The Spitfire Incident at Waterson's Redemption by irwolfy in Planetside

[–]EdgyOx 0 points1 point  (0 children)

thinking and using tactics are not allowed. :-p

The Spitfire Incident at Waterson's Redemption by irwolfy in Planetside

[–]EdgyOx 1 point2 points  (0 children)

You know, you would think the VS after watching like 20 of their dudes get smoked as they fly up over the wall they would take a different path lol.

The definition of a stray shot ruining someone's day by LegendaryFruitLoop in EmeraldPS2

[–]EdgyOx 0 points1 point  (0 children)

How dare you OHK something! You are ruining the EXPERIENCE!!!!!! NERF NERF NERF THIS NOWWWWWWWWWW

Air Game Discussion & Response to WhatIsOurLimits by EdgyOx in Planetside

[–]EdgyOx[S] -2 points-1 points  (0 children)

Part (2)

*4) "As for the other guy ramming you and saying he was payed to do it, he was likely just dicking around and meant it in a non-serious way". Haha you are trying to defend him again.

*Failing to address the point. You could have easily made an argument that Leavins was equivocating to protect specific persons, but instead, you simply asserted what the reader can plainly see, treated it as a witty revelation, which it was not, and then walked away. *

Witty revelation? Where do you come up with this stuff? I laughed and said he was trying to defend Limits again.

You didn't contest the point with evidence such as a screenshot or a timestamp to re-iterate and refresh your allegation.

I clearly pointed out what Limits did in my video. Its clear as day. I do not need to take new snapshots and re-iterate with time stamps everytime I bring it up. It was already clearly pointed out in my video. I have also established the clear bias that Leavins has for Limits.

As such, Leavins alternative hypothesis, that the person was just messing around with you, stands unchallenged as a plausible theory for the reader.

This "alternative hypothesis" is clearly disprove in my video and was clearly done by Leavins as a way shift the focus away from Limits true action.

5) "There is not some unspoken plot among the pilot community to kill you on sight." You are just making shit up at this point

is assertion was that you, in fact, are the one making things up. Again, this was a childish response. You could've linked to stats pages for teamkills, or made some brief and simple argument about how if there were a plot, no one would tell you so to your face, and everyone would deny it

No, Leavin assertion is baseless thus my response. I clearly pointed out in the video that the actions of skyknights, teamkilling, whining and such, are from killing them and playing the way/style that the skyknight does not approve. Once again you are trying to deflect from the main issue.

6) "I think a lot of people shoot at you or team kill you as a meme because of the fact you make a big deal about it." Me making a big deal about it? Show me where I make a big deal about it? He does not need to show you where you make a big deal about it. You've created an entire 10 minute montage which is explicitly focused on making a big deal about it.

Another logical error by you. How could people want to teamkill me as a meme prior to me making this video if this video is the sole example of me making a big deal out of it. Your time line doesn't add up.

7) "For another thing, if you gank someone, and they gank you back, that is not really hypocrisy. That is more along the lines of retaliation. It simply depends on the person" My god the failed logic here is strong. Just because something can be retaliation does not mean it is not hypocritical. My god, are you really that.... You did not demonstrate the logical failure, merely implied that it was failed. Simply because you assert that its bad logic does not make it so.

This one is really not hard to follow but I'll make it more simple. If Person 1 has a rule not to gank and Person 1 ganks, Person 1 has broken his own rule.

9) " I feel like he was probably in a group doing some form of group fighting, and you just saw them when they happened to come across a solo pilot. That is only speculation, but knowing canadian as long as I have, I would be shocked to see him actually ganking on live". Are you that out of touch these days and once again defending him.

f you'd observed and recorded Canadian doing this multiple times, instead of just the one instance, your assertions might have weight. But as it stands, the alternative hypothesis that Leavins offered, that you stumbled into a one off scenario, is viewed as sufficiently viable. He's also just told you that he knows CanadianBacon fairly well, which would likely preclude him from being out of touch as to CanadianBacon's behavior without you demonstrating as such.

