User talk:13ThirtySeven

lol gg

moved from userpage
Please review GWW:NPA. Making personal attacks isn't likely to persuade anyone. --SoraMitsukai 07:37, 15 April 2008 (UTC)

umm i dont think any of these rules were broken in my comments

racial, sexual, homophobic, ageist, religious, political, or ethnic epithets directed against another contributor. Disagreement over what constitutes a religion, race, sexual preference, or ethnicity is not a legitimate excuse. Using someone's affiliations as a means of dismissing or discrediting their views — regardless of whether said affiliations are mainstream or extreme. Threats of legal action. Threats of physical violence, particularly death threats. Threats of vandalism to userpages or talk pages. Threats to interfere with the usual operation of a user's computer. Threats or actions which expose other contributors to political, religious or other persecution by government, their employer or any others. Posting a link to an external source that fits the commonly accepted threshold for a personal attack, in a manner that incorporates the substance of that attack into discussion, including the suggestion that such a link applies to another editor, or that another editor needs to visit the external source containing the substance of the attack. Revealing or threatening to reveal personal information about another contributor.

gg to you kyle, i dont make personal attacks, personally i believe that calling someone a noob isnt a personal attack, its just a matter of opinion in reference to thier gaming experience,it has nothing to do with the attributes or the characteristics,sex,intelligence,limitations related to that individual, if you take that personally then... rofflelawl gg go play gears of war co op lolll

'''At the moment, I'm quite fond of running SS/Interrupt in PvE (I prefer to let a hero MM), when I'm not running a 55 build for solo farming. In PvP, I'm quickly falling in love with Shock Axe, though I'm currently developing a R/W spike build that will replace it once my PvE warrior is higher in level.'''

this isnt a personal attack but imo 55ing sucks at soloing cuz its limited due to enchant removal. why do u seem to like all the gimmick builds that everyone uses? there are better ones out there that people either havent discovered yet or dont use(cuz they dont use it right)

i just want to say that if u want to solo fow,doa,uw,tombs,cof,sorrows and all those "elite" areas in hardmode.. 55ing isnt all that great and most people use it because alot of people know about it, just know there are a ton of better solo builds that the average players dont know about. 55ing is inferior compared to alot of the builds me and my friends have been developing XD
 * I'm going to move this over to the talk page. Your userpage is only meant to be editing by yourself, or with permission. This seems more like talk-page relevant material anyways. --[[Image:User Wandering Traveler Oie User Wandering Traveler Sig2.png]] Wandering Traveler 19:35, 15 April 2008 (UTC)

ty i didnt appreciate people editing my userpage --13ThirtySeven 19:39, 15 April 2008 (UTC)


 * An honest mistake made at a late hour, and I apologize for that. That said, read the second sentence of NPA. "Comment on content, not on the contributor." Calling someone anything clearly runs counter to that, and discourages further contribution. Secondly, if you really want to nitpick, read the line above those that you quote: "include but are not limited to." And later on in the page: "Insulting or disparaging an editor is a personal attack regardless of the manner in which it is done," using other quotations or otherwise. Finally, where did I once say that I enjoy gimmick builds? I think the whole point of my own comments were that I hate them as much as the next decent player, and Ursan only makes matters worse. All I'm saying is that namecalling isn't going to get you anywhere (putting the fact that it violates policy aside), regardless of how you phrase it, and that I would also politely suggest reading everything before making a response in the future. --SoraMitsukai 07:37, 16 April 2008 (UTC)
 * By the way - "this isnt a personal attack but imo 55ing sucks at soloing cuz its limited due to enchant removal." You're right, it's not - because it comments on the build, not the one using it. ;] The build is unoriginal and limited, perhaps even a bit slow if you're not boss farming, but even though I don't farm much at all anymore (doing titles instead), I still enjoy using it in areas where you "aren't supposed to," because of those limitations. Not anywhere near effective, efficient, or safe, but a good challenge nonetheless. :p  And it often leads to "well, if this doesn't work, maybe this does," where you eventually start creating the new builds you mention above. If I understood you correctly, you're saying that Ursan is no different from any other overused build, and that there's really nothing to complain about. In almost every other case, I'd tend to agree, if Ursan were a single, class-specific skill that was actually used in conjuction with other skills. It's like a gimmick build with everything non-gimmicky stripped out - 100% pure, undiluted lameness that everyone insists on using (and as a result, people think that grinding to R10 automatically makes them good at PvE, when really they miss the whole point). But maybe we should carry this part of the conversation over to the Ursan talk page. --SoraMitsukai 07:54, 16 April 2008 (UTC)

