arrest over someone tapping your shoulder. No thats not what a weak heart is. A weak heart would really mean you have low contractility causing you to have a low stroke volume and hence a decreased cardiac output
: If you are unhappy with the game, you need to stop playing it.
No, the food is not down the toilet. It was absorbed into your blood stream and used as nutrients to carry out normal physiologic functions
: Why is this not an s, s+ rank?
Because compared to how other people performed on the champion you didn't get into a certain percentile. You know there is more to this game besides K/D/A For starters your farm is not good
: The year is 2018.
https://i.imgur.com/UHUtN7X.jpg[/img] https://i.imgur.com/zHD896X.jpg[/img]
Rioter Comments
Akaash (NA)
: > [{quoted}](name=Busty Demoness,realm=NA,application-id=yrc23zHg,discussion-id=Q3EAOkE8,comment-id=00010000000000000000,timestamp=2018-10-29T08:38:44.902+0000) > > Where's your proof that the 34% win rate is even possible? If you play 66 series and go 1-2. Then go 2-0 in the last one you'll promote. That's 68 wins out of 200 games. But again. That's not how math works. Math works by taking the number of ways you can promote and comparing them to the number of ways you can't promote. It's a 50% chance of promoting in any series. > You are trying way too hard. All you did here was repeat your same statements which I already refuted in my post. You didn't refute anything. It's irrelevant. If I ask you what 2+2 is and you tell me 2 is larger than 3, it's irrelevant, and also wrong.
> [{quoted}](name=Akaash,realm=NA,application-id=yrc23zHg,discussion-id=Q3EAOkE8,comment-id=000100000000000000000000,timestamp=2018-10-29T18:08:15.157+0000) > > If you play 66 series and go 1-2. Then go 2-0 in the last one you'll promote. > > That's 68 wins out of 200 games. > > But again. That's not how math works. Math works by taking the number of ways you can promote and comparing them to the number of ways you can't promote. > > It's a 50% chance of promoting in any series. You don't understand how math works first of all. Second of all we are clearly talking about a single series. its impossible to get a 34% win rate in a promotion series. If you want to try to make some sort of point about multiple series then why are you ignoring the fact that you have to win games to get back into another series? > > You didn't refute anything. It's irrelevant. If I ask you what 2+2 is and you tell me 2 is larger than 3, it's irrelevant, and also wrong. lol you don't even have anything to say but you try so hard to say something. I already refuted your post. Stop trying to argue things for an empty set.
Akaash (NA)
: > [{quoted}](name=Busty Demoness,realm=NA,application-id=yrc23zHg,discussion-id=Q3EAOkE8,comment-id=000100000000,timestamp=2018-10-29T04:38:49.310+0000) > > I can. And the minimum final ratio of wins to losses must be 60% for a completed series. Just because it's addressed in a binary situation does not mean you actually have those odds at getting a win or loss. Sorry, where is your example of a 34% win rate not promoting?
> [{quoted}](name=Akaash,realm=NA,application-id=yrc23zHg,discussion-id=Q3EAOkE8,comment-id=0001000000000000,timestamp=2018-10-29T07:13:55.780+0000) > > Sorry, where is your example of a 34% win rate not promoting? Why do you keep asking for examples from the empty set.
Akaash (NA)
: > [{quoted}](name=GlobDaBlob,realm=NA,application-id=yrc23zHg,discussion-id=Q3EAOkE8,comment-id=000100000001,timestamp=2018-10-29T04:53:00.799+0000) > > You are using non-existent numbers lol. > > To go up a division the only win rates are > 0% > 33% > 66% > 100% > > 34% is a non-viable value > > You are trying to write a proof for something before you even checked to make sure it exists. > > The funny thing since there are no scenarios of a 34% win rate, all the scenarios of a 34% win rate is actually the empty set. The empty set has fun properties. So while it **IS** true that there are no scenarios where you _don't_ get promoted with a 34% win rate, it is **ALSO** true that there are no scenarios where you _do_ get promoted with a 34% win rate Lol. I'm going to quote this again. > But the 34% and 41% are just troll numbers that are equally wrong to 60 and 66%. I don't think you even read my post before you posted. The point of the 34% and 41% are to upset people who can't pass their series with a true but meaningless number. Equally meaningless are 60% and 66%. Write down all the possible combinations and count them. That's the only number that holds value. If you want I could post more bullshit to back up the 34% number that would still be true but also still be meaningless. For example. If you repeat series multiple times there is literally no situation where you can end a series with a total winrate higher than 34% and not promote. By which I mean if you do 10 series that go 1 win 2 losses and on your third series you go 2-1 you will have promoted.... and your total winrate is 12/33 which is only a 36% winrate. and if you scale to infinity, your winrate needs to only be 33.333...4% Alternatively, you can also go 0 - 2 in 10 series, and 2 - 0 in the 11th for a winrate of 2/22 and still promote. It's less than 33% But that's fine because the only requirement is that you promote over 33.333...4% All it disproves is the 66% winrate bullshit.
