Just Your Opinion

The biggest objection whenever I show people this:

Just An Opinion - Chameleonred5's blog

Is "that's only when you say 'just my opinion.' What if I say 'that's just your opinion?'"

To which I say: it's exactly the same thing. Seriously, switching 'my' for 'your' doesn't change any of the arguments at all. It's still an assertion, not an opinion. It's still obviously my opinion, so there's no need to even say it because it's obvious that my opinion is in line with my assertion. You're still saying it to try and make me unable to argue with you. And I'll still wreck you if you try to say this.

None of the arguments change either way. I'm only writing this because every single person who sees that says something like this.

Learn to Troll

Let me be the first to say that trolling is wrong. The idea that someone is there for the express purpose of making as many people mad as possible is an evil one without a doubt. However, if you're going to do it, do it right. Above all else, I am for intelligence and against stupidity. That applies even to this.

Making other people mad isn't that hard. A very vocal group of people will try to attack you if you go to a video that they like and declare it the worst thing ever and that those watching it suck. It's easy as that. Unfortunately, this only works on anyone who has no brain. Granted, it's numerically a lot of people, but making those people mad is like putting a token on the "free" space of a bingo card. It takes no effort. 

People like me will ask for reasons. If you're unable to provide them, or your reasons are bad, you will be labeled a moron or a troll. The first one shows that you haven't made them mad, and so you've basically failed as a troll. The second one tells any of the other people with common sense that it's not worth the effort, and so you've lost the ability to make worthy targets angry, thus failing as a troll.

A good troll has reasons for their obviously wrong statements that make sense. They must be able to justify their arguments to those with logic, the ones that actually matter. On top of this, you know what's more hilarious than making the "free" space people mad? Actually convincing them to agree with you and target other people. If you succeed at doing that, you've basically made a troll army out of mindless sheep. Even if people figure out you're a troll in these cases, they'll still fight you because you're a worthy opponent. 

The best troll I've seen managed to singlehandedly turn the entire comments section for a major video into a river of flame by being racist and being able to logically back up racism. Six people with logic fought with him, and he held his own, gathering a few other commentors and directing them as well. He became a fixture of the video itself, a reason to come there for anyone who enjoys getting mad at trolls. Quite frankly, that's a lot more skilled of an accomplishment than any of the hundreds of people you can make angry by saying "THIS VIDEO SUCKS."

Just An Opinion

Every time I enter an argument, regardless of site or content, some idiot inevitably says, "it's just my opinion" or some variation of that. The problem is that it's not just your opinion you're putting out when you're arguing. Opinions are statements about yourself and are not useful in arguments. When you argue, you are making an assertion that reality is one way instead of the way your opponent says it is. Let me give you an example to show you the difference between an opinion and an assertion.

Opinion: I don't like this video.

Assertion: This video is bad.

The first is a statement about you. YOU don't like the video. I can hardly argue with that; I can't read your mind and tell you that you don't think that when you obviously do. The second is a statement about the video. I can argue with that, since the video is something we can both see and discuss. Calling that your opinion, then, is wrong. 

On top of that, you would not assert something you don't believe in, right? If you don't like the video, it's likely that you think it's bad, right? So if you say "the video is bad," I know what your opinion is! You don't need to say it, because I already know.

So why the heck do people say it, if it's not true and doesn't need to be said anyways? Because it's a defense mechanism. People are told from a young age that opinions can't be argued, which is true. However, these people believe that if they just label everything out of their mouth an opinion, they can avoid actually having to think about what they're saying. That is, if it's an opinion, they don't need to give real logic or reasons, because an opponent can't argue against it anyways, right?

Except that's nonsense. I, at least, will call you out on it every time you do it, and then since you're in the habit of using "opinion" as a shield and I've destroyed that shield, you will get logically decimated. Learn to use real arguments, and get rid of the word "opinion" altogether. It may help you to save face.

Ready Player One

This is a short review of the book Ready Player One by Ernest Cline.

Here's what it says on the cover and on the back of this book, to give you an idea of my expectations:

"Willy Wonka meets the Matrix."

"The grown-up's Harry Potter."

Now, Harry Potter is a series that reinvented many things in literature and redefined concepts that are still being borrowed from in many stories today. While it did many things strangely, it wasn't boring and I wouldn't consider it to be simplistic or formulaic by any means. It was a good enough read that I was excited to read Ready Player One, if it really was anything like Harry Potter. Especially when the summary said it was about virtual reality. I've enjoyed every single take on virtual reality that I've ever seen, often because they push the concepts of VR to new and interesting levels.

This book, unfortunately, does not meet expectations.

