Rebecca Mayes Muses: War for Cybertron

[Flunk]

I didn't enjoy the song at all, it's long and slow and dull. Just not engaging at all. There isn't any connection to transformers beyond the lame pasting of a logo, it would have been nice to see some thought put into that.

Once again I have no idea why I clicked the link for this video, I don't think I will watch any more of these.

 

[AdmiralMemo]

This is one of the clunkers for me, along with "Love You, Hate You" and "Armageddon". Rebecca, you usually do good by going a bit off the wall, but I think this one bounced too far off another wall entirely.

 

[Aurgelmir]

Hmm this was interesting. The weird voice at least makes it unique to the other videos (Which I personally find to sound all a little to alike.)

 

[dls182]

I was thinking 'that sounds very much like Sigur Rós or Múm', then you mentioned listening to a lot of Icelandic Music. I got a good chuckle out of that.

It never ceases to amaze me how well your songs come out in the short time it takes you to produce them, and just how critical some of the people on these forums are.
Sure, not every song is brilliant, but they are consistently good, clever and interesting.

To those who continue to post negative comments that add nothing to the discussion, please grow up and move along. If you don't like it, no one cares if you just post 'That was shit' etc. The point of a forum is to discuss. Please expand upon your ideas. Why didn't you like it? What would you have done to improve it?

Yelling 'Crap' tells the world that you have Tourette's. Serious discussion tells the world you have a brain.

 

[El pup]

Me attempting to reason with someone who is being very defensive.

All that reading, with none of the comprehension. Go reread what I said:
1) I never said no one agreed with you, I said few people here would agree with you.
2) I didn't say your insults and ad hominem attacks invalidated your points, I said they invalidated their worth. Big difference. To make your analogy appropriate, it would be like Dawkins trying to publish an academic paper on evolutionary biology and, in it, he states "Besides, anybody who believes in god is a fucking retard." I doubt that paper would get published, regardless of how valid or noteworthy the other material was.
3) I never said you shouldn't state your opinion, and I certainly don't wish to silence you. I simply pointed out that you're more likely to achieve the effect you are looking for (a discussion of the flaws you perceive) in a different forum. I still maintain that to be the case; furthermore, I don't think that posting a reasonable thread with the title "So am I the only one who hasn't liked RMM much lately?" would be inappropriate. If you cut and pasted what you wrote above, you'd probably get in trouble for being so insulting about it, but there have been plenty of threads about Yahtzee being a jerk or whatever over the couple of years I've been posting here.
4) I'm not being a 'white knight'. Or at least that is not my intention. I simply was saying that a lot of people probably would give your opinion more consideration if you didn't have the schoolyard namecalling (at worst) and ad hominem arguments (at best) in it.

So, to sum up, insults and ad hominem attacks are useless things when you're trying to make a point about which you feel strongly; if you're really trying to appeal to a specific audience, I would suggest you consider who, exactly, is going to both find those 'jokes' amusing and actually be interested in a discussion, anyway?

NOTE TO ALL: I'M ONLY ADRESSING THE SPECIFIC ONE DIRECTED TO ME. I DIDN'T EXPECT SUCH A HUGE REACTION TO WHAT I WROTE...

Ok kiddo, lets begin with what you are asking me to address.

1. It seems after my original statement, those who agreed with me finally were not afraid to come out of the wood-works (as shown by MANY of the later comments). I would conservatively estimate half of the posters here agree with my point of view... Not that it really matters. Everyone is entitled to an opinion and to express it, and those who express it are consequence to the feedback for what they put in the open.

2. Sorry, I didn't word my response properly to this initial way. While it CAN be seen as an "ad hominem" attack, I disagree because I validate my name insults. And ad hominem would be me insulting someone BECAUSE of irrelavent seemingly hypocritical behavoir

Example
"Obama is such an idiot for signing legistlation getting rid of flavored ciggeretts, he smokes himself."

It is intentional misdirection from the purpose of the action by drawing attention to an irrelavent issue that makes a loose logical argument for hypocracy...

However, I back my what I say with a cause and effect.

Example
"(my cause)...She doesn't speak about anything other than how things make her "feel" which is a horrible barameter of measurement for ANYTHING seeing as it is a self centered perception. (analogy/insult) It's like finding out the artist you enjoy listening to has the mindset of a 4 year old."

"Ad hominem" is often called out on people who are either calling someone out on hypocracy, or harshly insulting someone. However if and insult (or charge of calling someone a hypocrit) is properly backed by reason it is not an "ad hominem".

3. You wish to designate WHERE and HOW I state/write my thoughts, which under certain circumstances is correct.

You don't go to a breast cancer forum to crack jokes about cancer or women.
You don't talk about your sexual conquests on a childrens seaseme street forum
etc.

However, this is an area where FANS (that would be me) post their feedback on what they thought about it(which is what I did) for the artist to get an idea of how her fans feel (which she did).

Your argument is I should not be posting here because it is not the correct place, I disagree... as a result of me disagreement there were a few people who stated themselves that they felt the same as me but have been scared to express it because... well either people like you or a ban hammer (which I would like to kiss the ass of Beg to continue not to banhammer thank the moderators for taking the time to see this wasn't a totally destructive critique for Ms. Mayes). And even more so asking me to use euphamisms to express how upset I am? That would be like telling J.D. Salanger how to express how to write "Catcher in the Rye" because YOU felt the way it was expressed was too harsh.

4. While you may BELIEVE you are not trying to be, it doesn't change the fact that it IS what your doing.
A good example is what is currently going on with Glen Beck. Glen Beck is using the money he is collecting for his "Help the troops with their medical bills" to FIRST AND FOREMOST pay for the Administrative costs for his speech in washington.
He may not believe he is STEALING FROM THE TROOPS, but it doesn't change the fact that he is taking money that is meant for the troops to pay off his own projects.