> [{quoted}](name=Akaash,realm=NA,application-id=yrc23zHg,discussion-id=Q3EAOkE8,comment-id=0001000000010000,timestamp=2018-10-29T07:11:50.197+0000) > > Lol. I'm going to quote this again. > > I don't think you even read my post before you posted. > > The point of the 34% and 41% are to upset people who can't pass their series with a true but meaningless number. Equally meaningless are 60% and 66%. > > Write down all the possible combinations and count them. That's the only number that holds value. > > > If you want I could post more bullshit to back up the 34% number that would still be true but also still be meaningless. > > For example. If you repeat series multiple times there is literally no situation where you can end a series with a total winrate higher than 34% and not promote. By which I mean if you do 10 series that go 1 win 2 losses and on your third series you go 2-1 you will have promoted.... and your total winrate is 12/33 which is only a 36% winrate. and if you scale to infinity, your winrate needs to only be 33.333...4% > > Alternatively, you can also go 0 - 2 in 10 series, and 2 - 0 in the 11th for a winrate of 2/22 and still promote. It's less than 33% But that's fine because the only requirement is that you promote over 33.333...4% All it disproves is the 66% winrate bullshit. You are trying way too hard. All you did here was repeat your same statements which I already refuted in my post.
Akaash (NA)
: > [{quoted}](name=Busty Demoness,realm=NA,application-id=yrc23zHg,discussion-id=Q3EAOkE8,comment-id=0001,timestamp=2018-10-29T02:56:50.098+0000) > > False. The actual number is 60% over the next 3 or 5 games (not including free wins, which would make it 50% over 2 and 4 respectively). > > The reasoning is simple. If you win your first 2 games out of the 3 game series, your win rate for that series cannot fall below 60% if you play your remaining games. 3 Games out of 5 is also an automatic 60% minimum for that series. Since your win rate for those series cannot fall below that specific threshold through playing out the remaining games, they're skipped. Uh. You're wrong. If you'd like to disprove me. Find me a situation where you wouldn't promote division with a 34% winrate in the series, or a 41% win rate for tiers. But the 34% and 41% are just troll numbers that are equally wrong to 60 and 66%. The actual number is 50%. Series of 3 is faster, but 5 is the same pattern. You have the same chance to promote as you do to fail promotions. WW - Pass WLW - Pass LWW - Pass WLL - Fail LWL - Fail LL - Fail It's literally a counting problem. I hope you can count.
> [{quoted}](name=Akaash,realm=NA,application-id=yrc23zHg,discussion-id=Q3EAOkE8,comment-id=00010000,timestamp=2018-10-29T04:17:47.509+0000) > > Uh. You're wrong. > > If you'd like to disprove me. Find me a situation where you wouldn't promote division with a 34% winrate in the series, or a 41% win rate for tiers. > > But the 34% and 41% are just troll numbers that are equally wrong to 60 and 66%. > > The actual number is 50%. > > Series of 3 is faster, but 5 is the same pattern. You have the same chance to promote as you do to fail promotions. > > WW - Pass > WLW - Pass > LWW - Pass > WLL - Fail > LWL - Fail > LL - Fail > > > It's literally a counting problem. I hope you can count. You are using non-existent numbers lol. To go up a division the only win rates are 0% 33% 66% 100% 34% is a non-viable value You are trying to write a proof for something before you even checked to make sure it exists. The funny thing since there are no scenarios of a 34% win rate, all the scenarios of a 34% win rate is actually the empty set. The empty set has fun properties. So while it **IS** true that there are no scenarios where you _don't_ get promoted with a 34% win rate, it is **ALSO** true that there are no scenarios where you _do_ get promoted with a 34% win rate
: Banned For Mouthing off to inting player
"Banned for being toxic, this is ridiculous"
: > [{quoted}](name=p a t r i o t,realm=OCE,application-id=yrc23zHg,discussion-id=1Buca3VP,comment-id=0001,timestamp=2018-10-17T10:34:13.219+0000) > > I think i would be more upset if grinding 2000 tokens was the only way to get it to be honest. At least this way theres another method if you dont make it with the pass. While I see, where you're coming from, to me it's like if they put Black Alistar, Silver Kayle, PAX skins, victorious skins etc on the hextech crafting like gemstones and prestige as well. Those skins mean "I preordered the game" "I played the beta" "I reached Gold in S2" "I attended PAX in 2010" and I guess my point is I would like the Prestige skin to mean "I supported the Worlds season and I played a hell of a lot games back then". But, that's just my opinion and I see that they weren't going for that when they made the skin.