Noob or n00b, nub, newb, newbie, is a common player term used to refer to a new or inexperienced player. It is a term common in internet and online game culture. common as in millions of people say that all the time over wiki, so instead of just getting on my case about it... chill

calling someone a noob isnt a personal attack, its just a matter of opinion in reference to thier gaming experience,it has nothing to do with the attributes or the characteristics,sex,intelligence,or limitations pertaining to that individual

maybe you need to read up on the definition of noob,although the variations in the ways it can be used in context can change, i didnt mean it as offensive i meant it as... what is listed above

if you havent sent the same message to the other few hundred thousand people who commented on wiki using the phrase "newb,noob,nub,or newbie" then you are sending me a message for no reason.. i really dont see the whole issue you have with me

oh and if you would like, i can show u how to solo farm elite areas like fow,tombs,sorrows,or whatever in hardmode,alot better than 55ing imo. as long as u dont put it on wiki so noobs(inexperienced players) cant rip(steal) strats, the most ive made is 150k a day with some of my builds

My ign is Dark Sapremia
 * I really don't have an issue with you (which is why I meant to post on your talk page rather than crying to an admin); and you're right, it is a common term. I can't count the number of times where I find myself thinking the same thing. I was just pointing out the the policy of commenting on the strat/build/skill, not the people using it, because (unfortunately) some people just don't have tough skin, that's all. Some people make the distinction between "n00b" as an insult and "newb" when referring to someone who is just new to the game, for example, which is why it's generally better to just comment on the content as being sub-standard. It sucks being politically correct (believe me, I know, I put up with it at work at all time), but it is an open community project.
 * As far as Wiki builds, they're a double-edged sword, as I see it - on the one hand, it introduces players to new strategies that they may not have thought of yet, but at the same time, so many people adopt these builds that gameplay becomes one-dimensional. It's the reason I haven't shared my SS build outside of my own group of friends, for example, because I know they aren't afraid to learn it, and then expand on it instead of settling for the flavor of the month.
 * I appreciate your offer to share a few builds, too, and just might take you up on it. :]  I really don't mean to be a pain in the ass, just meant to give you a heads up before an admin got irritated, that's all. By the way; remember to sign your comments.   ;]   Makes the conversation easier to read. --SoraMitsukai 21:22, 16 April 2008 (UTC)

Ign
This wuz one of my ingame names, lol Canthan illegal works Annoying And Deadly 00:35, 17 April 2008 (UTC)

ill meet up with ya one of these times--13ThirtySeven 02:50, 17 April 2008 (UTC)


 * ever going to? getting preety boring solo farming raptors for money to finish prestiege armor, :P 3.5months old account, my main char is 2.5 months old i feel newb Shadowshock

ummm i havent really been playing lately, i kinda got bored of the game so... sry--13ThirtySeven 21:11, 8 May 2008 (UTC)

Talk:Shroud of Silence
Do not remove comments from that talkpage again. I do not want to get in a revert war with you. You're not allowed to remove comments from talkpages, which I'm quite sure you're aware of. Thanks. -- Mini Me   21:42, 19 April 2008 (UTC)

so i cant edit my own comments?--13ThirtySeven 21:44, 19 April 2008 (UTC)

that pretty much violates the freedom of speech, changing what i choose to say, but you guys not allowing me--13ThirtySeven 21:44, 19 April 2008 (UTC)