In your case you don't believe you are white knighting, yet you seem to attack me soley based on how harsh and critical I am/where I post.

Technically you are also a hypocite by your own logic, because much like you think it would be reasonable for me to start my own thread on another forum saying how rebecca mayes hasn't been crankin out the hits lately, you could EASILY of done the same thing with MY post that in you're own words

"you're pretty much wasting both their time and yours by trying to evanglize in this forum."

And on the evangelical note, I am stating a sole opinion (in graphic detail) where asked to state my opinion, I do not ask anyone to follow.
You wish to banish all those who don't agree with your opinion to somewhere else. Meaning you wish for everyone on THIS area to agree with your opinion.

Also, a ban hammer by THE ESCAPISTS own rules would of been placed on me for making a post threat "bashing" a member. Ms. Mayes is a member, while I was not JUST bashing her, it would of been against the rules stated HERE: http://www.escapistmagazine.com/forums/read/18.112832-The-Banhammer-and-You-A-Users-Guide-to-the-Forums

 

[El pup]

I mean she thought Yahtzee lived in england at first.

"Yahtzee is a British-born, currently Australian-based writer and gamer with a sweet hat and a chip on his shoulder"
Says so under each and every Zero Punctuation video.So do a little more research,and that wall-o-text that you made could have been something that I would have taken seriously.

The "at first" is grammatically directed towards Rebecca. The post is saying that she thought Yahtzee was based in Britain, before someone presumably pointed out he currently resides in Australia or she just figured it out herself.
The text is correct, you just read in incorrectly

To stay on the actual topic at hand, I didn't like this song. The changes in volume from ridiculously quiet in the beginning to the sudden volume for the chorus, the fact that the crescendo ended up as a tuneless screech (possibly in part because of the volume changes) and the Icelandic language blurring into a series of wails and clicks.
Also, one other point, you're clearly trying to branch out, with your 'experimentation' in the Heavy Rain song and the Icelandic theme in this one, so here's a friendly suggestion: try a different layout for your songs. At the moment they're all "Verse, Repetitive chorus, Different verse, Same repetitive chorus". Why not do something different to that?

It sort of proves my point seeing as it says he is BASED in Australia, meaning that is where he lives.

 

[El pup]

Lots and Lots of Words

Dear El Pup,

Hello. I have read everything you have written, as you have listened to every song I have sung. It is a strange sort of relationship. We both sit at our computers and write these words like artforms. I am hurt by your words, of course. As was, I suppose, your intention, and I found what you said about your girlfriend very disrespectful; I hope she finds a man who respects her as she deserves, which may in time, be you. But back to the point. I will feel hurt of course. Or feel insecure. Or angry. Or sad. To pretend otherwise is to be in denial. The emotions are there and they are really quite harmless, really quite beautiful. And they are not the totality of me, or anyone. In fact they haven't anything at all to do with who I really am. If I was living for my ego I wouldn't be doing this. Ego's can't hack this kind of thing - just look at what happens to famous people. It attracts so much hate. Just the other day someone sent me a twitter to say they hoped I would get hit by a bus. And I am just a girl who lives in devon and makes silly videos.

I make them for us, for you and for me. I make them for fun. I make them to see what happens. I care. I work hard. I love it when you love it. And when you don't I am sad. I wouldn't have it any other way. This one appears to have gone down badly with a fair few of you, as I sort of thought it might. But don't be to quick to put a linear pattern to it. The belief of things going downhill is a general negative-thinker thing. Positive thinkers have the opposite problem and always think things are getting better, but that is similarly an illusion. My take on it is more circular. There are definitely songs/videos that are better than others. But better in whose opinion? The circle will take a different loop for each of us, including me (and many of those you mentioned in your list are my favourites like The Monster and The Mirror). This song will be someone's favourite, even if they are in the minority. That is the beauty of individuality.

Well dear El Pup, if I may be so bold as to address you as such, I wish you all the best in your endeavors. You clearly have a sharp mind and eloquent voice. Criticism is an artform, and I'm sure you will put it to good use. Keep asking why things are not as they should be.

Rebecca

I must admit, I am a little shocked I got a response. I'll start with the good first.

I'm supprised to see you follow all my writings, especially since I quit writing for the old site do to ad disagreements. I'm suprised you would read any of it (as well as find me to "have a sharp mind and eloquent voice"... That was quite pleasing) since after all , it's not really your cup of tea (and there is A LOT of writing to cover).
It was nice seeing you didn't take to being bashed as hard as I thought you would, which is pretty down to earth of you.
I'm also glad to hear that you are paying attention to what is being said. I am hoping this is more cyclical and less linear. My fear of it being a linear trend comes from as you said

" you mentioned in your list are my favourites like The Monster and The Mirror."

As an artist you pretty much follow which ever direction you like. My pessimism comes from this being the direction you genuinely enjoy going towards, and the lack of fans not willing to speak up in fear of offending you (or having some white knight tell them to shut up and this is not the place). I hope you prove me wrong because I know you have the talent to do so.

Now the not so good...

"I found what you said about your girlfriend very disrespectful; I hope she finds a man who respects her as she deserves"

My girlfriend and I were actually quite offended by this. Me because I normally avoid mentioning I have a girlfriend in my online hijinx so people don't attempt to find out who she is and attack her for my actions. People on the internet love to take it too far in real life, and the hormonal wrecks I deal from the old writing gig are so vindictive they would actually go out of their way to attack my GF. She's a great person, so I walk a line to keep her safe from the flack I get.

She was insulted that you would undermine her intelligence in thinking she would be stupid enough to stay with anyone who treated her poorly.
The whole purpose of what I wrote is "I do treat women like objects, but I treat objects very well" which went on about how chauvinism is misunderstood (in a comic style of course).

"I am hurt by your words, of course."