> [{quoted}](name=Guardian Devil,realm=EUNE,application-id=yrc23zHg,discussion-id=1Buca3VP,comment-id=00010000,timestamp=2018-10-17T12:13:25.558+0000) > > While I see, where you're coming from, to me it's like if they put Black Alistar, Silver Kayle, PAX skins, victorious skins etc on the hextech crafting like gemstones and prestige as well. > Those skins mean "I preordered the game" "I played the beta" "I reached Gold in S2" "I attended PAX in 2010" and I guess my point is I would like the Prestige skin to mean "I supported the Worlds season and I played a hell of a lot games back then". But, that's just my opinion and I see that they weren't going for that when they made the skin. If I see someone with that skin i'm not going to think "He supported the Worlds season and played a hell of a lot games back then" Im going to think "He was willing to spend money on an overpriced skin"
: Was Watching a Popular Dota 2 Streamer
Why are you comparing a champion from a different game to league? The reason newer champions seem/are more complex than older ones is because you need to make new champs. Like if they never came up with new ideas than they would just be making copies of older champions. And its not _always_ the case For exmaple, Xayah, who is a decently new champion, in my opinion is pretty simple. And one thing that i think Riot does general well with is keeping power in line. Meaning that more complex =/= more powerful. While i do think that the more complex champions often have more outplay potential just because more complexity usually means you have more options in the actions you take, we still see old simple champions like malzahar, Nocturn, Janna, ect. that are high tier picks.
CIayman (NA)
: "I'll queue fill so my teammates can play what they're good at :))))))"
Cloud273 (NA)
: Why do people assume that paying for online makes a game better?
The title talks about the game being better and the body talks about the community so i'm not sure what you are trying to get at.
wildfox9T (EUW)
: > [{quoted}](name=BLACK REALM GOD,realm=NA,application-id=yrc23zHg,discussion-id=2ePc1g1F,comment-id=001300000000,timestamp=2018-10-12T14:29:18.275+0000) > > so you want it to last for a shorter duration? > > i mean.... i'd be okay with it having a shorter duration at lower levels sure. shacos Q is like that so why not. it was meant to be a joke,but yeah i think his W is insanely forgiving for the reasons i said in the other comment
> [{quoted}](name=wildfox9T,realm=EUW,application-id=yrc23zHg,discussion-id=2ePc1g1F,comment-id=0013000000000000,timestamp=2018-10-12T15:48:16.557+0000) > > it was meant to be a joke,but yeah i think his W is insanely forgiving for the reasons i said in the other comment How is it forgiving, when he uses it the enemy has enough time to drink a tea,take a breakfast,read the today newspaper and still be back in time to kill him before its CD is done.
: > [{quoted}](name=GlobDaBlob,realm=NA,application-id=yrc23zHg,discussion-id=2ePc1g1F,comment-id=000b00000001,timestamp=2018-10-12T00:04:51.337+0000) > > Meanwhile braum has a yasuo wall that moves and no one bats an eye. Yasuo's wall isn't unhealthy, just learn to play against him Braum's is different on several fundamental levels. - Only fully blocks the first projectile - Braum still takes damage/CC from all other projectiles after the first - Hard CC (other than snares) WILL break the wall - Braum's wall will only block projectiles from the direction he's facing (shots hitting him in the back do full damage) This doesn't even take into account how Braum is designed as a warden-style (protector) support, making it much more fitting on him than Yasuo. Yasuo's wall also comes at basically zero cost (Cool down being the only real cost to the skill).
> [{quoted}](name=Busty Demoness,realm=NA,application-id=yrc23zHg,discussion-id=2ePc1g1F,comment-id=000b000000010000,timestamp=2018-10-12T00:12:24.057+0000) > > Braum's is different on several fundamental levels. > > - Only fully blocks the first projectile > - Braum still takes damage/CC from all other projectiles after the first > - Hard CC (other than snares) WILL break the wall > - Braum's wall will only block projectiles from the direction he's facing (shots hitting him in the back do full damage) > > This doesn't even take into account how Braum is designed as a warden-style (protector) support, making it much more fitting on him than Yasuo. Yasuo's wall also comes at basically zero cost (Cool down being the only real cost to the skill). No it blocks every projectile, its just that he takes some damage to do so. People are just mindless sheep and will never stop crying about yasuo no matter what. They would rather attempt act like he has a design problem that makes him impossible to play against but in reality they are just too stubborn to suck up their pride and learn to play against him.
