Page 9 of 9 FirstFirst ... 56789
Results 161 to 176 of 176
  1. #161

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by HAL View Post
    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.
    Nah. I just don't like people who use their intellect in an effort to trick others into attempting to prove a negative. Rubs me the wrong way.
    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)

  2. #162
    Community Member
    Join Date
    May 2013
    Posts
    169

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Pandir View Post
    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.
    If this poll is anything to go by, that fraction is a substantial portion of the playerbase.

    Quote Originally Posted by Pandir View Post
    If that is the agenda then it's poorly executed becase so far i've seen mostly attacks and putting down.
    Which I've asked you to identify and which you've refused to do.

    Quote Originally Posted by Pandir View Post
    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
    I've asked you to deal with the facts, which you've also refused to do. See a pattern here yet?

    Quote Originally Posted by Pandir View Post
    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 ?
    You're basing it on figures you've pulled out of thin air, as I've already demonstrated. Again, you're implying that implimenting options for pets would lead to a decrease in sales. Which leads us right back to the question you keep refusing to answer. The only issue here is that you think it's sound reasoning to make arbitrary emotional assertions and present them as facts.

    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.
    Really? I thought you conceded your position a few pages ago when you stopped replying.

    Quote Originally Posted by sebastianosmith View Post
    Some people want pets hidden. Fine! No justification required. Other want pets always visible. Fine! Again, no justification necessary.
    So I take it you agree that we should be given the choice?

    Quote Originally Posted by sebastianosmith View Post
    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.
    What my arguments serve to demonstrate is that the only logical response to sustained terminal obstinacy is to stick to the facts.

    Quote Originally Posted by sebastianosmith View Post
    So, YOU WIN! YAY! Now go enjoy your accolades in peace and let this meaningless debate be ended.
    It's not about winning or losing, it's about having a rational discussion. If you can't handle that, then you know what you can do.

    Quote Originally Posted by Enoach View Post
    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.
    Because YOU'RE NOT THE BOSS OF ME! is a really mature and rational position to take..

    Quote Originally Posted by sebastianosmith View Post
    Nah. I just don't like people who use their intellect in an effort to trick others into attempting to prove a negative. Rubs me the wrong way.
    There have been pages upon pages of opportunities for anyone willing to engage in a rational discussion to put their case forward. If you had a logical leg to stand on, you would have done so yourself already. The only trickery going on here is by those who seek to impose limitations upon the freedom of others to make their own choices, while reserving the right to withhold any reasons for wanting to impose those limitations. On the other hand, there have been plenty of sound arguments to the contrary.

    So the end of the day, what we are left with something like:

    YES Camp: We should have the choice

    NO Camp: No you shouldn't

    YES Camp: Why not?

    NO Camp: Because

    YES Camp: What is the reason?

    NO Camp: Not telling

    YES Camp: But you must have one

    NO Camp: You're not the boss of me!

    YES Camp: That's not a reason..

    NO Camp: *throws tantrum* I CAN'T HEAR YOU LALALALA! MAKE THE BAD MAN GO AWAY!!

  3. #163
    Community Member
    Join Date
    Jan 2010
    Posts
    801

    Default

    IBTL.

    Now if there already were an option to disable seeing other people's pets, what would be the argument for removing that option? That more people would buy pets if the people who didn't want to see them would be forced to? That's pretty close to griefing: "If more people would be annoyed by me having a pet, then I'd buy a pet to annoy them. If only people who want to see my pet will see it, then I won't bother."

  4. #164
    The Hatchery Enoach's Avatar
    Join Date
    Nov 2006
    Posts
    4,596

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by RightToRemainStupid View Post

    Because YOU'RE NOT THE BOSS OF ME! is a really mature and rational position to take..
    ...

    So the end of the day, what we are left with something like:

    YES Camp: We should have the choice

    NO Camp: No you shouldn't

    YES Camp: Why not?

    NO Camp: Because

    YES Camp: What is the reason?

    NO Camp: Not telling

    YES Camp: But you must have one

    NO Camp: You're not the boss of me!

    YES Camp: That's not a reason..

    NO Camp: *throws tantrum* I CAN'T HEAR YOU LALALALA! MAKE THE BAD MAN GO AWAY!!
    Ok, your position is clear, especially since I never said "Your not the boss of me" {which you are not my boss, but that is a totally different tangent}

    I will clear up my position as plainly as I can. I was asked if I wanted this feature, my answer is NO, I do not want this feature. I have no emotional ties to this feature.

    Now if the question was, do I care if this feature gets added. My answer is again NO, again because I'm not emotionally attached to this feature. It is fun, but like anything else we have it can be abused.

    Just so it is clear my suggestion was not curt or dismissive, my suggestion is that you convince Turbine Management that this feature will benefit their Game. Trying to win people over that cannot directly effect the result you want does not make your arguments for this feature any stronger.

    You seem to be emotionally vested in having this feature added. Take the next step contact someone that can actually help you get this feature done.

    I wish you the best in your efforts.

  5. #165
    The Hatchery Enoach's Avatar
    Join Date
    Nov 2006
    Posts
    4,596

    Default

    Duplicate
    Last edited by Enoach; 06-12-2013 at 01:21 PM.

  6. #166
    Community Member
    Join Date
    May 2013
    Posts
    169

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Enoach View Post
    Ok, your position is clear, especially since I never said "Your not the boss of me" {which you are not my boss, but that is a totally different tangent}

    I will clear up my position as plainly as I can. I was asked if I wanted this feature, my answer is NO, I do not want this feature. I have no emotional ties to this feature.