There was a saying at the old dorm I lived in durring my first year of college:
"Only a real friend will be willing to embarrass you and tell you when your face is covered in dirt, rather then lie to you to make you feel better."

It was intended to make you see an honest reflection of what I, and appearantly others, were thinking.

" Ego's can't hack this kind of thing - just look at what happens to famous people."
I disagree. Many people get in to doing this for the praise/attention and just label all naysayers as "haters" or "idiots." However when you surround yourself with yes people the results can be DISASTEROUS. It's like the first 3 Star Wars movies and the last 3 Star Wars movies. George Lucas had A LOT of people when he first started telling him many of his early ideas were stupid and not to do them. Now look at the last 3... No one tells George he's wrong anymore, therefor he thinks everything he does is fantastic. On the rare occassion someone gives them their opinion and he doesn't just ignore it, he has his group of supporters there to build him up and tell him its all wrong. Egos can take it so long as they delude themselves by surrounding themselves with "yes people" (Example: http://twitter.com/LordCuthberton).

"The emotions are there and they are really quite harmless, really quite beautiful."

I agree that emotions can be beautiful. I like to think of emotions as Paint, they brighten life and make it more vivid with color. HOWEVER, without a canvas of reason, logic, or restraint it just end up as a blotted mess all over everything.

The critique is not of your use of emotions, your ability to link them to games is what drew me and many other to you to begin with. It's your misguided focus on the "points" your trying because you are trying to get people to "feel" how you feel... which alienates a lot of the audience that has been with you since day one because they simply don't agree with you, nor are on the same page.
Also emotions are a very individualistic expression. You can TELL people about your emotions but you can't make them FEEL your emotions. Even if you can properly convey it to them, whos to say they "felt" the correct emotion?
Also, Emotions lead to irrational behavior, and tend to cause people to act in ways they normally would not. Doesn't mean emotions are bad, so long as you don't let your actions be totally dictated by them.

"Just the other day someone sent me a twitter to say they hoped I would get hit by a bus."

I read what you speak of, and while she poorly worded it I understand where she was comming from. Her point was directed a lot towards how you claim to be so much for "feminism" (can anyone explain what rights women don't have in civilized countries), yet your videos make girls like her who consider themselves as "equals" to the boys look like emotional idiots.

She has sort of a point "You make all female gamers look even more incompetent." Your wii sports song was about how incompetent you were at that. You seem to always be appauled by the idea of a game where you hurt things which 90% of the time in games is what DRIVES THE CONFLICT THAT MAKES GAMES INTERESTING.
Add to that you trying to be a voice for women in gaming, and the women who actually want to be treated as equals end up seeing you as a liability rather than an inspiration.

I don't think she really wanted you to get hit by a bus... The internet has a way of over dramatizing things.

"And I am just a girl who lives in devon and makes silly videos."

Whenever you open you art to the public, you also open it to be criticized by the public.


Overall I'm hoping for an improvement musically and I'm glad the message got through

 

[El pup]

To the most brought up questions:

Q: Why do you watch her if you haven't liked her for so long?
A: I AM a fan. Just because an artists releases one bad cd doesn't mean you cut them off entirely because they did a bad job once.

Q: Why didn't you praise her whenever she was doing good work?
A: She doesn't need it WHEN SHE ALREADY has so many who are patting her on the back. What difference was one more "I really enjoyed that" gonna make? She doesn't have enough people who actually LIKE her work telling her when it is not all that great. The reason why is because alot of them are scared of the overly zealous WHITE KNIGHTS (who consider saying that Ms. Mayes is anything less then great whenever she so much a coughs flem on to her mic on accident as blasphemy) attacking them for having a differing point of view.
This was something that needed to be said, and apearantly the message got through.

Q: Why waste your time telling her it sucked?
A: I apperantly was not. A lot of people have been scared to say that they haven't been enjoying the Muses experience as of lately, it actually got through to her, etc. I want to continue enjoying more of what I USED to hear... or at least see if it will go in a direction that I am more fond of. Either way,why should I not be all to express disaproval on a portion of the forum where I am asked to say what I thought of it?

 

[FalloutForever]

I think i'm falling in love with Ms. Rebecca Mayes. Woops, shouldn't be doing that.

 

[Fritzn]

Long time listener, first time poster.

Personally for me, I will admit this isn't my all time favorite (as would appear to be a general consensus) BUT, if I may quote Yahtzee, "It was experimental! Sure, it didn't work, but that's what experimentation is for."

At the same time that its not one of my favorites, I feel I should say: I do enjoy all of Ms Mayes' music (go ahead call me fanboy) if I find myself browsing around the internet for a few hours, I'll open a new page and go just pop open one of her songs every now and then to listen to, doesn't matter which one.

Also if I may say something, I won't quote anybody, as I don't wish to be a finger-pointer or whatever, but I don't think its fair to pretty much say an artist is done just because of a few "downhill" works (I know many of you are not saying such, but that is the feeling I get from some of the posts). It strikes me as if someone said Michelangelo should've stopped after finishing the Statue of David, but if he had, the Sistine Chapel wouldn't be what it is today, and a lot of other great works wouldn't exist either.

Side note: I do realize that the Statue of David is hardly a "downhill work", but consider it as if maybe David had reached his peak of artistic ability, and people wanted him to stop before he made something "bad". if that makes any sense... it sort of works in my mind... I think...

To Miss Mayes (as I feel everything I put before is said more at the forum than her/you) I say, congrats on the song. I felt it was a unique and creative way to go and I look forward to your next song, bringing a smile into my otherwise dull weekends.

 

[Aran]

stuff

Dude, you need a psychologist. I'm not kidding.

 

[BlueInkAlchemist]

Rebecca continues to play with our expectations, blurring the line between "music" and "artistic expression." Sometimes that blurring is beautiful, and sometimes it's just a meaningless smear. This is somewhere in the middle, leaning towards the 'beautiful.' The language can make it inscrutable, but overall it's a successful experiment. As always I'm thankful to see these posted here.

stuff

Dude, you need a psychologist. I'm not kidding.