: > [{quoted}](name=Daddy Issues,realm=NA,application-id=yrc23zHg,discussion-id=2ePc1g1F,comment-id=000b,timestamp=2018-10-11T06:05:50.930+0000) > > I'm with Glob and Malza on this one. Yasuo is not a problem in the current state of the game. It's not a matter of whether he's a problem in the current meta. The design itself will always remain unhealthy regardless of whether he's strong.
> [{quoted}](name=Busty Demoness,realm=NA,application-id=yrc23zHg,discussion-id=2ePc1g1F,comment-id=000b0000,timestamp=2018-10-11T11:21:25.711+0000) > > It's not a matter of whether he's a problem in the current meta. The design itself will always remain unhealthy regardless of whether he's strong. Meanwhile braum has a yasuo wall that moves and no one bats an eye. Yasuo's wall isn't unhealthy, just learn to play against him
CLG ear (NA)
: Remove Yasuo's windwall and give it to Janna as her ultimate
People still whine about yasuo and don't understand how to play against him. lol
Ahris (NA)
: > [{quoted}](name=Lord Dusteon,realm=NA,application-id=yrc23zHg,discussion-id=Y7ENoR5G,comment-id=000100000000,timestamp=2018-10-10T04:10:46.385+0000) > > Courtesy of your own statistic's link: > > https://i.imgur.com/Yp9Qo9m.png?1[/img] The website makes it by itself. Doesnt mean it is backed by logic or understanding in any way or form.
> [{quoted}](name=Ahris,realm=NA,application-id=yrc23zHg,discussion-id=Y7ENoR5G,comment-id=0001000000000000,timestamp=2018-10-10T04:18:50.511+0000) > > The website makes it by itself. Doesnt mean it is backed by logic or understanding in any way or form. Did you just devalue the source that you provided?
Rioter Comments
: > [{quoted}](name=GlobDaBlob,realm=NA,application-id=yrc23zHg,discussion-id=sg2xiWqy,comment-id=000100000002,timestamp=2018-10-07T08:31:53.239+0000) > > If playing the game is a waste of time then why play? I'm not really a comptitive A type, I'm not invested in the winning, I just like picking the characters I enjoy and playing them. Once it hits a "get stomped every time you leave base" point, there's no purpose to it for me. The fun's sucked out at that point.
> [{quoted}](name=Strawberrycocoa,realm=NA,application-id=yrc23zHg,discussion-id=sg2xiWqy,comment-id=0001000000020000,timestamp=2018-10-07T15:32:14.418+0000) > > I'm not really a comptitive A type, I'm not invested in the winning, I just like picking the characters I enjoy and playing them. Once it hits a "get stomped every time you leave base" point, there's no purpose to it for me. The fun's sucked out at that point. Maybe its not fun for you, but other people can have fun without winning.
: > [{quoted}](name=Busty Demoness,realm=NA,application-id=yrc23zHg,discussion-id=sg2xiWqy,comment-id=0001,timestamp=2018-10-07T05:21:05.340+0000) > > No. > > I'm sick of players giving up. I don't want my losses dictated by 3 people calling it quits. And I don't like having my time wasted in a match that's decided in the first half by people who wanna be egomaniac tryhards. \*shrug*
> [{quoted}](name=Strawberrycocoa,realm=NA,application-id=yrc23zHg,discussion-id=sg2xiWqy,comment-id=00010000,timestamp=2018-10-07T05:40:00.747+0000) > > And I don't like having my time wasted in a match that's decided in the first half by people who wanna be egomaniac tryhards. \*shrug* If playing the game is a waste of time then why play?
