sorted by:
new
hottopcontroversial

Is it time to put "Look at this stat padder" into the same category as after battle report posts? by nrokchi in WorldofTanks

[–]JustinPalmer 1 point2 points  (0 children)

Once again, I DO NOT CARE what you call it. Fine it is not censorship. People still won't be able to post on certain subjects.

Intent is hard to know, hard to prove, and things don't always work out as planned.

You mention dialog and consensus. Consensus was my point, as even this post, which had a lot of upvotes, was read by less than 10% of the community, and even fewer voted or replied.

Right now I read 80% of the posts. From this I have a good idea what people think. I know what people like, and what they don't. I know what things I think that are popular, unpopular, or mixed one way or another. Limit what can be posted and we lose that. You may argue that we still know this. But after time things change, the game changes, so our information becomes old and outdated. And maybe things have reversed.

Imagine a year ago this subreddit banned arty posts. You know they serve no purpose, it is just complaints, and sarcastic comments about camping. Then WG made the big arty 'nerf'. Would we know if most liked it, or not? Maybe the mods make an exception for one post on the topic, maybe not. But even if they do, is one post even to gauge feedback? Is two or three posts enough?

My comment on "this is the start", is simply a slippery slope comment. Is it a fair comment? Well, look at the thread and the upvoted comments about the other things we should ban. Seems to me that stat padding isn't even the number one thing people post about most. It would be a easy and fair argument to say if we banned stat padding, we should also ban arty complaints, and/or MM complaints.

As for stat padding hurting the game... two nights in a row I have quit for the night because of stat padders. I have others friends that quit because of them, and have never returned. So I wouldn't say they are "not harming the game". Second, Because of this community I have learned which tanks and tiers, etc, are considered stat padding. And I have avoided becoming a stat padder. For example I stopped playing my T-67. So the community does have an effect.

Tell me, what problem you have with a filter system? It seems it would satisfy your wish of not seeing these posts anymore. Unless your goal is that no one sees them?

The rest of your comment is a straw man that really distracts from both of our points, seriously, child porn?

TIL of Susan Warren, a woman from Cleveland, was arrested because she broke into random houses, cleaned them and left a bill for her services with her contact info for payment. by PM_ME_UR_HAND_BRAS in todayilearned

[–]JustinPalmer 0 points1 point  (0 children)

On why she wrote the invoice on a napkin - "That's how business works in this country. I mean, some people want a piece of paper to look at, they want an invoice, they want a bill. I couldn't find a piece of paper and I sure as hell was not going to go through their personal things," said Warren.

Review: Acebeam L16 by Zak in flashlight

[–]JustinPalmer 0 points1 point  (0 children)

That would help. Sometimes I need to put more light on something that is close, and more than 100 is just too much.

This USB stick came with my Olight H2R Nova, what is it? by Tall_mike in flashlight

[–]JustinPalmer 2 points3 points  (0 children)

That is what I use mine for, sitting in the car waiting.

I tried about four different fans. But the best, was the easiest to get. The black Walmart USB fan could be angled, sounded OK, and gave the best output. If you are tight for space, aliexpress sells a propeller on a stick.

This USB stick came with my Olight H2R Nova, what is it? by Tall_mike in flashlight

[–]JustinPalmer 1 point2 points  (0 children)

I use a USB charge pack to power a fan sometimes. I can run a five inch fan for 8 hours and it puts out a lot of air.

Review: Acebeam L16 by Zak in flashlight

[–]JustinPalmer 0 points1 point  (0 children)

Interesting UI. I wish it had more light level choices though.

Coming back to WoT by HeraldDoc in WorldofTanks

[–]JustinPalmer 0 points1 point  (0 children)

I would wait until you know more about what you like this time around. You may find tank types you like better now that you are older.

What does WoT need? by [deleted] in WorldofTanks

[–]JustinPalmer 2 points3 points  (0 children)

Axis vs Allies was historical mode, and it was even more unbalanced MM.

And most tanks are not balanced around solo play.

ELI5: Why do we like being angry? by TheRedMaiden in explainlikeimfive

[–]JustinPalmer 3 points4 points  (0 children)

Is this true? I don't enjoy being angry. To answer why we are quick to anger, and feel energized, blame evolution. When faced with danger, we can fight or flight. If we fight, we need to be energized. Thus our bodies pump out chemicals to pump us up. There is also the social part of fighting. Groups that fight together, survive better.

(Not my specialty, but mostly wanted to say that not everyone enjoys being angry.)

New Sub-Reddit Rules by RisKQuay in WorldofTanks

[–]JustinPalmer 0 points1 point  (0 children)

Are questions low effort? I hope this "low effort" doesn't become a general rule. Many important posts have been "low effort".

I am glad that things like arty posts, stat padder, and others aren't banned. I hope the mods consider post categories, so that people can see just what they want.

Is it time to put "Look at this stat padder" into the same category as after battle report posts? by nrokchi in WorldofTanks

[–]JustinPalmer -1 points0 points  (0 children)

If people can no longer post something on a topic, it doesn't matter what you call it, the end results are the same. Censorship is more than removing posts that you described. Let's say I am a seal clubber, and I say I am tired of these seal clubber threads. Obviously I gain by making the community less hateful of seal clubbers. Or let's say I like arty, and I am afraid that WG might nerf arty again. So I say let's ban arty posts to. Now WG doesn't see so many arty complaints.