To sum up the plot, a world-wide VR game system is designed by some one-dimensional rich fellow who we'll call "Plot Starter." Plot Starter put in his will that he designed an "easter egg" in his game, and the first person to find it would get basically everything Plot Starter owned. Since Plot Starter needs to start the plot, everything he owns totals hundreds of billions of dollars. Somewhat understandable because it's VR, but that still seems like too much money.

This seems like a cool concept. It's a hunt for treasure and also a race for treasure, since basically everyone on the planet has access to the VR game system. This concept is supposed to be more interesting in theory because Plot Starter is obsessed with the 1980s (despite being 2040 in the story), and so has set up clues that have to do with references to that decade.

The main character is Wade Watts, a Mary Sue. He is witty, intelligent, good at video games (important in a game world), too cool for school, has 1337 hacking skills (so much so that he can hack access into one of the most secure servers with just a few exploits), is a rags-to-riches character, and everybody eventually loves him except the stereotypical evil corporation that all these stories set in the future seem to have. He also is best friends with a popular guy. He also gets plot armor in places that he himself doesn't understand until it protects him just so that he can succeed. He also has pretty much everything made in the 1980s memorized (he quotes entire movies line-for-line perfectly). He also gets the girl.

The problems with this book are a combination of the 1980s references and the cookie-cutter characters, Wade most of all. Wade is the standard "rebel who fights evil corporation" character who has Mary Sue powers. The girlfriend of Wade is the standard "girlfriend who is also good at what the main character's good at." The best friend is the standard "popular best friend." The evil corporation hit every single evil corporation cliche perfectly and without fail. If one can replace the characters of a story with characters from another and not see a difference (provided they have the same tools), then those are not good characters.

If the characters and plot were in any way good and not contrived and/or formulaic, I might have been able to stand the 80s references. These pepper everything with no rhyme or reason. The only reason these seem to exist is to prevent the author from having to do much thinking to set up the clues to Plot Starter's easter egg and to make people warm and fuzzy with nostalgia.

In conclusion, D+. Not a complete failure, but you should at least try to be less contrived and formulaic, Mr. Cline. And for crying out loud, avoid Mary Sues.

Google Plus' Involvement

As of Google+, my previous entry has become irrelevant. While some of the steps may still exist in spirit, it will never be the same.

 

Google+ is bad. Everything they've done with the possible exception of italics and bolding and all that crap (and even that requires stupid formatting) is abusable beyond measure, confusing in nature, and it's causing people to shut the comments down.

 

Comments are the lifeblood of Youtube, and that blood has turned into venom. People are adjusting, but I bet if you did a poll the majority would say they hate it.

 

Good job, Google. Try adjusting it for Youtube users instead of G+ users, because Youtube users are the ones who care about Youtube.

6 Stages of a Youtube Argument

With only three exceptions among hundreds of arguments I've seen, these are the stages of an argument on Youtube.com.

 

1. Conflict: Someone has a problem with somebody. This can range from something complex to something stupid.

Example: "Why is he flirting with her? She's old, ugly, and has a rancid, b****y personality. I wouldn't give someone like that the time of day. He must be desperate." (This is obvious trolling, but it is an example of a stupid conflict.) 

 

2. Pseudologic: People make up anything and everything they can to support their side. This can range from actual logic (involving arguments and counterarguments) to insane troll logic (involving numerous fallacies and conclusions that do not follow from any logic). Because both are so different, I will give you both kinds.

Insane Troll Example: "shut ur f***en punka** b****a** raggedy a** up! what the hell does this convo have to do with u! dont try to jump into s*** that doesnt concern u..thats how motherf***ers get hurt, sitting there with a f***en cartoon as an avatar with a satanic screename..teeny bopper b****" (This is in response to someone trying to stop an argument.)

Actual Logic Example: "So just because I am defending Asians from racist, ignorant s***s like you means I automatically have an Asian girlfriend who apparently is ugly?" (This is in response to someone randomly accusing this person of having an ugly Asian girlfriend for a nonsensical reason.)

 

3. (This step is optional, and can be put anywhere after the second step.) I ttly won right guyz: Claiming you have won even though you have done no such thing. This can range from "You left, so I win" to "I'm just right" to other variations.

Example: "Notice how [Person] conveniently forgot to reply to my comment. He knew he was pwned and hoped everyone would forget his humiliation." (The person actually left because the only thing this person was doing was making up insults.)

2nd Example: "you just keep on talking dont you? xD All im doing is correcting you, you got angry and started a little war you want to win, now your seeing how i disprove you, your now trying to get back up, but your just gunna fail ;)" (This person did not disprove anything.)