 * if you want to change your comments scratch them out with Dominator  Matrix  21:45, 19 April 2008 (UTC)


 * You can change your comments (I think), but you can't remove your, nor other people's comments. You've removed Lord Belar's commenst, and that's not allowed. -- Mini Me  [[Image:User Mini Me sig.png|19px|talk]] 21:46, 19 April 2008 (UTC)

ok, i wont erase anyone else's comments but still, people keep on changing my revisions, no matter how small

"Violating Free Speech ... Penalties included a $50000 fine and up to six months in prison"

i just wont comment from now on, so any further comments on this page will not be seen by me

i cant even say noob on here, nor can i change my own comments or remove them..

well since you guys wont let me remove my comments, ill jus replace them with a "change"

i still dont get why you guys wont let me change my comments, now you guys are just getting childish --The preceding unsigned comment was added by User:13ThirtySeven (talk).
 * Comments are not to be removed, you can see why at Guild Wars Wiki:User pages. The talk page restrictions there generally apply throughout all talk pages. Also, your last two edits here are highly inappropriate, and could be considered vandalism, hence its removal. Contribute constructively. --[[Image:User Brains12 Spiral.png|15px|Pling! \]] Brains12 \ Talk 23:05, 19 April 2008 (UTC)

so many things can be considered inappropriate, the term inappropriate is mostly a matter of opinion, a kid in a third world country, brought up by murderers and terrorists might not consider killing someone as inappropriate, but those of us who are spoiled and born into a society that is peaceful cant comprehend this, we are mindset on these ways. inappropriate... not being able to express myself is inappropriate, not being able to change my comments is inappropriate. under the circumstances, i feel my response, and "comments" were appropriate in this situation. also i believe the fact that we arent allowed to change, or remove our own individual comments should be revised --The preceding unsigned comment was added by User:13ThirtySeven (talk).
 * First of all, sign your comments with . Secondly, you can indent your comment using a : at the beginning of the paragraph, using one more indent than the comment you are responding to.
 * Thirdly, there is a "Show Preview" button that you can use to read your comments. Change, edit, improve. Once you have submitted that comment (i.e. you click "Save Page"), don't change it significantly enough that it changes the meaning or original intention. As the policy says, if you want to change it, strike it out with.
 * Finally, your logic is impeccably flawed, not to mention hideously incorrect. As I said, contribute constructively, or not at all. --[[Image:User Brains12 Spiral.png|15px|Pling! \]] Brains12 \ Talk 23:17, 19 April 2008 (UTC)


