Page 8 of 9 FirstFirst ... 456789 LastLast
Results 141 to 160 of 176
  1. #141
    Community Member
    Join Date
    May 2013
    Posts
    650

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by RightToRemainStupid View Post
    Can you explain what you mean by demeanor? Do you mean that because some people are aggressively demanding freedom of choice, they should be denied because they didn't ask nicely enough? Can you explain which agendas you think are being pushed in this thread and what bearing that has on people being allowed to make choices for themselves based on sound reasoning? Are you saying that there are circumstances under which people should be denied the freedom to choose for themselves? If so, what circumstances would those be and who should decide when they apply?
    Really ? This is about freedom of speech/choice now ? In a privately owned environment ? Ok then attacking other people for not sharing your opinion is just as well intruding on that same freedom.
    Putting down the people that voted no and questioning their motives is an agenda.
    You want a reason for no? That's simple too much effort for too little gain. The percentage of players caring one way or another is probably at the single digit % if that.
    Although pointless i would have voted yes but i don't think i want to be associated with the yes group atm :P

  2. #142
    Community Member DarkThoughts's Avatar
    Join Date
    Sep 2009
    Posts
    179

    Default

    Yes! Please allow me to disable all cosmetic pets on my client and get them out of MY DDO.
    We should take a torch to this place and burn all the Trolls.

  3. #143
    Community Member
    Join Date
    May 2013
    Posts
    169

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Pandir View Post
    Really ? This is about freedom of speech/choice now ?
    It's always been about freedom of choice. What else could it be about?

    Quote Originally Posted by Pandir View Post
    In a privately owned environment ?
    This is a red herring, I don't see what difference the environment should make on denying people the freedom to choose for themselves. Success in business hinges around giving customers what they actually want, not telling them what they should want. Why are you looking for circumstanes in which freedom of choice shouldn't apply?

    Quote Originally Posted by Pandir View Post
    Ok then attacking other people for not sharing your opinion is just as well intruding on that same freedom.
    Putting down the people that voted no and questioning their motives is an agenda.
    I'd be interested to see you go into more detail about what your definition of an agenda is in this context. How is attemping to understand the logical reasoning behind a decision taken, an attack or intrusion on freedom? Why are you being so defensive about being asked to rationalise your decisions? Of course you have the right to not answer, but that then begs the question why you would choose not to do so. Is there an ulterior motive that you don't want to share?

    Quote Originally Posted by Pandir View Post
    You want a reason for no? That's simple too much effort for too little gain. The percentage of players caring one way or another is probably at the single digit % if that.
    Although pointless i would have voted yes but i don't think i want to be associated with the yes group atm :P
    Your opinion on whether the practical application of implimenting freedom of choice is worth it or not, has no foundation in reason, unless you are privy to more facts that the rest of us and even then the moral question still remains. Your whole response seems to be an emotional reaction to not being allowed to make irrational decisions without being questioned. Being required to provide reasons for your actions, especially when they impinge upon the rights of others, is not a personal attack.

  4. #144
    Community Member Wanesa's Avatar
    Join Date
    Sep 2012
    Location
    Prague
    Posts
    527

    Default

    "Disable pet rendering" on/off
    on - pets aren't visible
    off - pets are visible

    There should be option to disable pet rendering (default off - they will be rendered). At last, you will need to have this turned off to see your pet. I guess, that most of players will leave this option off (visible).

    Option can be in Troubleshoting section.

    Thelanis: Shewind the Airbender (Sorc20/Epic5 -> Bard20/Epic8 -> Rog20/Epic8/Epic2 -> Harper_FvS20/Epic4 -> Art19), Azaxe (Rog18/Wiz2 -> Sorc20/Epic6)

  5. #145
    Community Member
    Join Date
    May 2013
    Posts
    650

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by RightToRemainStupid View Post
    It's always been about freedom of choice. What else could it be about?