: > [{quoted}](name=GlobDaBlob,realm=NA,application-id=yrc23zHg,discussion-id=lEKMaB4i,comment-id=0005000000000000000000000000,timestamp=2018-10-06T23:52:20.319+0000) > > So you really don't understand how logic and reasoning works, ill make it as clear as i can. > > It is not up to me to provide proof, the burden on proof is on you. > You are for some reasoning ignoring 80% of my post, i clearly stated why your argument is logically invalid. > **it does not logically follow from your premises that women have a harder time going into the gamin industry.** And i gave a counter example that you chose to completely ignore. > Its a safe bet you don't understand how that works as disproving an argument, but providing a counter example to an argument is a logically valid way to disprove it. You thinking that it is not logically valid is just a gap in knowledge. > > I have no idea what this whole thing is saying that i need to tell you what proof is. Firstly, that dialogue never happened, you never asked me what proof is. You gave an argument and I explained why that argument is not valid (for the record the 2 ways to refute an argument are the either show that one or more of the premises are false or that it is not logically valid). If you need help on learning what is considered proof then i guess try google because I dont have the time to give you a lecture on logic and reasoning. Your argument makes no logical sense. {{sticker:slayer-jinx-wink}}
> [{quoted}](name=Colonel J,realm=NA,application-id=yrc23zHg,discussion-id=lEKMaB4i,comment-id=00050000000000000000000000000000,timestamp=2018-10-07T00:09:00.119+0000) > > Your argument makes no logical sense. > > {{sticker:slayer-jinx-wink}} Makes a thread complaining that people don't respond to his arguments Proceeds to ignore peoples arguments
: > [{quoted}](name=GlobDaBlob,realm=NA,application-id=yrc23zHg,discussion-id=lEKMaB4i,comment-id=00050000000000000000,timestamp=2018-10-06T19:03:02.179+0000) > > I don't think you understand how logic works. Firstly, you are the one making the claim, the burden of proof is on you, not me. Meaning that you need to provide sufficient proof of your claim. It's not on me to give proof. > > Second, I never said that "statistics aren't proof" but like i said, your argument is not logically valid. I already explained what that that means, but in case you forget it means that even if your premises are true it does not follow that your conclusion is true. And I already gave you a counter example to show you why your logic is invalid. Your argument does not make logical sense. There. Now I too can say you're wrong without telling you why. >> ***shows proof*** >>> "that isn't proof" >> ok what do you consider proof then? >>> it's up to you to show me proof >> but i did, you just don't think it's proof. so what do you consider proof? >>> I don't have to tell you what I think proof is You're so ridiculous it's astounding.
> [{quoted}](name=Colonel J,realm=NA,application-id=yrc23zHg,discussion-id=lEKMaB4i,comment-id=000500000000000000000000,timestamp=2018-10-06T22:59:27.743+0000) > > Your argument does not make logical sense. > > There. Now I too can say you're wrong without telling you why. > > You're so ridiculous it's astounding. So you really don't understand how logic and reasoning works, ill make it as clear as i can. It is not up to me to provide proof, the burden on proof is on you. You are for some reasoning ignoring 80% of my post, i clearly stated why your argument is logically invalid. **it does not logically follow from your premises that women have a harder time going into the gamin industry.** And i gave a counter example that you chose to completely ignore. Its a safe bet you don't understand how that works as disproving an argument, but providing a counter example to an argument is a logically valid way to disprove it. You thinking that it is not logically valid is just a gap in knowledge. I have no idea what this whole thing is saying that i need to tell you what proof is. Firstly, that dialogue never happened, you never asked me what proof is. You gave an argument and I explained why that argument is not valid (for the record the 2 ways to refute an argument are the either show that one or more of the premises are false or that it is not logically valid). If you need help on learning what is considered proof then i guess try google because I dont have the time to give you a lecture on logic and reasoning.
: > [{quoted}](name=GlobDaBlob,realm=NA,application-id=yrc23zHg,discussion-id=lEKMaB4i,comment-id=000500000000,timestamp=2018-10-06T06:20:06.176+0000) > > Thats not proof... Thats like saying its harder for a male to be a veterinarian because its a female dominated field right now even though a significant number of males own pets. > > Again, your arguments are not logically valid. What do you consider proof? You clearly don't consider statistics to be proof. I could link you a bunch of articles about how it's more difficult for women but i'm doubtful you consider that to be proof as well. Furthermore, what is your proof that it's just as easy for women to enter the indistry than men? You only seek to undermine my argument, in a very poor manner might i add, without providing any of your own.
> [{quoted}](name=Colonel J,realm=NA,application-id=yrc23zHg,discussion-id=lEKMaB4i,comment-id=0005000000000000,timestamp=2018-10-06T10:04:15.462+0000) > > What do you consider proof? You clearly don't consider statistics to be proof. I could link you a bunch of articles about how it's more difficult for women but i'm doubtful you consider that to be proof as well. Furthermore, what is your proof that it's just as easy for women to enter the indistry than men? You only seek to undermine my argument, in a very poor manner might i add, without providing any of your own. I don't think you understand how logic works. Firstly, you are the one making the claim, the burden of proof is on you, not me. Meaning that you need to provide sufficient proof of your claim. It's not on me to give proof. Second, I never said that "statistics aren't proof" but like i said, your argument is not logically valid. I already explained what that that means, but in case you forget it means that even if your premises are true it does not follow that your conclusion is true. And I already gave you a counter example to show you why your logic is invalid.