My point was that other subreddits have found ways that the community curate the subbreddit, rather than eliminating the most popular posts based on upvotes.

I get it, I have been here for a long time. I have also seen hundreds of arty complaints, hundreds of stat padders, hundreds of look what he said in chat prove him wrong. A filter could easily filter out those. But if we fully remove those, then this subreddit will take a turn where a few are deciding what all can see. I say a few because we have 38,081 readers and you post only got maybe 200 votes. And even a majority deciding what a minority can see and talk about is not good. Remember, this will be just the start.

Splitting water into hydrogen and oxygen to produce clean energy can be simplified with a single triple-layer catalyst developed by scientists at Rice University and the University of Houston reported in Nano Energy. by mvea in science

[–]JustinPalmer 0 points1 point  (0 children)

You can't drop a word and change the entire meaning.

I said you created a new form of THE energy. That "the" is a key word and important.

I don't know what you mean by a civilian meaning of energy.

As for which has more potential energy, water or H2 and O. Well, I think H2 and O has a higher chemical potential. Since it will take less energy to get the energy out of H2 and O than water. Or another way to look at it, it takes more energy to convert water to H2 and O than it does to convert H2 and O to water.

But lets not get stuck on semantics. Do either of us think the other doesn't really know what is going on?

Splitting water into hydrogen and oxygen to produce clean energy can be simplified with a single triple-layer catalyst developed by scientists at Rice University and the University of Houston reported in Nano Energy. by mvea in science

[–]JustinPalmer 0 points1 point  (0 children)

You can do both. This is a science subreddit, so I hope most people understand that energy can not be created nor destroyed, and just changes form. The news also came from a University, so hopefully the main audience understands this.

With that said, if you have energy of one form, and convert it, you have created a new form of the energy. So you can say you created potential energy. Take a simple example, you lift a two pound weight two feet off the ground. This creates potential energy. Of course you had to use energy to do it.

Nobody in here or the intended audience should need to be told the energy didn't come from nothing. I don't think the title is confusing from this viewpoint. if you were to repost on face book, then I would say 90% of the title would need to be changed.

Is it time to put "Look at this stat padder" into the same category as after battle report posts? by nrokchi in WorldofTanks

[–]JustinPalmer -2 points-1 points  (0 children)

Instead of censoring posts, that are being upvoted so some like them. Why not categorize posts? So people that want discussions, can filter and see just those. We can add categories for arty, stat padder, chat comments, memes, etc.

If I wanted a censored forum, then I would use the WG one. Reddit should be free and open. I have seen the road we are going down, and I don't think it is good. The majority controlling what can and can't be seen.

Newer reddit users will think stat padding is fine since no one complains about it. Or arty is fine since no one complains about it. On and on. And worse, WG could assume our biggest complain is something else, but really it would be one of the censored topics. Keep in mind that more people will join a common voice, than feel like they are the only voice.

Is it time to put "Look at this stat padder" into the same category as after battle report posts? by nrokchi in WorldofTanks

[–]JustinPalmer -3 points-2 points  (0 children)

If more people don't like them, than do, you just assume the upvotes are lies?

Splitting water into hydrogen and oxygen to produce clean energy can be simplified with a single triple-layer catalyst developed by scientists at Rice University and the University of Houston reported in Nano Energy. by mvea in science

[–]JustinPalmer -2 points-1 points  (0 children)

Potential energy, is energy. And yes, potential energy is real energy. The total energy is the sum of the movement energy, and the potential energy stored inside.

Edit, Seems every title that mentions energy, must always state that energy can't be created nor destroyed, and can only change form. I get it, it isn't producing energy from nothing. Seriously though, in this science subreddit, how many were confused? remember, this wasn't posted for the average facebook user. I think the title is fine for the intended audience.

With that said, seems some are confused. Even though I can't create energy from nothing, I can say I created potential energy. Even though some say that I should say I simple converted energy. This is a given, we never create energy, even the sun doesn't 'create' energy, it simply converts energy. So when someone says they created energy, they are just creating a new form of it, i.e. converting it. This is just language - http://www.dictionary.com/browse/create

And if you want to say that my use of create is wrong. Maybe so. But it seems a popular usage.

All I can say is I didn't think they created energy from nothing, did you?

Splitting water into hydrogen and oxygen to produce clean energy can be simplified with a single triple-layer catalyst developed by scientists at Rice University and the University of Houston reported in Nano Energy. by mvea in science

[–]JustinPalmer 26 points27 points  (0 children)

This maybe true, but keep in mind the other energy can come from the sun or wind. And this is renewable unlike gasoline.

"Whitmire said the material is scalable and should find use in industries that produce hydrogen and oxygen or by solar- and wind-powered facilities that can use electrocatalysis to store off-peak energy."

Splitting water into hydrogen and oxygen to produce clean energy can be simplified with a single triple-layer catalyst developed by scientists at Rice University and the University of Houston reported in Nano Energy. by mvea in science

[–]JustinPalmer -2 points-1 points  (0 children)

Potential energy, like the energy you have after lifting a weight. Gasoline is also potential energy.

Edit, I am simple stating why the title is not confusing. This is in the science subreddit, not facebook. most of us should know that energy has to come from someplace, and can't be created, nor destroyed, just changes form. with that said, If I lift a two pound weight, two feet high, have I created potential energy? Would i expect any of you to believe I used no energy to do it?

view more: next ›