Why? Because he actively and thoroughly analyzes what he's experiencing? If that's behavior that requires psychoanalysis, I'll be next in line for the couch.

 

[Death-of-Penguins]

Strange as it was, I really enjoyed this one. Not my favourite, no, but definitely interesting. I also can't help but think that the rhythms, ergo the time signatures and tempos, in her songs differ, but what do I know?
A leap into the dark, and I don't think it was wholly unsuccessful. If we stuck to the same formula, stuff wouldn't change. Shit, I'm rambling.

I like it. Some people don't.

Oops, is that free will?

 

[AngryPuppy]

Your argument is I should not be posting here because it is not the correct place, I disagree... as a result of me disagreement there were a few people who stated themselves that they felt the same as me but have been scared to express it because... well either people like you or a ban hammer (which I would like to kiss the ass of Beg to continue not to banhammer thank the moderators for taking the time to see this wasn't a totally destructive critique for Ms. Mayes). And even more so asking me to use euphamisms to express how upset I am? That would be like telling J.D. Salanger how to express how to write "Catcher in the Rye" because YOU felt the way it was expressed was too harsh.

That was what pissed me off, and still does. Whenever someone doesn't like something here and expresses so, they are told to fuck off, more or less. Yes some people express themselves very poorly, like Cristian Capatana for example, but even when someone expresses themselves in a manner that isn't ranting dribble they still get "attacked" for it.

solidstatemind, don't let your ego get the better of you. I didn't snip your comment to hide shit. Anyone with half a brain can click your name in that quote to see your post. My comment was mostly Towards Ms. Mayes. You may not see your post as an attack, but it was. El Pup stated his opinion and you picked it apart. Your a Fanboy hoping to get brownie points with a woman you'll never meet. Get over it. The "majority" doesn't disagree with El Pup and as you can see by her post she doesn't need you ripping on her fans for her. Let people post THEIR opinions on HER music.

I am and always will be a big fan of Rebecca Mayes. That said if I think somethings shit, I'll say so. I'm entitled. It's why this forum is here after all right? Did I miss a memo?

 

[solidstatemind]

Your argument is I should not be posting here because it is not the correct place, I disagree... as a result of me disagreement there were a few people who stated themselves that they felt the same as me but have been scared to express it because... well either people like you or a ban hammer (which I would like to kiss the ass of Beg to continue not to banhammer thank the moderators for taking the time to see this wasn't a totally destructive critique for Ms. Mayes). And even more so asking me to use euphamisms to express how upset I am? That would be like telling J.D. Salanger how to express how to write "Catcher in the Rye" because YOU felt the way it was expressed was too harsh.

That was what pissed me off, and still does. Whenever someone doesn't like something here and expresses so, they are told to fuck off, more or less. Yes some people express themselves very poorly, like Cristian Capatana for example, but even when someone expresses themselves in a manner that isn't ranting dribble they still get "attacked" for it.

solidstatemind, don't let your ego get the better of you. I didn't snip your comment to hide shit. Anyone with half a brain can click your name in that quote to see your post. My comment was mostly Towards Ms. Mayes. You may not see your post as an attack, but it was. El Pup stated his opinion and you picked it apart. Your a Fanboy hoping to get brownie points with a woman you'll never meet. Get over it. The "majority" doesn't disagree with El Pup and as you can see by her post she doesn't need you ripping on her fans for her. Let people post THEIR opinions on HER music.

I am and always will be a big fan of Rebecca Mayes. That said if I think somethings shit, I'll say so. I'm entitled. It's why this forum is here after all right? Did I miss a memo?

I'm going to address this one first because it won't be as long:

I address the 'right' to disagree in my reply to El Pup. Please see below. Or above if you wish to review Samcanuck's exchange with me.

Let my ego get the better of me? You really think that? You think I'm trying to score brownie points? Trying to be insulting again, are we? Dude, again, please feel free to go find any proof other than your own personal opinion that that was my motive instead of you just making a spurious accusation. Go look at any one of my 800+ posts and try to figure out my demographic if you think I'm lying about my age or my profession in my profile. I don't need to make 'brownie points', and frankly it's really weak that you'd throw that out there in your own defense.

I have to ask are you being willfully blind? Or are you just more invested in appearing to be right than actually proving your right, because I have said again, and again, and again, and again, and again, and again AND AGAIN:
find me one example of where I attacked anyone for rationally expressing an opinion. Just one. Sorry, but if you can't or even if you choose not to, your statement is INVALID. If you make statements, it's your job to back them up, not the audiences' job to scramble for your proof. So, if you don't have "half a brain click name in that quote to see post" and provide the specific statement you were referring to (there has to be one good example, doesn't there? You know, since I was the guy you just had to provide as an example of a fanboy?), then why the hell would you expect somebody reading your statement to search and find what you might mean? Oh, wait. Is that the purpose? You want to make the accusation without havinng to back it up yourself? I'm sorry, you're not everyone's father, and you can't pull the 'just because I said so' card.

And the kicker is, if you bothered to read my whole post, I said : "I generally enjoy the music, but this experimental stuff isn't my thing" or, more accurately: "I usually at least like RMM, but this song was not good", only in a polite way.

And Xavier, while it might be more comfortable if you honestly think that I'm opposing any criticism of RMM, the truth is, I have repeatedly stated that I object to El pup's arrogance and insults, not to the substance of his criticism. To provide just a single example, if calling her not "the brightest peanut in the turd" isn't a prime fucking example of "doesn't expresses themselves in a manner that isn't ranting dribble", well, I'm sorry, but there is nothing I can do for you.

Last, please see the final line after my response to El Pup.

---

Now, on to El pup: I'm going to try to trim this a little bit to keep it a not-colossally-insane length. I apologize if I cut out something that is germane.