: > [{quoted}](name=VoraciousX,realm=NA,application-id=yrc23zHg,discussion-id=lEKMaB4i,comment-id=0005,timestamp=2018-10-05T05:59:19.093+0000) > > For example, right now you're saying that women have a harder time getting into the gaming industry. Where's your proof? As far as I'm aware not as many women try to get into the gaming industry because they're not as interested in it. Also asking for a 1:1 ratio of women to men in the gaming industry is ludicrous. I erased things from your post that were irrelevant which was most of it. 1. Women have a harder time getting into the gaming industry because it is dominated by men. 2. My proof is that the gaming industry is dominated by men even though 48% of gamers are women. https://www.washingtonpost.com/news/morning-mix/wp/2014/08/22/adult-women-gamers-outnumber-teenage-boys/?utm_term=.e2b4691d6dbd 3. I did not ask for a 1:1 ratio of women to men. This is a strawman.
> [{quoted}](name=Colonel J,realm=NA,application-id=yrc23zHg,discussion-id=lEKMaB4i,comment-id=00050000,timestamp=2018-10-06T03:12:27.916+0000) > > I erased things from your post that were irrelevant which was most of it. > > 1. Women have a harder time getting into the gaming industry because it is dominated by men. > 2. My proof is that the gaming industry is dominated by men even though 48% of gamers are women. https://www.washingtonpost.com/news/morning-mix/wp/2014/08/22/adult-women-gamers-outnumber-teenage-boys/?utm_term=.e2b4691d6dbd > 3. I did not ask for a 1:1 ratio of women to men. This is a strawman. Thats not proof... Thats like saying its harder for a male to be a veterinarian because its a female dominated field right now even though a significant number of males own pets. Again, your arguments are not logically valid.
: > [{quoted}](name=GlobDaBlob,realm=NA,application-id=yrc23zHg,discussion-id=lEKMaB4i,comment-id=0003000000000000000000000000,timestamp=2018-10-05T06:47:01.572+0000) > > You do realize that your argument is logically invalid. If you don't know what that means, it means that even if we assume that all your premises are true, it does not follow that your conclusion is true. > > You take a single specific example and try to argue it for every case. Explain in more detail why i'm wrong. None of what i said was contradictory nor did i say my conclusion was truth.
> [{quoted}](name=Colonel J,realm=NA,application-id=yrc23zHg,discussion-id=lEKMaB4i,comment-id=00030000000000000000000000000000,timestamp=2018-10-05T07:02:29.731+0000) > > Explain in more detail why i'm wrong. None of what i said was contradictory nor did i say my conclusion was truth. So you are admitting that what you are trying to argue is false.
: > [{quoted}](name=GlobDaBlob,realm=NA,application-id=yrc23zHg,discussion-id=lEKMaB4i,comment-id=00030000000000000000,timestamp=2018-10-05T06:02:41.507+0000) > > exactly Not exactly. The female-only events are still sexist by definition. Having an event for one gender and having another one for all genders doesn't make the first event not sexist. As proven above, gendered restrooms are sexist.
> [{quoted}](name=Colonel J,realm=NA,application-id=yrc23zHg,discussion-id=lEKMaB4i,comment-id=000300000000000000000000,timestamp=2018-10-05T06:07:42.055+0000) > > Not exactly. The female-only events are still sexist by definition. Having an event for one gender and having another one for all genders doesn't make the first event not sexist. As proven above, gendered restrooms are sexist. You do realize that your argument is logically invalid. If you don't know what that means, it means that even if we assume that all your premises are true, it does not follow that your conclusion is true. You take a single specific example and try to argue it for every case.
: > [{quoted}](name=GlobDaBlob,realm=NA,application-id=yrc23zHg,discussion-id=lEKMaB4i,comment-id=000300000000,timestamp=2018-10-05T05:18:36.521+0000) > > What are the classes? Do they offer classes to women with no equivalent for men? Yoga and other feminine-type activities, but not all are female-only. Some are open to all. They do not offer male-only type activities, but they do have classes where only males attend.
> [{quoted}](name=Colonel J,realm=NA,application-id=yrc23zHg,discussion-id=lEKMaB4i,comment-id=0003000000000000,timestamp=2018-10-05T05:38:39.121+0000) > > Yoga and other feminine-type activities, **but not all are female-only. Some are open to all**. > > They do not offer male-only type activities, but they do have classes where only males attend. exactly
: > [{quoted}](name=GlobDaBlob,realm=NA,application-id=yrc23zHg,discussion-id=lEKMaB4i,comment-id=0003,timestamp=2018-10-05T05:11:39.684+0000) > > Last time i check there are no gyms that advertise to everyone and then after males buy a membership and show up they get told they are not allowed in because its only females. This is inaccurate and a false equivalency because you act like the whole facility was shut down to one gender when that is not the case at all. I actually go to a gym, Club Sport, and they have lots of women-only classes.