    This is a red herring, I don't see what difference the environment should make on denying people the freedom to choose for themselves. Success in business hinges around giving customers what they actually want, not telling them what they should want. Why are you looking for circumstanes in which freedom of choice shouldn't apply?
    It's not a red herring, the freedom of choice you're looking for is not guaranteed in a private environment. Turbine is not oblieged to add such an option, they may do so though if it's benefical for them.
    You always have the freedom to stop paying though to make a point.

    Quote Originally Posted by RightToRemainStupid View Post
    I'd be interested to see you go into more detail about what your definition of an agenda is in this context. How is attemping to understand the logical reasoning behind a decision taken, an attack or intrusion on freedom? Why are you being so defensive about being asked to rationalise your decisions? Of course you have the right to not answer, but that then begs the question why you would choose not to do so. Is there an ulterior motive that you don't want to share?

    Your opinion on whether the practical application of implimenting freedom of choice is worth it or not, has no foundation in reason, unless you are privy to more facts that the rest of us and even then the moral question still remains. Your whole response seems to be an emotional reaction to not being allowed to make irrational decisions without being questioned. Being required to provide reasons for your actions, especially when they impinge upon the rights of others, is not a personal attack.
    The agenda seems to be to have this option be the only ehtical solution, while inferring ulterior motives to those not in agreement.

    And you're absolutely right this is an emotinal response from me. I'm pretty much indifferent to the topic at hand and i'm actually in favour of adding options. But the general attitude of people in the yes camp towards the people voting no makes me non sympathetic.
    In a vote you can ask for the reasoning for a given vote if it's refused you have no right to demand it though, nor can you put down a person because of it.
    If you so will i have an agenda too, i would vote no out of spite.

    And you're again right, my reason was not a reason to say no, it's the reason i find such polls somewhat useless.
    If you want this option added you will have to convince turbine it's monetary sound to add such an option, or at least that the non inclusion of such a function is detrimental to their bottom line.
    The bickering in this thread does not do a good job at that.

  6. #146
    Community Member Charononus's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jun 2010
    Posts
    5,345

    Default

    Is this the ddo forums or an american politics forum? All this meh freeeedddommmms talk has me confused on where I am.

  7. #147
    Community Member
    Join Date
    May 2013
    Posts
    1

    Default

    no

  8. #148
    Community Member
    Join Date
    May 2013
    Posts
    650

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Charononus View Post
    Is this the ddo forums or an american politics forum? All this meh freeeedddommmms talk has me confused on where I am.
    Wait a second this is not the official forums of the US Congress ? Awwwwwww ****.

  9. #149
    Founder
    Join Date
    Feb 2006
    Posts
    4,623

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by RightToRemainStupid View Post
    The reason you gave for it being bad for sales, is that you think less people would buy them if they were unable to show them off to others. But with the OPTION to disable those effects on the client side, those people would still be able to show them off to those who have opted into wanting to see and hear them, which would be the default setting. Are you suggesting that some people would be put off buying pets if they were unable to force others to see and hear them? If so, what is your basis for this reasoning? I have yet to see anyone voted NO, claim that they would personally be less likely to buy a pet if this option were to be implimented. Would you be less likey to buy a pet if you thought someone else could opt out of seeing and hearing it?
    Nevermind that the vast majority of players would never know that I could opt out of seeing their pet. How many players know that you can turn off seeing character names? This is definitely not an issue.

  10. #150
    Community Member
    Join Date
    May 2013
    Posts
    169

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Pandir View Post
    It's not a red herring, the freedom of choice you're looking for is not guaranteed in a private environment. Turbine is not oblieged to add such an option, they may do so though if it's benefical for them.
    You always have the freedom to stop paying though to make a point.
    The point you are attempting to make is completely irrelevant to the subject at hand. The only guarantee we have is that Turbine will act in their own self-interest. The continuation of doing business, by giving customers what they want, is going to be in their self-interest. It is beneficial for Turbine to stay in business. You seem to believe that it may not be in Turbine's interest to give us the choice to disable pets. What I want to know is what you are basing that belief on.