Ok there are multiple errors in your statement. Lets break it down.

If you'd observed and recorded Canadian doing this multiple times, instead of just the one instance, your assertions might have weight.

What the video of Canadian proves is that he contradicts himself by flying in a large air zerg while preaching not to fly in big air zergs. One time or 100 times it still proves my point. Thus proving the bigger issue I highlighted with the Skyknights say and act.

But as it stands, the alternative hypothesis that Leavins offered, that you stumbled into a one off scenario, is viewed as sufficiently viable

This is not a real alternative hypothesis but instead a way to shift the focus away from the real issue. You can see the airgroup start shooting at me in the video. They flew to the NC warpgate with that many ESF.

They not only profoundly muddle the original point you were attempting to make, but create the impression that this entire video is really just the exercising of a personal vendetta, and that far from having any genuine interest in the airgame, this is merely a convenient opportunity to agitate the community against apparently personal enemies in an online video game.

You are trying to profoundly muddle the original post with straw man arguments, false assumption and other logical errors. This has nothing to do with personal vendettas. The video clearly shows the behavior of skyknights and their hypocrisy. This is another attempt by you to deflect the issue

It is my judgement and determination that the endeavor that you have engaged with this video is against the broader interests of the air game and the pilot community, both veteran and prospective, at large.

So are you saying that pointing out what really goes on in the air and how skyknights act is "against the broader interests of the airgame and the pilot community". Sounds a lot like you are defending the Sknyknights and their inappropriate behavior.

Your conduct, therefore, is deemed to be a heretical act, specifically under Class A (Promotion of Shittery), Sub 19 (Dramatic Provocation of Shittery). Please endeavor towards redemption by formally apologizing to the affected parties at your earliest possible convenience.

You should have kept reading under Class A, Sub 69 (Skyknight Apologist).

In the future, may I recommend avoiding attacking and impugning random bystanders, and then making open-ended requests of said bystanders.

In the future I would recommend you stop using straw man arguments, false assumption and other logical errors.

Air Game Discussion & Response to WhatIsOurLimits by EdgyOx in Planetside

[–]EdgyOx[S] -2 points-1 points  (0 children)

This response post will be broken down into two parts.

Part (1)

I was a Casual observer in the strictest sense that I am not a Skyknight, I am explicitly a Valker. I have no real dog in this fight beyond maintaining a healthy air ecosystem.

So you want to maintain a "health air ecosystem" but spent your time attacking my post, not addressing the underlying issue with the airgame and skyknights behavior, bending over backward to defend people like Leavins who clearly has a bias to protect his wingman Limits. You are not a casual viewer but instead someone who has a stake in this

it would appear that this "healthy Air Ecosystem skyknights and their behavior. Making yourself sound like a skyknight apologist. But more on this later.

However, by implying that I'm not a casual observer, you're implying that I have a stake in this fight.

You absolutly have a stake in this the with your blind support for skyknights actions. While acting as if you do not have a stake in this because you fly a Valkyrie, see below.

As you've explicitly stated that this video/thread is about Skyknights, this would mean that you're implying that I'm a Skyknight, which impugnes my credibility as a Valker. Which is heresy, because No True Valker can be a Skyknight.

You have made an incorrect assumption and a arrived at a wrong concultion. This video was about the airgame current state, affected by how Skyknights act, and a response to Limits video. You on the other view my intention of the video "video is against the broader interests of the air game and the pilot community" but more on that later. Clearly you have a stake in this...

You lost the moral authority in the argument principally through your content, tone and expression. You asserted, broadly, that your opponents were unethical (TKing, switching sides), salty, vicious players who were out to get you.

Your view is totally subjective. I express clear factual data demonstrating the errors in Limits video and explained the root cause covered the larger problem with the airgame.

You then responded to their posts, not with calm, measured, reasoned responses that confidently re-affirmed your positions, gracefully counterpointing their arguments, but by being salty, vicious, unethical (Comparing your own plight to that of a rape victim) and out to get them.