> [{quoted}](name=Colonel J,realm=NA,application-id=yrc23zHg,discussion-id=lEKMaB4i,comment-id=00030000,timestamp=2018-10-05T05:13:20.314+0000) > > I actually go to a gym, Club Sport, and they have lots of women-only classes. What are the classes? Do they offer classes to women with no equivalent for men?
: Why the usual PAX argument is terrible.
Last time i check there are no gyms that advertise to everyone and then after males buy a membership and show up they get told they are not allowed in because its only females. Women don't have a harder time going into the gaming industry. Males were negatively harmed by not being allowed in because they were being denied from their interests and getting advice. Women were not more likely to attend as many women openly said that refused to participate after they learned that males were being denied access.
S0kaX (EUNE)
: It's 2018 and people still use "of" instead of "have"
: Can't even say that a Nerf.. more CD on r? That's all? What about her damage? Every time i try to gank mid she ults away, like she has r all the time
> [{quoted}](name=the shushi,realm=EUW,application-id=yrc23zHg,discussion-id=1oEQU2I8,comment-id=0009,timestamp=2018-10-03T23:33:09.683+0000) > > Can't even say that a Nerf.. more CD on r? That's all? What about her damage? Every time i try to gank mid she ults away, like she has r all the time You say that nerfing the CD on her ult isn't even a nerf and then immediate complain that her ult was up too often. Did someone take over writing your post half way through or something? And as an Ahri player, i can tell you her ult is not as great for escape as people make it out to be. You can easily burst her to dead before she can get away. And if you are a decent player you its easy to abuse its current cooldown. I'm only in plat and like every time i ult the enemy jungle immediate camps mid while its on CD.
ExpStealer (EUNE)
: A current experience with the boards
Because if you make a serious post about Zed then the people that post in it will be Zed players who know what they are talking about and probably know the changes you would make are bad If you make a Zed QQ thread then the sheep will mindlessly up vote it. Because as you know any AD assassin that can kill you is Overpowered, but yet when non-assassin AoE mages like Orianna an 100-0 all non tanks at once its balanced.
: > [{quoted}](name=GlobDaBlob,realm=NA,application-id=yrc23zHg,discussion-id=97d5rtR4,comment-id=0000,timestamp=2018-10-01T02:57:52.995+0000) > > They rebroadcast it in the evening for NA Why it's on YouTube by then
> [{quoted}](name=Calamitosus Cini,realm=NA,application-id=yrc23zHg,discussion-id=97d5rtR4,comment-id=00000000,timestamp=2018-10-01T03:07:57.121+0000) > > Why it's on YouTube by then Because the Vods only show the games
Allkh (EUW)
: Next vs event.
Leona vs Dianna
: I was gonna watch Worlds
They rebroadcast it in the evening for NA
Rioter Comments
Asudurga (NA)
: Maybe it's just me but I think Mordekaiser should have been priority number 1 for a VGU
{{champion:81}} {{champion:145}} {{champion:55}} {{champion:236}} {{champion:11}} {{champion:15}} Only champion with no CC?
: What was the best piece of advice someone ever gave you
: > [{quoted}](name=GlobDaBlob,realm=NA,application-id=yrc23zHg,discussion-id=T6Zyfcvq,comment-id=0010,timestamp=2018-09-22T22:06:10.851+0000) > > lol people still crying about zed > > "waa this champion can 100-0 me" > > Oh you mean like literally every mid lane assassin? > > Zed has way more counter play than garbage like LeBlanc and Fizz More like complaining about the ability to build to contend with threats being removed from the game.
> [{quoted}](name=Irelia Bot,realm=NA,application-id=yrc23zHg,discussion-id=T6Zyfcvq,comment-id=00100000,timestamp=2018-09-22T22:16:39.846+0000) > > More like complaining about the ability to build to contend with threats being removed from the game. 1. You shouldn't be able to "remove a threat" by building a single item (half an item at that) 2. Qss is not the only defensive item in the game. Zonyas does a better job at invalidating Zed than Qss anyway.
: Remember when this game had counterplay to zed's ult with QSS.
lol people still crying about zed "waa this champion can 100-0 me" Oh you mean like literally every mid lane assassin? Zed has way more counter play than garbage like LeBlanc and Fizz
zoliking (NA)
: > [{quoted}](name=GlobDaBlob,realm=NA,application-id=yrc23zHg,discussion-id=zYdfld3z,comment-id=0002000100000001,timestamp=2018-09-22T08:04:20.945+0000) > > "Names containing insults, grotesque imagery, and **strong vulgarity**." What strong vulgarity? Where? As a non-native speaker of the English language I might have a serious misunderstanding of the term, but doesn't "vulgar" mean crass language, as in using swear words and such? "Love" is a four letter word only in the technical, counting the letters sense, not in the proverbial one. Just sayin'. > I mean you even pasted the rule to the Rioter yourself. Huh? What?
