Jump to content
canasian

Congratulations to the Winners of the 2015 DG Awards!

Recommended Posts

»canasian    4105

Best Mod: Wumbologist

Best Duelist: Matthew Monahan

Best New Member: The Antagonist

Best Poster: Matthew Monahan

Best Signature: CASH4KAWAIIKOCHANS.COM

Most Improved Poster: Matthew Monahan

Sexiest Member: confuse rei

Pokemaster: rap tap

Best Other Games Player: white-bordered swamp

Mafia God: tie between confuse rei and rei

Mafia Host with the Most: tie between Paraliel and Malcolm

 

Worst Mod: Mr. Cook

Worst Duelist: Calvin Tahan

Worst Poster: TFJ

Worst Signature: digbick the pickleman

 

Best Post: Satchmo on rei's mixtape

Best Thread: Dickrude - Buttstorm

Worst Thread: Trying to get over this guy that never was and never will be...

 

 

Thanks to everyone who participated and congratulations to all of our winners!

  • Upvote 5

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
»Digbick    7262
Requesting to revoke Calvin's duelist of the year 2014 award
  • Upvote 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
»Logic    2033
Stefano's hasn't posted in four months and still wins an award and a half. Lol
  • Upvote 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
»ACP    33421

Requesting to revoke Calvin's duelist of the year 2014 award

Did DGZ actually vote him best duelist last year? You guys should be ashamed of yourselves.

  • Upvote 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Flacko    2143

its k i didnt get le award, i was one from tying so i guess that is p cool. thanks for the votes. at least a decent portion of people think i deserved.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
»canasian    4105
Only 14 people voted for best Mafia host and Paraliel deserved his share but I honestly can't believe Malcolm didn't run away with it, I know he's only run 3 games but among them were the best round of Mafia we've had on dg and another game that was easily top 5.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
confuse rei    5608

12541096_1047469515275743_37311466972322

  • Upvote 6

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
+Malcolm    4612

i put more effort into my games than all others combined

 

for shame

 

foooooor shame

  • Upvote 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
slickz    4308
paraliel hosts more games and they run pretty smooth for the most part but yeah Malcolms games are always the most fun

best hosts are rei/lfn i think

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Naythin    4650

oh wow when did Chubmeme Stacks become a good poster?

He was def top 5 worst when I stopped posting regularly

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
»Noelle    5848

You're definitely overstating that. I had two or three really cringe-level bad posts when I became a member three years ago, I was also just legitimately retarded 3 years ago, and since that they've almost all been completely fine, and the ones that weren't the best weren't due to a lack of effort or anything like that, but rather me just ending up being wrong about shit I thought that I was logically correct about (like missing part of how that spellcaster stone spell works or not considering some ramifications, not the democratic portion but the logistic international and share-holder related issues with making syndicalism punitive.) Almost won best poster last year too, lost to confuse rei by one vote, guess more ygo posters voted this time.

 

Like, the really only current criticism is the wordiness of my posts rather than their actual content, and whenever there is an actual disagreement in content, we always argue it out and I rarely end up on the wrong side of those arguments (although you can fault me for occasionally not replying to some, and I sometimes don't when I think people are favoring shutting down the discussion altogether but I usually persevere.) Actually if people took the initiative in arguing with me more in 2014 especially from the standpoint of my posting in 2015, I would have been shown to be wrong a lot more and even some of my most popular posts, like in Tellarknight, like in Qliphort, like in HAT, would fall apart quickly if someone like my current self were to go after them.

  • Downvote 2

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
+scuzzlebutt    23495
i thought dubstax was a good poster b4 it was cool :^)

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
mark    3105

You're definitely overstating that. I had two or three really cringe-level bad posts when I became a member three years ago, I was also just legitimately retarded 3 years ago, and since that they've almost all been completely fine, and the ones that weren't the best weren't due to a lack of effort or anything like that, but rather me just ending up being wrong about shit I thought that I was logically correct about (like missing part of how that spellcaster stone spell works or not considering some ramifications, not the democratic portion but the logistic international and share-holder related issues with making syndicalism punitive.) Almost won best poster last year too, lost to confuse rei by one vote, guess more ygo posters voted this time.