NOTE TO ALL: I'M ONLY ADRESSING THE SPECIFIC ONE DIRECTED TO ME. I DIDN'T EXPECT SUCH A HUGE REACTION TO WHAT I WROTE...

Ok kiddo, lets begin with what you are asking me to address.

It is generally not considered to be a great opening to a reasonable, non-antagonistic discussion with someone to begin with a diminuitive. Particularly when the person you are addressing happens to be likely somewhere around twice your age.

1. It seems after my original statement, those who agreed with me finally were not afraid to come out of the wood-works (as shown by MANY of the later comments). I would conservatively estimate half of the posters here agree with my point of view... Not that it really matters. Everyone is entitled to an opinion and to express it, and those who express it are consequence to the feedback for what they put in the open.

Wow. Really? Are you really that arrogant? You think your 'courageous words' somehow freed the chains of the 'oppressed RMM-Hater-Minority?' You must not read any other forums on this site. People here can ***** just fine on any subject, and frequently do. (And more power to them, incidently. You know, as long as they're civil.)

No, I'm sorry, the reason the dissenters posts showed up after yours is because your post was on the first page of comments, a page which, logically, is going to be dominated by fans, because fans watch the vid as soon as it's available.

Also, and not to further burst your bubble, but very relevant to our discussion about good argumentation? Your "conservative estimate" is completely wrong. My quick scan through the posts yielded a count of about ~38 positive comments, about ~29 negative comments (ONE OF WHICH WAS MINE), and 21 neutral arguments, with the balance of the 134 total comments being people such as ourselves bickering back and forth. Even if you figure in a substantial margin of error (I admit, I did it pretty damn fast), you wouldn't come anywhere close to 29 negatives being equal to or more than 59 positive or neutral posts.

Go count 'em yourself if you don't believe me, rather than just assuming your own perceptions are absolutely correct. (The point being: one of the things they teach you when you do scientific studies is that your perceptions will definitely impact the data you gather. It's why they have 'control groups'.)

2. Sorry, I didn't word my response properly to this initial way. While it CAN be seen as an "ad hominem" attack, I disagree because I validate my name insults. And ad hominem would be me insulting someone BECAUSE of irrelavent seemingly hypocritical behavoir

Excising most of the irrelevant examples. Just scroll up a couple of posts for said examples.

Ad Hominem is a general category; it includes several types of logical fallicies including 'ad hominem abusive', which may or may not be factual, but are not relevant, and generally are only introduced to impugne the character of the person who is the target of the argument; and while you probably thought that you were being witty, the point is that you introduced 'arguments' that really aren't relevant under any scrutiny, which is a no-no if you want to be taken seriously. Examples I would offer are: 'Attention-whoring', 'cheap publicity stunt by a raging feminist', when referring to a song that the speaker had said 'was ACTUALLY GOOD' (this post was about how RMM had decayed, remember?)... I could go on, but it'd just be belaboring the point.

I also particularly like how, in your response, you completely ignored the insults part of '...insults and ad hominem attacks'. Ad hominem attacks actually bother me less than the insults, to be honest. Why? We all can make logical mistakes. Human beings are emotional creatures, emotions cloud logic, and when we are wound up discussing something we are passionate about, we tend to lose track of reason. Insert some Spock quote from Star Trek here.

Two things I abhor, however:
1) insults, particularly when flung from under the cloak of Internet anonymity, don't make you look smart, clever, or witty; they make you look like an immature jerk who is petty, small, immature, and cowardly. And make no bones about it:
"she became desperate for attention"
"like a pathetic 4 year old BEGGING for her parents to buy her a new doll"
and the one I personally find MOST odious:
"Rebecca isn't the brightest peanut in the turd"

Okay, Mr. Avatar-that-says-"BE A MAN", and yet isn't manly enough to reveal any details about himself in his profile: Go to a bar and find a guy who is at least your size and tell him to his face that you don't think he's "the brightest peanut in the the turd". Hopefully your hospital room will have WiFi so you can tell us how that went.

2) the inability to admit when you are wrong. Even if it's just about your attitude, or the way you put something you said. I'm interested to hear this, because in your digression about the definition of ad hominem arguments, you never bothered to actually address the primary point that insults and ad hominem arguments invalidate the worth of your argument, rather than any factual accuracy you may have had.

3. You wish to designate WHERE and HOW I state/write my thoughts, which under certain circumstances is correct.

You don't go to a breast cancer forum to crack jokes about cancer or women.
You don't talk about your sexual conquests on a childrens seaseme street forum
etc.

I would add that list "You don't talk in detail about the totality of Rebecca Mayes's career in a thread titled 'Rebecca Mayes Muses War For Cybertron'. You talk about how you feel about the specific video." Thing is, you had already posted that you didn't like the video-- and did I say anything about that post? NO! I commented on the post in question because you had already stated your opinion, and then decided for some reason (given that you keep repeating that YOU somehow inspired people to start trashing RM, I'm guessing that you felt vindicated by being the 'first' negative poster) to dump more bile on the pile, out of the scope of the original topic!

Your argument is I should not be posting here because it is not the correct place, I disagree... as a result of me disagreement there were a few people who stated themselves that they felt the same as me but have been scared to express it because... well either people like you or a ban hammer (which I would like to kiss the ass of Beg to continue not to banhammer thank the moderators for taking the time to see this wasn't a totally destructive critique for Ms. Mayes). And even more so asking me to use euphamisms to express how upset I am? That would be like telling J.D. Salanger how to express how to write "Catcher in the Rye" because YOU felt the way it was expressed was too harsh.