> [{quoted}](name=zoliking,realm=NA,application-id=yrc23zHg,discussion-id=zYdfld3z,comment-id=00020001000000010000,timestamp=2018-09-22T08:34:03.761+0000) > > What strong vulgarity? Where? As a non-native speaker of the English language I might have a serious misunderstanding of the term, but doesn't "vulgar" mean crass language, as in using swear words and such? "Love" is a four letter word only in the technical, counting the letters sense, not in the proverbial one. Just sayin'. > I don't see what you are trying to accomplish by making yourself look like an idiot.
zoliking (NA)
: > [{quoted}](name=chipndip1,realm=NA,application-id=yrc23zHg,discussion-id=zYdfld3z,comment-id=00020001,timestamp=2018-09-22T00:31:13.424+0000) > > You wouldn't have a name like "JesusLovesPornography" as a name, and that's literally the same thing. Yeah. So? I'm asking why is it inappropriate, I know what hentai is, you don't need to explain that. > Ain't offensive to me, but if you're dumb enough to use it as a name you ain't my martyr. You can't make somebody getting offended over something the criteria for inappropriate, by that standard no summoner names would be safe. Some idiot might say "Ooh, zoliking is offensive to me because it has 'king' in it, and I'm offended by references to monarchy." or "Ooh, chipndip1, that promotes unhealthy diets, that's very offensive to me an my wellness nut friends, that's gotta go". So you not being offended is just as irrelevant as if you were.
> [{quoted}](name=zoliking,realm=NA,application-id=yrc23zHg,discussion-id=zYdfld3z,comment-id=000200010000,timestamp=2018-09-22T00:43:51.903+0000) > > Yeah. So? I'm asking why is it inappropriate, I know what hentai is, you don't need to explain that. > "Names containing insults, grotesque imagery, and **strong vulgarity**." I mean you even pasted the rule to the Rioter yourself.
: > [{quoted}](name=Pubic Boy,realm=NA,application-id=yrc23zHg,discussion-id=zYdfld3z,comment-id=0002000000000000,timestamp=2018-09-22T00:21:55.380+0000) > > "Jesus, he mythological figure" He isn't a mythological figure, because he is a historical figure. You should change that bud. Now lets not start shit like that. Some people believe Jesus is real and some dont,lets just leave it at that. We all have our opinions
> [{quoted}](name=R107 Games,realm=NA,application-id=yrc23zHg,discussion-id=zYdfld3z,comment-id=00020000000000000000,timestamp=2018-09-22T00:30:03.020+0000) > > Now lets not start shit like that. Some people believe Jesus is real and some dont,lets just leave it at that. We all have our opinions No, it is universally accepted that Jesus did in fact exist and its complete foolishness to deny that. Secular historians acknowledge that its irrefutable that he did exist due to the many non-collaborated accounts of him. Yes of course people debate whether he was the son of God, but denying his existence completely and calling him a mythological figure shows a gross lack of knowledge.
: > [{quoted}](name=GlobDaBlob,realm=NA,application-id=yrc23zHg,discussion-id=J8p9ksR2,comment-id=0005,timestamp=2018-09-21T14:37:23.791+0000) > > Well considering that she is not interacting with you at all, no she is not flirting lol. > > If you want advise, you need to have some reason to go to her place (like you get her mail on accident) then just walk in and she is in the middle of changing or just got out of the shower with a towel on. She will then blush and then call you an idiot or a pervert and hit you. The next thing you know both of you will be sitting in her place and you will be holding a tissue to your bloody nose. At this point she will either apologize and ask why you are there or act pouty and ask why you are there. Either way its smooth sailing from there. um.... no? I don't think that is right? probably cause I have respect for privacy
> [{quoted}](name=Calamitosus Cini,realm=NA,application-id=yrc23zHg,discussion-id=J8p9ksR2,comment-id=00050000,timestamp=2018-09-21T14:38:43.522+0000) > > um.... no? I don't think that is right? probably cause I have respect for privacy Looks like the joke went over everyone's head.
: new lady moved in next door (lady advice?)
Well considering that she is not interacting with you at all, no she is not flirting lol. If you want advise, you need to have some reason to go to her place (like you get her mail on accident) then just walk in and she is in the middle of changing or just got out of the shower with a towel on. She will then blush and then call you an idiot or a pervert and hit you. The next thing you know both of you will be sitting in her place and you will be holding a tissue to your bloody nose. At this point she will either apologize and ask why you are there or act pouty and ask why you are there. Either way its smooth sailing from there.
Show more

GlobDaBlob

Level 110 (NA)
Lifetime Upvotes
Create a Discussion