 

Like, the really only current criticism is the wordiness of my posts rather than their actual content, and whenever there is an actual disagreement in content, we always argue it out and I rarely end up on the wrong side of those arguments (although you can fault me for occasionally not replying to some, and I sometimes don't when I think people are favoring shutting down the discussion altogether but I usually persevere.) Actually if people took the initiative in arguing with me more in 2014 especially from the standpoint of my posting in 2015, I would have been shown to be wrong a lot more and even some of my most popular posts, like in Tellarknight, like in Qliphort, like in HAT, would fall apart quickly if someone like my current self were to go after them.

Something that bothers me a bit about the rep system is that people don't rate the quality of a post, but rather the quality of a poster. You can look at any popular member, or someone who's considered to be 'good', then look at their posts, and all of them have +reps even though they just suck, or when other make the exact same posts or even better, they won't get possed at all. It also works the other way around, 'bad' posters will just get negged more easily for any post they make. I wouldn't necessarily call this unfair, because it means DG looks al the bigger picture: what kind of person are you, what is your contribution to the site etc, rather than just judging every post individually, but it does also mean that the amount of reps a person has means far more than the amount of reps a single post has. If you're new to this site and skimming through posts, you can't rely on checking reps of posts at all. The reason I'm brining this up is because this post got me curious, so I checked back, and I really don't understand how your infernity posts all got -20 reps. If you were to make such posts now, I'm sure they would receive criticism in the form of constructive replies instead 
 

I rarely end up on the wrong side of those arguments

 

This may be true, but that's really a dumb thing to say about yourself, because:
- Of course you think you're right, otherwise you wouldn't have had that opinion to begin with
- You keep discussions going, atem style, but most members on this board don't have the patience or desire to read through everything and keep explaining their point of view. It's perfectly possible that people are 'right' on certain things, but they aren't able to word it as strongly/logically as you can, or they aren't putting in the time. I do think you're wrong sometimes, but I don't feel the desire to fight you on it everytime, mostly because there's far more 'retarded' stuff to deal with on this site, which takes less effort to point out. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
+scuzzlebutt    23495
we talk a lot about people "improving as posters" on DG but a lot of the time its just other members starting to "get" a persons posts more
happened with me, quack, squiddy, chum, and a lot of others

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
website is bad    2172

good thing ive always been a good ass poster

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
»Noelle    5848

I think the rep system is fine for the social portions of this website but not what is supposed to be the objective, in yugs. In yugs, I'd scrap it all together for a new system, with four buttons per post. 1. Agree 2. Disagree 3. No Opinion 4. Don't 100% Agree but don't 100% Disagree. Obviously 4 should be condensed in words, not something I know how I'd word, though. Also, I'd want to focus on, in what we've decided are supposed to be the objective parts of the forum, forcing people, particularly contributors, to pick one after reading posts (but also being able to switch after when their opinions change, possibly having a history of your choices that also shows the time in between you making that decision and you making the next so that people can also know that maybe your selection is outdated and you may have just not bothered to go back and fix it.)

 

I know it seems a bit weird, and I know something like this would probably never be implemented here, but I think that would 100% be a great and more objective system in garnering community thoughts. It would also allow those who just downvote and dip to be called out, the problem with this now is that they may not be downvoting for other reasons than objective which again, is perfectly fine and all for social sections, but in argument in the ygo sections is largely useless and harder to call out. I think that the laziness of not contributing when you disagree comes with not being a real, contributing member of the website. It might not be theoretically perfect, but it's more of a rough idea of what I think it should be, in those sections.

 

@Mark, yeah I definitely have noticed people ditching me in argument sometimes, as I do occasionally as mentioned. It also delves into another issue that I find obnoxious, is when people only air their contentions rather than their concessions. The problem with it is it doesn't really guarantee that the same issue won't be brought up in a roundabout way later in the argument even though it has already been addressed, and I'm sure we have all seen examples of that. It also is why in objective argument I tend to go over every single part of someones post, additionally because I can't assume that just because my stream-of-consciousness style has been pointed out in the past, that other people don't use the same method. Also yes I was worried in writing that post that I had gone a little too far, it's a bit unfortunate because it's kind of an annoying type of post to have to get back to in the first place because anything I type is going to sound defensive.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
mark    3105
1. Agree 2. Disagree 3. No Opinion 4. Don't 100% Agree but don't 100% Disagree. 