First off, feel free to disagree over whether or not this is the correct forum. I admit that it is somewhat debatable. However, that is actually the least of my complaints. A misdemeanor among felonies. While I'll let the 'correct place' slide, I still think you would've had even MORE success getting responses in the Off-Topic forum, if only because it's simple logic to believe that many, many people who tried RMM and disliked it don't even read these comment threads. If you're truly interested in providing honest feedback to Rebecca, I think you may have tried sending her a message, or would've started a discussion amongst Escapists in general, and not just trying to incite controversy in an area which is likely to be pro-Rebecca,

In re: J.D. Salinger, I'll be frank: it is absolutely and completely ludicrious that you are again trying to make an irrelevant comparison to a famous figure, this time Salinger instead of Dawkins. In this case, you are trying to compare a work of fiction with what is supposed to be a critique of an artist. Again, if J.D. Salinger used the same authorial voice he used in 'Catcher' in a critique of, say, James Joyce's "Ulysses", it never would've seen the light of day! I shouldn't have to even explain why. It bothers me that that you have done this not once but twice: it brings up a very disturbing question: given that you are repeating behavior, you are either too ignorant to recognize the difference and you believe these comparisons you make are somehow legitimate, or you are so invested in 'being right' that you are willing to try to haze over the weakness of your position with absurdly faulty syllogisms. I don't know which option I find to be more disturbing.

4. While you may BELIEVE you are not trying to be, it doesn't change the fact that it IS what your doing.
A good example is what is currently going on with Glen Beck. Glen Beck is using the money he is collecting for his "Help the troops with their medical bills" to FIRST AND FOREMOST pay for the Administrative costs for his speech in washington.
He may not believe he is STEALING FROM THE TROOPS, but it doesn't change the fact that he is taking money that is meant for the troops to pay off his own projects.

Ooh, nice touch: demonizing me by trying to place me in association with Glen Beck, who many people are sure to hate. Sadly, this is erroneous on many levels- I have said that I am not crusading for RMM, and I am not. In fact, I said that I disliked the transformers song. I have said that I was primarily taking issue with the fact that you were insulting and rude. Am I being a white knight about that? Guity as charged! Got a problem with it? Contact the Moderators. (As I side note, tt would've been far more effective and relevant if you had compared what I'm doing to Yellow Journalism, or perhaps even a wierd form of Jingoism. But way to swing for the fences, dude. Sorry you came up short.)

In your case you don't believe you are white knighting, yet you seem to attack me soley based on how harsh and critical I am/where I post.

OK, leave off the 'where I post' bit. I'm willing to concede that is actually a minor (but not irrelevant) beef. See above.

And was I white knighting about civility? Yes, I was. And yes, I will. You talk that immature bullshit you did in your post and I see it, and I will jump down your throat, feet first. As I explained to Samcanuck, the moment we let you get away with slinging insults like we were on a grade-school playground, is the moment that the Pandora's box opens and every single argument will eventually devolve into who comes up with the best insult. And frankly, the Internet already has a 4-chan.

In response to the inevitable 'why not just let the mods handle it and hit 'report'?' question: The mods have a limited set of tools at their disposal. If a post is just somebody spewing a stream of epithets, I do hit report. But there are many posts that I feel have intelligence and reason (ie- a glimmer of hope) behind them, and if the original poster could just leave out the logical fallacies and outright insults, they would actually contribute. I feel in that sort of situation, the Mods can't effectively act without throwing the raw material out with the dross-- ie.- applying a or a ban is an overreaction because ther is some reasonable material there, and that is exactly the category you fall into, El pup.

Technically you are also a hypocite by your own logic, because much like you think it would be reasonable for me to start my own thread on another forum saying how rebecca mayes hasn't been crankin out the hits lately, you could EASILY of done the same thing with MY post that in you're own words

Oh, except for the fact that I was responding to your post. I do not believe that it is unreasonable that the response to your post should be expected to be seen in the same forum as the post itself. And before you go off on the "but why should I post in a different forum...", again, please recall that I have said your post would be more relevant if you posted elsewhere. And you know what? If you had just posted the "-Transformers: It seems like she's not even trying anymore." paragraph only, rather than a treatise on "I can actually pinpoint when and where I started not liking her and her work", I still wouldn't have said 'boo' about it. But you, for some reason, decided it was appropriate to expand the scope of your examination, and do so in a derisive fashion.

"you're pretty much wasting both their time and yours by trying to evanglize in this forum."

And on the evangelical note, I am stating a sole opinion (in graphic detail) where asked to state my opinion, I do not ask anyone to follow.
You wish to banish all those who don't agree with your opinion to somewhere else. Meaning you wish for everyone on THIS area to agree with your opinion.

Uhm, no. You are intentionally misinterpreting a single statement I made. Rather than providing only your interpretation of a single, small quote, please provide multiple examples. I say this because we've had several exchanges, and while you have a semi-legitimate point with my original quote: "Thing is, most of the people posting here don't agree with you, and you're pretty much wasting both their time and yours by trying to evanglize in this forum," the truth is, I've maintained a pretty stable stance throughout our exchanges: one that is: "I believe that, if you truly wish a constructive discussion of the subject matter you raise and not just an argument, you wouldn't go to a forum where it is reasonable to conclude that most people are going to be RMM fans." I still say that if you were really interested in providing constructive criticism, and not more concerned with being a clever, witty, and tough-mr.-insult poster looking to pick a fight, you could've found a variety of more productive (not to mention constructive) ways to do so.

Also, a ban hammer by THE ESCAPISTS own rules would of been placed on me for making a post threat "bashing" a member. Ms. Mayes is a member, while I was not JUST bashing her, it would of been against the rules stated HERE: http://www.escapistmagazine.com/forums/read/18.112832-The-Banhammer-and-You-A-Users-Guide-to-the-Forums

Very simply, Ms. Mayes may be a member, but she is also a contributor, and while you can hide behind shallow rationalizations that you can't start a thread against a member (wait, didn't you suggest above that I should start a thread about what you said??? Huh? Are you contradicting yourself or just trying to get me in trouble?), I'm pretty sure you could get away with posting about Rebecca Mayes Muses, provided you weren't rude or insulting. (Too bad you were in fact both.) I say this because it doesn't take a genius to figure out that the Escapist staff were trying to prevent cat-fights among regular posters, rather trying to shield posted content from criticism.