 

4. Insults: This is where everything falls apart. This ranges from swears to extremely clever insults.

Example: "and youre clearly a child to sit there and spend ur time readig comments of 3 trolls fighting! u have no f***en life! u have nothing to live for! I know dumba**es loove to get the last say stage is yours......... I wont be replying to a piece of s*** who is beneath me...Talk to yourself! and watch you get flagged" (In this example, notice the personal attacks that take the place of a logical response. You will probably be entertained to know that ironically, this person got flagged.)

2nd Example: "There are other reasons why he might not have responded to you, other than the one that insures that you look great and that [person he was arguing with before] is a coward. Of course, you will deny this because of the aforementioned being full of yourself. You always have to be right, and you always need the last word. Everyone who tries to deny you these things are *whatever insult you come up with.* And everyone who stops arguing with you because you have these qualities is a coward. You're almost a troll." (This example is clever, accurate, and also very personal instead of being a generic phrase like 'idiot.')

 

5. This is where it simply peters out into insults until somebody leaves. This step can take months and can be followed by step #3. This step is unique to each argument and depends greatly on the people involved.

 

6. This step has two directions: Silence or Repeat. Silence takes place when no one else jumps in. Repeat occurs when someone replies to whoever is perceived to be the loser of the argument, calling them an idiot. In a repeat situation, the argument starts up again from any of the previous steps, depending on the sophistication of the newcomer. 

 

The three exceptions to this were arguments I participated in and guided away from this. If you remember this and avoid it as much as possible, keeping as close to the argument and actual logic as you can without insulting your opponents, you can avoid having a Youtube argument going this direction. To actually see that happen naturally would be amazing.

Epicness

I have compiled a list of the eight most epic people in fiction ever. "Epic" is a hard quality to judge, so I have thought long and hard. These are not in any particular order. Any one would likely equal another.

 

1. Chuck Norris. This is fairly self-explanatory. His reputation far precedes him. His legends are more or less what made me come up with this list in the first place. After all, he is not the only epic person in existence, only the most widely known. (Note that only his fictional self contains these qualities. His real self is probably not as exciting.)

 

2. Trainer Red. From Pokemon. This guy mops the floor with Team Rocket, ascends to Championhood, then goes to live on the very top of a mountain so dangerous that you need sixteen badges to enter. For THREE YEARS.

 

3. The Doctor. From Doctor Who, of course. Time-travelling alien who has saved the Universe on multiple occassions with nothing but a screwdriver, his intellect, and sometimes a companion. He has dealt with so many threats that I don't think anyone can keep track of them all.

 

4. Gaz. Invader Zim is a fun show, but we rarely see Gaz' true powers. The few times she's played the main role, she's shown to have the ability to alter reality just by being pissed off. One can only imagine what she's like when something decides to attack her.

 

5. Belgarion. Fantasy character from some of David Eddings' books. I'm pretty sure a lot of people won't have heard of him, but he deserves to be on this list. Long story short, he is the Godslayer, and commands a magic so strong that it's returned the dead to the living, cracked a continent in half, and could even write his name in the stars, if he wanted.

 

6. Dave Strider. From Homestuck. He is a time-traveller and a really cool dude. The guy finds his own corpse and barely breaks a sweat. Given the size of Homestuck, I could go on and on about his qualities, but to be frank? I don't want to.

 

7. Hayato Furinji. From "History's Strongest Disciple Kenichi." The guy is known as "the Invincible Superman." The guy is so awesome, he can chop down thick trees and blow up brick walls with a single finger. Granted that the other masters in his group can do this as well, but he's their leader.

 

8. Saxton Hale. From TF2's mythology. Taken from the TF2 Wiki:

"Notable achievements of Saxton Hale include:

  • Cutting his way out of primate hell.
  • Teaching his girl scout troupe, the 'Saxtonettes', a fire safety tip: grizzly bears burn.
  • Fighting off a lion while simultaneously having his hair cut.
  • Single handedly wiping out the Indonesian berzerker shark (and making it cry).
  • Inventing the ancient and mystical Jarate fighting style after kicking a chair across the room in a frustrated rage. His complete Jarate course includes Saxton Hale Jarate Pills, which triple the size of your kidneys, and Saxton Hale Pain Tonic, which completely masks the feeling of your internal organs shutting down.
  • Becoming the wealthiest man in the western hemisphere.
  • Blowing up the moon using an Apple product called the iBlewupthemoon."

 

So there you go. If you have any others that you think should be on this list, or if you think one of these people should not be on the list, let me know.