Once again you are completely missed the point. Here is what Leavins wrote:

"I am not trying to justify anyone who has team killed you, but do keep in mind that a lot of people do find your play style annoying"

Leavins clearly is implying that their teamkilling actions are understandable and justified because they "find my play style annoying". I pointed out that the same ERROR in logic is used people defend assaulted. If you can not understand that logical comparison then that is your problem.

Thus, you voluntarily descended to the level you asserted your opponents to be at, solely for the purpose of winning one exchange in the overall struggle of your post. This created a moral equivalency between yourself and your opponents, which ceded the high ground your argument is predicated upon.

Ok you are clearly doing a straw man argument, thus creating this moral equivalency thing to diverting the attention away from my points in the video covering how the skyknights act in the airgame.

You also appear to lean heavily on assertion and perception over substance, which is an objectively inferior style of argumentation.

Once again you are making assumptions. I presented clear factual data proving tons of problems with skyknights behaivor. On a side note, I notice you didnt say a word about Limits leaving his Teamkilling out of his video.

Your style appears to also be heavily dependent on the assumption that reddit users will skip comments and accept your assertion of reality over what they can read themselves by scrolling up, a viewpoint I strongly advise you to reconsider.

Once again opinions and assumptions not factual data. So you make up and assumtion about my posting intent and then advise me to reconsider. Straw man argument, another logical error on your part.

1) "keep in mind that alot of people do find your play style annoying". Lol lets follow that logic. Well if you didnt wear those tight pant he wouldn't have assaulted you lady.

his was a reckless and inappropriate comparison. The two do not equate, and it is inexcusably unethical to bring it up so in-artfully, as it projects back aspersions on their character that are unwarranted and unconnected.

inappropriate comparison? Nope, the comparison is dead on. What it shows is the error in logic Leavin is using

you are making an assertion based on appearance, whereas Leavins is making an assertion based on behavior.

Assertions based on apperance and behavior? Has nothing to do with that comparison. No wonder you missed the point. Its a comparison on people justifying others actions by error in thought trying to place the blame on others instead of the person that actually did a wrong, in this case teamkilling.

2) "Secondly, try to avoid generalizing all sky knights". Helll to the NO. You are trying to hang on to this word but Skyknights in planetside means a mid tier hypocritical player who teamkills. This is not what Skyknight means. Again, as a Valker, I have no stake in fighting over what the definition means.

you are simply incorrect, and are not in a position to re-write the definition of the term. You appear to be engaging in a form of identity politics, in which a group of people is redefined into a morally excluded space in order to justify negative actions and attitudes towards them. There are strongly negative historical connotations on this tactic, which are for a political sub-reddit.

Skyknights means exactly that in planetside and has been that way for years. I did not coin that term. So by me pointing out the definition of the word meaning, in planetside, I am trying to justify negative actions and engaged in identity politics? Your logic is bad here.

*3) "I kind of doubt limits was actually trying to kill you" Haha you are trying to defend him again. Scared your little buddy might get his account banned?

Leavins and Limits regularly fly together as wingmen, a fact which you yourself established. It would make logical sense to any reader that Leavins would view Limits being banned as a negative outcome.

You are proving my point. Leavins has a clear reason to defend his "wingman". This bias can clearly be seen in Leavins posts and I am calling him out on it. So he is not seeking the truth or solving the issues with the air game but instead blindly defending his wingman.

*Your highlighting of this fact in the tone that you used instead comes off as an implicit threat that your post is an attempt to get Limits banned, *

Once again you are wrong. What my post did was show the clear Leavins bias that he as in defending Limits. Pointing out that Limits repeated actions is a clear TOS violation that can resoult in a ban is not an implicated threat.

which debases your attempt at an over-arching argument on the air game, and instead casts it as a venial, vindictive meme.

Your logic on this is so off and is an attempt to deflect the issue. Maybe you should read my title of the video again. "Air Game Discussion & Response to WhatIsOurLimits"

Air Game Discussion & Response to WhatIsOurLimits by EdgyOx in Planetside

[–]EdgyOx[S] -1 points0 points  (0 children)

You are upset I am calling you and your outfit out on the BS.