---

The end-all-be-all is this: Xavier and El pup, I don't think you're brainless. If I did, I wouldn't have bothered investing the time in responding to you, and I wouldn't have taken great pains in my replies to be neither dismissive nor demeaning. That said, it is pretty clear to me, from your attitudes, thaat you are both reasonably young/inexperienced and overconfident.

I will say this and no more:
Grow. Abandon insults and other base canards. Adopt logic and be able to defend what you think or believe. Trust me, it will make you shine while compared to your peers.

Or forget what I'm saying and just keep on believing that, unlike every other person your age throughout history, you are infallible, and repeat the mistakes that almost everybody does.

Either way, I'm finished investing time on this.

 

[BlueInkAlchemist]

The truth, as they say, is usually somewhere in the middle. I'm as guilty of letting my opinion get the better of my judgement as the next human being, but in this case it seems that some have taken this forum to be the place to have their viewpoints slug it out.

To reiterate and keep this at least tentatively on-topic, let me reiterate my thoughts on the music, just so we don't all forget why we're here.

Rebecca continues to play with our expectations, blurring the line between "music" and "artistic expression." Sometimes that blurring is beautiful, and sometimes it's just a meaningless smear. This is somewhere in the middle, leaning towards the 'beautiful.' The language can make it inscrutable, but overall it's a successful experiment. As always I'm thankful to see these posted here.

We good? Cool. Onto the analysis:

Your argument is I should not be posting here because it is not the correct place, I disagree... as a result of me disagreement there were a few people who stated themselves that they felt the same as me but have been scared to express it because... well either people like you or a ban hammer (which I would like to kiss the ass of Beg to continue not to banhammer thank the moderators for taking the time to see this wasn't a totally destructive critique for Ms. Mayes). And even more so asking me to use euphamisms to express how upset I am? That would be like telling J.D. Salanger how to express how to write "Catcher in the Rye" because YOU felt the way it was expressed was too harsh.

That was what pissed me off, and still does. Whenever someone doesn't like something here and expresses so, they are told to fuck off, more or less. Yes some people express themselves very poorly, like Cristian Capatana for example, but even when someone expresses themselves in a manner that isn't ranting dribble they still get "attacked" for it.

solidstatemind, don't let your ego get the better of you. I didn't snip your comment to hide shit. Anyone with half a brain can click your name in that quote to see your post. My comment was mostly Towards Ms. Mayes. You may not see your post as an attack, but it was. El Pup stated his opinion and you picked it apart. Your a Fanboy hoping to get brownie points with a woman you'll never meet. Get over it. The "majority" doesn't disagree with El Pup and as you can see by her post she doesn't need you ripping on her fans for her. Let people post THEIR opinions on HER music.

I am and always will be a big fan of Rebecca Mayes. That said if I think somethings shit, I'll say so. I'm entitled. It's why this forum is here after all right? Did I miss a memo?

I'm going to address this one first because it won't be as long:

I address the 'right' to disagree in my reply to El Pup. Please see below. Or above if you wish to review Samcanuck's exchange with me.

Let my ego get the better of me? You really think that? You think I'm trying to score brownie points? Trying to be insulting again, are we? Dude, again, please feel free to go find any proof other than your own personal opinion that that was my motive instead of you just making a spurious accusation. Go look at any one of my 800+ posts and try to figure out my demographic if you think I'm lying about my age or my profession in my profile. I don't need to make 'brownie points', and frankly it's really weak that you'd throw that out there in your own defense.

I have to ask are you being willfully blind? Or are you just more invested in appearing to be right than actually proving your right, because I have said again, and again, and again, and again, and again, and again AND AGAIN:
find me one example of where I attacked anyone for rationally expressing an opinion. Just one. Sorry, but if you can't or even if you choose not to, your statement is INVALID. If you make statements, it's your job to back them up, not the audiences' job to scramble for your proof. So, if you don't have "half a brain click name in that quote to see post" and provide the specific statement you were referring to (there has to be one good example, doesn't there? You know, since I was the guy you just had to provide as an example of a fanboy?), then why the hell would you expect somebody reading your statement to search and find what you might mean? Oh, wait. Is that the purpose? You want to make the accusation without havinng to back it up yourself? I'm sorry, you're not everyone's father, and you can't pull the 'just because I said so' card.

And the kicker is, if you bothered to read my whole post, I said : "I generally enjoy the music, but this experimental stuff isn't my thing" or, more accurately: "I usually at least like RMM, but this song was not good", only in a polite way.

And Xavier, while it might be more comfortable if you honestly think that I'm opposing any criticism of RMM, the truth is, I have repeatedly stated that I object to El pup's arrogance and insults, not to the substance of his criticism. To provide just a single example, if calling her not "the brightest peanut in the turd" isn't a prime fucking example of "doesn't expresses themselves in a manner that isn't ranting dribble", well, I'm sorry, but there is nothing I can do for you.

Last, please see the final line after my response to El Pup.

It seems to me that solidstate is being every bit as arrogant as he's accusing El Pup of being. As much as Xavier's "brownie points" comment is somewhat ill-concieved given the content of solidstate's other posts, solid's "Trying to be insulting again, are we?" just smacks of arrogant condescention. It's one thing to point out others being arrogant and then turn around and act like a douche yourself. It really sucks the wind out of an argument, and borders on hypocracy.

That said, I agree with solidstate here, in that Xavier's basis for his attack is unfounded and more research should have been done. Reading his post, it feels very knee-jerk, very heat-of-the-moment. And again, it's hypocritical to tell someone not to attack other fans when you are, yourself, attacking another fan.