    Quote Originally Posted by Pandir View Post
    The agenda seems to be to have this option be the only ehtical solution, while inferring ulterior motives to those not in agreement.
    The agenda is to have a rational debate on the subject in order to discuss the possible alternatives and their implications. In the absence of disclosure from one side of the debate, one can only assume ulterior motives for wanting to provide an arbitrary response. If those who support choice can provide valid reasons for doing so, while those who are against it can't or won't, then the only ethical conclusion we can draw is to give people choice.

    Quote Originally Posted by Pandir View Post
    And you're absolutely right this is an emotinal response from me. I'm pretty much indifferent to the topic at hand and i'm actually in favour of adding options. But the general attitude of people in the yes camp towards the people voting no makes me non sympathetic.
    Noone is asking for your sympathy; this is a rational conversation, not an episode of Big Brother.

    Quote Originally Posted by Pandir View Post
    In a vote you can ask for the reasoning for a given vote if it's refused you have no right to demand it though, nor can you put down a person because of it.
    What does anyone have to lose by sharing the reasoning upon which they have based their conclusions? Can you provide a reason why you think those people who have been identified as refusing to divulge the reasoning behind their decisions are being put down? Why do you perciece a description of the actions of individuals, based purely on the evidence at hand, to be a put down?

    Quote Originally Posted by Pandir View Post
    If you so will i have an agenda too, i would vote no out of spite.
    Why do you feel spiteful towards people wanting to know your reasoning behind wanting to deny them freedom of choice?

    Quote Originally Posted by Pandir View Post
    And you're again right, my reason was not a reason to say no, it's the reason i find such polls somewhat useless.
    If you want this option added you will have to convince turbine it's monetary sound to add such an option, or at least that the non inclusion of such a function is detrimental to their bottom line.
    The bickering in this thread does not do a good job at that.
    What is your reasoning to assume that Turbine might find it monetarily unsound to give us the option of disabling pets on the client side? As we have seen from this thread, there are plenty of good reasons to enable that choice. What we haven't seen, is any reason being given by the NO crowd why they are basing their negative response on the idea that Turbine may lose revenue because of it.

    I wonder why that is?

  11. #151
    The Hatchery Enoach's Avatar
    Join Date
    Nov 2006
    Posts
    4,615

    Default

    I have a recommendation for those who feel strongly enough that this feature needs to be implemented.

    1. Stop trying to sway the people that disagree with you on the forum that actually cannot do anything to make the change in the system.

    2. Start calling, emailing, and submitting by any other means available to you this suggestion to the people that can actually make this change - The Management of Turbine - DDO

    You can attempt to "Charlie Sheen" and Win all you like, can even claim it all you like. We all have our own opinions, and one thing I've learned early in my life is that no matter how much we want to we can't change someone else's mind, only they can change their own mind. It doesn't matter how blue in the face you get or how much your fingers bleed from typing.

    I would say that what we have learned from this informal poll is that the community is split on the matter. But I highly doubt that the NO vote means what others have implied it to mean. I imagine that it is probably broken down into many reasons and meanings.

    In the end I'm now actually changing my vote from NO and my previous reasons to ->

    NO, because RightToRemainStupid wants it. Since they already feel that I'm against them anyway. It is a clear and rational reason, based on the facts of this discussion.

  12. #152
    Community Member
    Join Date
    May 2013
    Posts
    169

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Enoach View Post
    I have a recommendation for those who feel strongly enough that this feature needs to be implemented.

    1. Stop trying to sway the people that disagree with you on the forum that actually cannot do anything to make the change in the system.