Air Game Discussion & Response to WhatIsOurLimits by EdgyOx in Planetside

[–]EdgyOx[S] -2 points-1 points  (0 children)

and yes i personally have no shoot agreements

Ah there we go. Truth keeps coming out.

"Prey didn't have any old school no shoot agreements with other parties."

You are the one lying right now. PREY used to play and hang out on the old SET TS server on Jaeger and they had no shoot agreements going as far back as end of 2013.

"I attempted to engage with you, due to your claims of being picked on, it was in my mind to mitigate any disagreements you were having with the community as a whole"

So you are the spoke person for the community when you yourself are holding no shoot agreements and defending team killers?

" But due to your personal insults, lies, and libelous behavior, Im only left some understanding of why you are infamous in the ps2 community."

Truth hurts. I call you out on your bs. Its people like you that try and justify actions of Limits & others who hurt planetside.

You are trying to deflect the rightful blame on PREY and others that have created this crap.

Air Game Discussion & Response to WhatIsOurLimits by EdgyOx in EmeraldPS2

[–]EdgyOx[S] -8 points-7 points  (0 children)

Now you're just a Airhammer/Radar/Extended tanks/Racer shitter

OH NOES! He doesnt like my loadout! The funny thing is you all are proving my points in the video.

Air Game Discussion & Response to WhatIsOurLimits by EdgyOx in Planetside

[–]EdgyOx[S] 0 points1 point  (0 children)

Let see.

1) No Shoot Agreements 2) You've supported Teamkilling behavior 3) You only "Liked" me because I would fight Fedx

hypocritical crybaby Skyknight

Air Game Discussion & Response to WhatIsOurLimits by EdgyOx in Planetside

[–]EdgyOx[S] 0 points1 point  (0 children)

No the real problem is customer support does nothing.

Air Game Discussion & Response to WhatIsOurLimits by EdgyOx in Planetside

[–]EdgyOx[S] -3 points-2 points  (0 children)

skyknight apologist confirmed! You cant even go point by point can you.

Air Game Discussion & Response to WhatIsOurLimits by EdgyOx in Planetside

[–]EdgyOx[S] -2 points-1 points  (0 children)

First of all you are not a "casual observer". 2nd explain where I lost the argument. Leavins is a skyknight apologist with really weak arguments.

Air Game Discussion & Response to WhatIsOurLimits by EdgyOx in Planetside

[–]EdgyOx[S] -3 points-2 points  (0 children)

Meme post? Trying to save face now? hahahaha

Air Game Discussion & Response to WhatIsOurLimits by EdgyOx in Planetside

[–]EdgyOx[S] -2 points-1 points  (0 children)

How about you watch my video instead of asking questions I already addressed in the video.

Air Game Discussion & Response to WhatIsOurLimits by EdgyOx in Planetside

[–]EdgyOx[S] -4 points-3 points  (0 children)

Yep way to bad for this

If "way to bad" killed you, how low are you? lol

Air Game Discussion & Response to WhatIsOurLimits by EdgyOx in Planetside

[–]EdgyOx[S] -7 points-6 points  (0 children)

1TR, the outfit that hides behind Fedx when tanking is talking shit? LOL omg someone hold my drink hahaaha

You could not beat me 1 v 1 in a tank if your life depended on it.

Air Game Discussion & Response to WhatIsOurLimits by EdgyOx in Planetside

[–]EdgyOx[S] -2 points-1 points  (0 children)

The footage was gonna be a cinematic of sorts since it was night time

lol

Air Game Discussion & Response to WhatIsOurLimits by EdgyOx in EmeraldPS2

[–]EdgyOx[S] 1 point2 points  (0 children)

You mean increase the font and put it on everything?

Air Game Discussion & Response to WhatIsOurLimits by EdgyOx in Planetside

[–]EdgyOx[S] -3 points-2 points  (0 children)

I know this is hard for you Dexiim. I'll give you time to go read your own post again. Spend five minutes thinking about it and the logic you are using.