 * hah, another thing, logic? why do people have the collective belief that there is only one right way of thinking?--13ThirtySeven 23:20, 19 April 2008 (UTC)
 * so obviously, you are correct in every way and form.. nothing you do is wrong, and my "logic" is flawed in accordance to your mindset one way "logical" way of thinking--13ThirtySeven 23:22, 19 April 2008 (UTC)
 * you claim my "logic" is "flawed" but you alone cannot accept other "logical" ways of thinking--13ThirtySeven 23:23, 19 April 2008 (UTC)
 * please take a few minutes to collect your thoughts and calm down. We don't need any more flaming on this talk page. All of the relavent points have been stated, so there is no use repeating anything. --[[Image:User Wandering Traveler Oie User Wandering Traveler Sig2.png]] Wandering Traveler 23:23, 19 April 2008 (UTC)
 * what you consider "flaming" i consider a constructive, and "appropriate" response, unless you see any vulgar terms in my wording, perhaps you need to learn what the term "flaming" means. and i am completely calm, and if anything, brains "flamed" my way of thinking or.. "logic"--13ThirtySeven 23:26, 19 April 2008 (UTC)
 * Perhaps I worded that wrong. My apologies. But please, take a moment to calm down and not spam the talk page with things that have clearly been stated before. With all due respect, you've essentially said "Brains is illogical" in the last 4 posts in a row. lets try to tone it down slightly please. --[[Image:User Wandering Traveler Oie User Wandering Traveler Sig2.png]] Wandering Traveler 23:28, 19 April 2008 (UTC)
 * if you have jumped to conclusions that i was stating that brains is illogical, then that would mean that i think that there is only one "logic" which is false, because in fact i am arguing the exact opposite. you seem to have inferred an incorrect comprehension of my statements--13ThirtySeven 23:34, 19 April 2008 (UTC)
 * I think this is what he means (argumentum ad nauseam, appeal to ridicule, equivocation, just to name a few that I can point out). One's worldview is directly related to their opinions. Logic itself is not. And like I said earlier, like it or not, this is a community project, governed by rules set by the community, regardless of any one individual's opinions. Unless there's an overwhelming consensus, none of the policies discussed above are going to change, and this seems extremely unlikely. Just keep things constructive, and this doesn't have to be a big deal. --SoraMitsukai 23:36, 19 April 2008 (UTC)
 * this could be complex, because you might say i am thinking there is no one way of "logic" that in itself is contradicting, because that would imply that my "logic" is that there isnt a "logic" but i believe there is no such thing as "logic", note, i said believe, although i am completely open minded to other beliefs, such as brain's belief that my "logic" is "flawed" but i still think that was wrong as a human being, for him to state that--13ThirtySeven 23:38, 19 April 2008 (UTC)
 * also i might note, that brains comment wasnt contributing constructively to me, saying my "logic" is "impeccably flawed, not to mention hideously incorrect" and i believe he owes me an apology, but not only me, but to the others who do not seem to share his same "logic" which would be the other billions of people living on the planet earth--13ThirtySeven 23:43, 19 April 2008 (UTC)
 * Some offensive opinions are what we call life, my friend. People get waaay too offended here. And yet we still live on. If you don't like what Brains said, then simply ignore it. No reason to raise a huff over a comment, even if I have done so above. That was my fault. --[[Image:User Wandering Traveler Oie User Wandering Traveler Sig2.png]] Wandering Traveler 23:47, 19 April 2008 (UTC)
 * and to add. Seeing how this is probably going to go awry, I suggest we all cool off. This is going to get into NPA really fast. I will make no posts from here on out on this talk page. --[[Image:User Wandering Traveler Oie User Wandering Traveler Sig2.png]] Wandering Traveler 23:47, 19 April 2008 (UTC)
 * As above. --SoraMitsukai 23:56, 19 April 2008 (UTC)
 * you either implied that "but to the others who do not seem to share his same "logic" which would be the other billions of people living on the planet earth" meant that no one agrees which him(which is false, i was talking about collective"logic" which would mean all of his morals,beliefs,and thoughts, because everyone's is different)was a personal attack, or you saw one of my other comments as a personal attack, this effect isnt intended, if one of my comments struck anyone as a personal attack, i apologize, because none of them were intended as a personal attack--13ThirtySeven 23:54, 19 April 2008 (UTC)
 * ok before i said i would post no further comments, sry i had to go on after brains...at first i was only partially annoyed that people wouldnt let me remove my comments, so i got over it, then people kept on ruining my comments, this annoyed me. since people on here cant let me "contribute constructively" i have to say i am really disappointed in guildwiki in its contradicting terms and conditions, since i cant remove a few comments that were incorrect in order to make comments "contribute constructively" but how.. how can i contribute constructively if wiki wont let me change comments that dont "contribute constructively" that in its self isnt contributing constructively, it is a paradox and is contradicting to itself in many ways, this is why i am disappointed, there are also a plethora of other reasons i would like to discuss, but since i cant change anything(including people's mindset ways) alas there is no point.--13ThirtySeven 00:08, 20 April 2008 (UTC) =\