    2. Start calling, emailing, and submitting by any other means available to you this suggestion to the people that can actually make this change - The Management of Turbine - DDO

    You can attempt to "Charlie Sheen" and Win all you like, can even claim it all you like. We all have our own opinions, and one thing I've learned early in my life is that no matter how much we want to we can't change someone else's mind, only they can change their own mind. It doesn't matter how blue in the face you get or how much your fingers bleed from typing.

    I would say that what we have learned from this informal poll is that the community is split on the matter. But I highly doubt that the NO vote means what others have implied it to mean. I imagine that it is probably broken down into many reasons and meanings.

    In the end I'm now actually changing my vote from NO and my previous reasons to ->

    NO, because RightToRemainStupid wants it. Since they already feel that I'm against them anyway. It is a clear and rational reason, based on the facts of this discussion.
    When people reach a certain point of mindless obstinacy, there's nothing left to do but read them their rights..

  13. #153
    Community Member thakorian's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jul 2009
    Posts
    233

    Default

    Yes

    Sometimes I have my pets out because the names are mostly inside jokes, but I wouldn't want to force them on anyone. If you only acquire pets for the sole reason to be able to force them on others, then you really have some attention seeking issues.

    I also don't think turbines revenues will take a dip if people are able to disable the showing of pets. People who would rather not see pets aren't the demographic to advertise pets to anyway.

    At least extend the squelch-function to disable pet tricks and sounds, pretty please.

  14. #154
    Community Member
    Join Date
    May 2013
    Posts
    650

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by RightToRemainStupid View Post
    The point you are attempting to make is completely irrelevant to the subject at hand. The only guarantee we have is that Turbine will act in their own self-interest. The continuation of doing business, by giving customers what they want, is going to be in their self-interest. It is beneficial for Turbine to stay in business. You seem to believe that it may not be in Turbine's interest to give us the choice to disable pets. What I want to know is what you are basing that belief on.
    That ones easy i have no clue how much dev time would be needed for the option, but there is dev time needed.
    Using resources on something that only a fraction of the player base wants is at worst wasted dev time(lost money) and at best something you can do on the very end of the list. Now nor you or me have any hard numbers, but basing my opinion on the popularity of pets here and in other games, i believe the number of people caring to have this option is really small.

    Quote Originally Posted by RightToRemainStupid View Post
    The agenda is to have a rational debate on the subject in order to discuss the possible alternatives and their implications. In the absence of disclosure from one side of the debate, one can only assume ulterior motives for wanting to provide an arbitrary response. If those who support choice can provide valid reasons for doing so, while those who are against it can't or won't, then the only ethical conclusion we can draw is to give people choice.
    If that is the agenda then it's poorly executed becase so far i've seen mostly attacks and putting down.

    Quote Originally Posted by RightToRemainStupid View Post
    Noone is asking for your sympathy; this is a rational conversation, not an episode of Big Brother.

    What does anyone have to lose by sharing the reasoning upon which they have based their conclusions? Can you provide a reason why you think those people who have been identified as refusing to divulge the reasoning behind their decisions are being put down? Why do you perciece a description of the actions of individuals, based purely on the evidence at hand, to be a put down?


    Why do you feel spiteful towards people wanting to know your reasoning behind wanting to deny them freedom of choice?
    If you want to sway people that are indifferent you'll have to work with some sympathy. I personally did not care one way or the other but comments like put everyone on ignore or attesting people that said no a power fetish is what would make me say no.
    That's far from a rational discussion





    Quote Originally Posted by RightToRemainStupid View Post

    What is your reasoning to assume that Turbine might find it monetarily unsound to give us the option of disabling pets on the client side? As we have seen from this thread, there are plenty of good reasons to enable that choice. What we haven't seen, is any reason being given by the NO crowd why they are basing their negative response on the idea that Turbine may lose revenue because of it.

