I did mean to say, though, that I think your method is better than Sylen's, even if neither is particularly adequate. Of course, I never set out to compare the two, but maybe this will make you feel a little better.
That's sweet, but your approval has no influence on how I feel about myself. The point is that if you pretend that in all of what I say nothing is valid, it strongly suggests that you have an issue with me personally and don't even care about the subject. That you only lead a discussion about a subject, to leave an impression on my personally. And that's a waste of time, already because I'm not easily impressed.
I see now what you are saying. My words were not as accurate as they should have been. I call it a "lie" because it is demonstrably false and you repeat it as fact simply because you don't believe the demonstration of your words as false. I suppose a better descriptor would be that you are wrong and stubbornly so, and your case will be misleading to others who read it uncritically. As for "hiding behind facts," plenty of emotional people do that, so it's not particularly onerous to be accused of it. People want to make their position seem stronger, so they appeal to other methods of argumentation to present that image of strength. Again, the problem is when people don't realize that this is what is happening; but it isn't necessarily sinister on the part of the person who does it.
See, that's much better. Calling someone ignorant or stubborn is fine, because to a degree, we all are. Calling someone literally evil is no basis for a discussion, but for a prosecution.
You are right to say that I should acknowledge adjustments and improvements in the argument. The reason that I "move onto the next complaint" is because I didn't present the heaviest hitter first thing.
None of your comments hit heavier than the raw facts I present. You can't argue any of that away. Just, you know, btw.
If I can counter you with a simple point, then I will, but it isn't the last or best in the arsenal. With an argument as holey as yours (like many on this forum), there are plenty of counterpoints. If they satisfactorily answer one, then it's time to move onto the next one. *shrug* Eventually, I get tired and the other person is so stubborn that they won't admit that the points are valid (sound familiar?), and I give up on convincing them...
I do know the feeling. But see, when you say that looking only at the first 15 pages of the other forums (which I did because there are only 15 pages on the 7dtd forum and I wanted to use the same sample size) is erroneous, and then I accept your criticism and look at all the pages, I am being anything but stubborn. I'm being flexible and cooperative. But when I did what you considered the better method and found the same results, and you just drop it, it makes you look like you only said that thing to counter me. Personally. And when you see that it's not a factual counter, you drop it and move on.
I could, also just btw, make statistics for 100 other forums on steam and find similar numbers of locked threads. Percentages that are much lower than on the 7dtd forum.
...Like I'm going to do here. Your methodology is not flawless, first of all, because no methodology ever is,
Say I want to find out wether the light in the storeroom is on or off. My methodology would be to open the door. Where is the flaw in my methodology?
but also because you don't have all of the information and your methodology can't account for that. For whatever reason, you refuse to see that the snapshot in time matters and that there are hundreds of thousands of other threads making your sample statistically insignificant. Yes, the results are self-explanatory, but the underlying data is not and requires interpretation...before you even get to results! The problems that I have pointed out with your approach are the same ones which would hamper my own study because there is no way for either of us to get around it.
When I make a statistic of the currently available forum, right?, then I find it pretty obvious that my statistic is of the currently available forum,. I'm not talking about the forum as it was 5 or 4 or 3 or 2 or 1 year ago. But right now. Does that have to be pointed out and is not obvious..? Because I clearly say that I have checked the currently available pages in the "General Discussions" forum..? It does not make any sense to me, but for fun, I accept your criticism and add that I am examining the number of locked threads in the currently available forum.
What now?
What you can say is that the situation as it is now must not necessarily be the situation at some other point in time. And that is certainly true. Because now people are upset because the release of the A17 takes so long. That is the reason why so many threads are being locked these days.