 


What's the real difference between this, and say, 1. pos 2. neg 3/4 nothing or reply? 
There's also the fact that agreeing with something and a post being good are 2 completely different things, which may be the point you're trying to get at, but right now it seems as if you dismiss that fact. For example, someone can make good arguments as to why you should play a card, and the post would be good, but you would disagree eventually because you have reasons not to play the card. Would that be 1 or 2? Maybe 4, but in that case every answer is going to be 4. Why? A good post tackles multiple issues at once, and unless it's just a very solid post (1) or a very bad one (which will get negged or reported etc.), they are all going to fall into category 4. I don't see this system being any different from the current rep system. I also think that any post with regards to yugioh either deserves a reply or a pos rep. A pos rep when you fully agree, or a reply that explains why you don't. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
»Noelle    5848

The difference between 3 and 4 is that 3 is for people that haven't thought about it enough to form an opinion while 4 is for someone that has but there is some percentage above 0 of the post you agree with and some percentage of the post above 0 you disagree with. The idea is because there are parts you disagree in, a response is then warranted to air those exact disagreements, whereas with no opinion, nothing warrants being said. I guess "mixed opinion" is a way shorter way of saying that. Basically, when you see someone has pressed "disagree," you know they find the entire post to be nonsense. If I made a post coming to a conclusion for 100% bullshit reasons, particularly fallible ones, and you believed the conclusion was wrong, you'd hit the disagree button. I think you're missing the universality of this post when you say that most will fall under 4. How often do you see a "don't play this because it's win-more," "I never want to see 2 so I play 1," etc? Pretty often when you think about it, and that's something I know I certainly don't have "mixed opinions" on. The other argument is the usefulness/uselessness that would result in the mixed button. The real practical functionality of it would actually be people not being able to infer which parts of a post someone agrees and disagrees with, whereas you know exactly what they think of everything in the post when they 100% agree/disagree. 

 

I suppose "no opinion" can be scrapped if you want to make it voluntary, but I actually don't wish to do so, I think objectively getting the most information possible is superior. Also as far as effort in a post goes, I think that's another thing I don't think is objective. If a post is one sentence or ten paragraphs and I agree with 100% of both, objectively, I agree. The point is that how much effort I think someone has put into a post is subjective and is therefore useless in discussions that we want to be objective, but great for stuff like this thread (all of which I'd label social.) I have more to say but I got to go, I'll get back to this later.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
»Noelle    5848
One extra thing tho and this may come out wrong cus on mobile when I post. When I talk about objective discussion I obv acknowledge people clicking on abuttonn doesn't add any logical point to the discussion but its more about both encourencouraging these grievances to be aired and also with the people who don't have much time they also have a short hand way of getting back to the post that cuts offexcess "I agree" posting etc. Also it's far Vvetter as far as recognizing community habits go for a better analysis which is something I've tried to emulate in polling and have gotten mixed results on

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
+scuzzlebutt    23495
what's more important is getting a better idea of what people are actually thinking when they pos or neg something and going from there

do people pos stuff bc they think is smart or bc they agree with it? do they neg stuff they disagree with or that they think is poorly written? there are so many ways to evaluate posts even in the objective world of ygo theory

you can say that we should all pos or neg based on the objective quality of the content (whatever that means, which is another can of worms) but is that really all we want from the rep system? sometimes it can be useful to look back at a posts rep to see what peoples attitudes towards a subject were at the time, ie if a post with a decklist in a deck discussion thread had like 30 rep or something you can tell that people agreed with the card choices at the time, which itself is useful information. its like a technical play poll is built into every post in theory; you can get an idea of general opinions toward just about any issue in a format by seeing how people pos or neg posts about that issue
  • Upvote 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Create an account or sign in to comment

You need to be a member in order to leave a comment

Create an account

Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!

Register a new account

Sign in

Already have an account? Sign in here.

Sign In Now


  • Recently Browsing   0 members

    No registered users viewing this page.

×