    I wonder why that is?
    See above it's simply the cost vs effect ratio that i doubt.
    A small minority on the Lotro forums have been asking for a XP Disabler. They actually got it when Turbine found a way to recoup the costs to make them for a small minority.
    They're now 795 TP i think on the store. Would you be willing to pay that for a pet disabler ?

  15. #155

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by RightToRemainStupid View Post
    Blah, blah, blah
    Are you still on this tear? Heavens! I stopped listening when your predictable sophistry began a quick, fiery descent into repetitive denial.

    Some people want pets hidden. Fine! No justification required. Other want pets always visible. Fine! Again, no justification necessary.

    Your dialectic argumentum ad ignorantiam ad infinitum rants serve no obvious purpose other than to demonstrate your vocabulary skills, which are, by the way, above average.

    So, YOU WIN! YAY! Now go enjoy your accolades in peace and let this meaningless debate be ended.
    The newest computer can merely compound, at speed, the oldest problem in the relations between human beings, and in the end the communicator will be confronted with the old problem, of what to say and how to say it. - Edward R. Murrow (1964)

  16. #156
    The Hatchery Enoach's Avatar
    Join Date
    Nov 2006
    Posts
    4,615

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by RightToRemainStupid View Post
    When people reach a certain point of mindless obstinacy, there's nothing left to do but read them their rights..
    Then take my advice and start convincing Turbine that you want the change. You will not be able to change my mind with your arguments.

    A rational person would realize that and take the appropriate actions and work to convince someone that can actually make the change.

  17. #157
    Community Member Vint's Avatar
    Join Date
    Feb 2006
    Location
    Indianapolis
    Posts
    3,594

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by sebastianosmith View Post
    Are you still on this tear? Heavens! I stopped listening when your predictable sophistry began a quick, fiery descent into repetitive denial.

    There is only one reason why I can side with this guy. Those that do not want them disabled are the ones that like to show off their gains and could care less if it is bothersome to others in the party. Then these same people will come complain on the forums that others are inconsiderate of them in parties (by booting them because of low hp, shr plz or ther things).

    P.S. Thank you for the advice on the problems I was having. Did I complete reinstall and am a okay.
    Flabby-Flaber-Flabo--Heifer-Oinks

    LEGION

  18. #158

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Vint View Post
    P.S. Thank you for the advice on the problems I was having. Did I complete reinstall and am a okay.
    You are welcome and I am glad your issue was resolved. I only wish I could have been a tad more specific with the advice and saved you some time.
    The newest computer can merely compound, at speed, the oldest problem in the relations between human beings, and in the end the communicator will be confronted with the old problem, of what to say and how to say it. - Edward R. Murrow (1964)

  19. #159
    Founder
    Join Date
    Feb 2006
    Posts
    4,623

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by sebastianosmith View Post
    Are you still on this tear? Heavens! I stopped listening when your predictable sophistry began a quick, fiery descent into repetitive denial.

    Some people want pets hidden. Fine! No justification required. Other want pets always visible. Fine! Again, no justification necessary.

    Your dialectic argumentum ad ignorantiam ad infinitum rants serve no obvious purpose other than to demonstrate your vocabulary skills, which are, by the way, above average.

    So, YOU WIN! YAY! Now go enjoy your accolades in peace and let this meaningless debate be ended.
    Funny that your argument is that he's going on and on...but you don't point out the other person that is partaking in that argument - I guess because he's on "your side" lol.

  20. #160
    Community Member
    Join Date
    Oct 2009
    Posts
    58

    Default

    no, and woah this thread was starting to get a little out of control there haha.
    Quote Originally Posted by Tolero View Post
    *fist shake* "Back in my day, we had to run the Coalescence Chamber up hill both ways! There wasn't even snow and the only slippery ice you could find was sleet storm! We had to imagine what snow would look like at Festivult time, and we liked it!"
    http://soundboards.cubicleninja.com/

Page 8 of 9 FirstFirst ... 456789 LastLast

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •  

This form's session has expired. You need to reload the page.

Reload