    Now if the question was, do I care if this feature gets added. My answer is again NO, again because I'm not emotionally attached to this feature. It is fun, but like anything else we have it can be abused.

    Just so it is clear my suggestion was not curt or dismissive, my suggestion is that you convince Turbine Management that this feature will benefit their Game. Trying to win people over that cannot directly effect the result you want does not make your arguments for this feature any stronger.

    You seem to be emotionally vested in having this feature added. Take the next step contact someone that can actually help you get this feature done.

    I wish you the best in your efforts.
    Some of the incohernet flailinging you've engaged in during previous posts in this thread when asked to validate your position:

    Quote Originally Posted by Enoach View Post
    You will not be able to change my mind with your arguments.
    Quote Originally Posted by Enoach View Post
    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.
    So what is your ACTUAL reason for voting NO to choice in the first place then? Do you even have one outside of being obtuse?
    Last edited by RightToRemainStupid; 06-12-2013 at 01:40 PM.

  7. #167
    Community Member Jacobius's Avatar
    Join Date
    Apr 2006
    Posts
    347

    Default

    OK sure do it.....

    But only if anyone who wants this implemented can never ever complain about any bugs if some major bug comes from implementing it

  8. #168
    2014 DDO Players Council
    SirValentine's Avatar
    Join Date
    Sep 2009
    Location
    Korea (temporarily)
    Posts
    5,421

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by HAL View Post
    What might be ideal is to have 3 modes: full-on pets; full-off pets; pets only in public spaces such as the Market, Harbor, Houses, Taverns.
    I get that people want to show off their pets, and I'll live with it if I can't turn the annoying things off in public spaces. But at the very least we need a way to turn them off inside quests.

  9. #169
    Community Member
    Join Date
    May 2013
    Posts
    650

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by RightToRemainStupid View Post
    Stuff
    Ah i see what you do there, selective reading and turning peoples words around in their mouth.
    Have it your way, my NO is pretty firm now.

  10. #170
    Community Member
    Join Date
    May 2013
    Posts
    169

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Pandir View Post
    Ah i see what you do there, selective reading and turning peoples words around in their mouth.
    Have it your way, my NO is pretty firm now.
    I would remind you that I cannot address something you haven't actually quoted, if I hadn't already realised you forfeited any intention of engaging in meaningful discourse several posts ago, when you first started responding with tantrums. I see from this post that your reasoning continues to be rooted firmly in emotional reaction, rather than the rational analysis of facts.

  11. #171
    Community Member Charononus's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jun 2010
    Posts
    5,345

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by RightToRemainStupid View Post
    I would remind you that I cannot address something you haven't actually quoted, if I hadn't already realised you forfeited any intention of engaging in meaningful discourse several posts ago, when you first started responding with tantrums. I see from this post that your reasoning continues to be rooted firmly in emotional reaction, rather than the rational analysis of facts.
    Click the arrow in the quoted post. Or keep trolling your choice.

  12. #172
    Community Member
    Join Date
    May 2013
    Posts
    169

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Charononus View Post
    Click the arrow in the quoted post. Or keep trolling your choice.
    Are you back to tell us whether an option to disable pets on the client side would deter you from buying one?

  13. #173
    Community Member
    Join Date
    Oct 2009
    Location
    3rd star from the left, and on til morning...
    Posts
    2,629

    Default }aid your Air Breathing tax today? No worries, it will be deducted from your chip

    How about this, then?


    NEW TO DDO STORE: Elixir of Visual Simplicity - COST: 40TP

    For the next 3 hours, all cosmetic pets and companions that have no combat abilities or effects will appear invisible to you, as if they didn't exist.

    Does not work in public areas.

    TURBINE: I respectfully request 1% royalty on store purchases for your use of my design idea.

    (I'm thinking of selling my forehead to advertisers if anyone is interested.)

  14. #174
    Community Member Qhualor's Avatar
    Join Date
    Sep 2009
    Posts
    10,007

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by My2Cents View Post
    How about this, then?


    NEW TO DDO STORE: Elixir of Visual Simplicity - COST: 40TP

    For the next 3 hours, all cosmetic pets and companions that have no combat abilities or effects will appear invisible to you, as if they didn't exist.

    Does not work in public areas.

    TURBINE: I respectfully request 1% royalty on store purchases for your use of my design idea.

    (I'm thinking of selling my forehead to advertisers if anyone is interested.)
    I wouldn't spend 40 TP for 3 hours of disabling pets, especially since those who bought pets get to pay a 1 time amount or got them for free from MM and can have them until DDO shuts down. it should be a box that can be checked/unchecked in the Options tab like where you can select certain aspects of the game to be tuned off or on.

  15. #175
    Community Member NaturalHazard's Avatar
    Join Date
    May 2010
    Posts
    8,866

    Default

    I find them annoying and pointless but they do generate $ for turbine and the game........ so I vote yes.......but hey its turbine so why not have the option to *not see* other peoples pets sold in the store? New from the ddo store Easy off BAMMMM!!! and the stain is gone!!!!!

  16. #176
    Moderation Team IWIronheart's Avatar
    Join Date
    Apr 2011
    Posts
    2,604

    Default

    Thank you for your input. Due to flaring tempers, this thread is now closed.

Page 9 of 9 FirstFirst ... 56789

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