As an aside, I'm not saying any of this as an attack on solidstatemind, he's a friend and I enjoy his posts, usually. But this pissing contest over Rebecca is just getting out of hand. And I haven't even gotten to the main event yet.

Now, on to El pup: I'm going to try to trim this a little bit to keep it a not-colossally-insane length. I apologize if I cut out something that is germane.

NOTE TO ALL: I'M ONLY ADRESSING THE SPECIFIC ONE DIRECTED TO ME. I DIDN'T EXPECT SUCH A HUGE REACTION TO WHAT I WROTE...

Ok kiddo, lets begin with what you are asking me to address.

It is generally not considered to be a great opening to a reasonable, non-antagonistic discussion with someone to begin with a diminuitive. Particularly when the person you are addressing happens to be likely somewhere around twice your age.

1. It seems after my original statement, those who agreed with me finally were not afraid to come out of the wood-works (as shown by MANY of the later comments). I would conservatively estimate half of the posters here agree with my point of view... Not that it really matters. Everyone is entitled to an opinion and to express it, and those who express it are consequence to the feedback for what they put in the open.

Wow. Really? Are you really that arrogant? You think your 'courageous words' somehow freed the chains of the 'oppressed RMM-Hater-Minority?' You must not read any other forums on this site. People here can ***** just fine on any subject, and frequently do. (And more power to them, incidently. You know, as long as they're civil.)

No, I'm sorry, the reason the dissenters posts showed up after yours is because your post was on the first page of comments, a page which, logically, is going to be dominated by fans, because fans watch the vid as soon as it's available.

Also, and not to further burst your bubble, but very relevant to our discussion about good argumentation? Your "conservative estimate" is completely wrong. My quick scan through the posts yielded a count of about ~38 positive comments, about ~29 negative comments (ONE OF WHICH WAS MINE), and 21 neutral arguments, with the balance of the 134 total comments being people such as ourselves bickering back and forth. Even if you figure in a substantial margin of error (I admit, I did it pretty damn fast), you wouldn't come anywhere close to 29 negatives being equal to or more than 59 positive or neutral posts.

Go count 'em yourself if you don't believe me, rather than just assuming your own perceptions are absolutely correct. (The point being: one of the things they teach you when you do scientific studies is that your perceptions will definitely impact the data you gather. It's why they have 'control groups'.)

Unless I'm missing something, El Pup never used the word 'courageous' to describe his words. Yes, the tone in which he posted indicates he believes his post allowed others to crawl from their darkened holes and pour their bile through their keyboards into this forum, but he never used 'courageous' and solid is, in fact, putting words in his mouth at that point. From the start, there seems to be plenty of arrogance to go around between the two.

I appreciate solidstate doing the math on the posts but instead of stating the figures baldly so we can draw our own conclusions as to whether El Pup's estimation is right or wrong (he's wrong), solid uses the figures as the proverbial pile of crap into which he rubs Pup's nose. It's one thing to point out the error in one's argument, but going about it in this way is just mean, man.

2. Sorry, I didn't word my response properly to this initial way. While it CAN be seen as an "ad hominem" attack, I disagree because I validate my name insults. And ad hominem would be me insulting someone BECAUSE of irrelavent seemingly hypocritical behavoir

Excising most of the irrelevant examples. Just scroll up a couple of posts for said examples.

Ad Hominem is a general category; it includes several types of logical fallicies including 'ad hominem abusive', which may or may not be factual, but are not relevant, and generally are only introduced to impugne the character of the person who is the target of the argument; and while you probably thought that you were being witty, the point is that you introduced 'arguments' that really aren't relevant under any scrutiny, which is a no-no if you want to be taken seriously. Examples I would offer are: 'Attention-whoring', 'cheap publicity stunt by a raging feminist', when referring to a song that the speaker had said 'was ACTUALLY GOOD' (this post was about how RMM had decayed, remember?)... I could go on, but it'd just be belaboring the point.

I also particularly like how, in your response, you completely ignored the insults part of '...insults and ad hominem attacks'. Ad hominem attacks actually bother me less than the insults, to be honest. Why? We all can make logical mistakes. Human beings are emotional creatures, emotions cloud logic, and when we are wound up discussing something we are passionate about, we tend to lose track of reason. Insert some Spock quote from Star Trek here.

Two things I abhor, however:
1) insults, particularly when flung from under the cloak of Internet anonymity, don't make you look smart, clever, or witty; they make you look like an immature jerk who is petty, small, immature, and cowardly. And make no bones about it:
"she became desperate for attention"
"like a pathetic 4 year old BEGGING for her parents to buy her a new doll"
and the one I personally find MOST odious:
"Rebecca isn't the brightest peanut in the turd"

Okay, Mr. Avatar-that-says-"BE A MAN", and yet isn't manly enough to reveal any details about himself in his profile: Go to a bar and find a guy who is at least your size and tell him to his face that you don't think he's "the brightest peanut in the the turd". Hopefully your hospital room will have WiFi so you can tell us how that went.

2) the inability to admit when you are wrong. Even if it's just about your attitude, or the way you put something you said. I'm interested to hear this, because in your digression about the definition of ad hominem arguments, you never bothered to actually address the primary point that insults and ad hominem arguments invalidate the worth of your argument, rather than any factual accuracy you may have had.

More than insults or ad hominem abuses, I abhor hypocracy. And this is a prime example of that.

Solid accuses El Pup of using insults, citing a few (which I don't feel were warranted in any case) and then turns around and wishes bodily harm upon El Pup. If I may digress for a moment, this is why Blizzard's RealID was such a bad idea. "This person thinks my class sucks and I should GTFO? There's his real name, let me Google him. Ah-ha, found his home address. Grab the bats and molotovs!" One could almost see a situation where Solid rings El Pup's doorbell just to say "So who isn't the brightest peanut in the turd now?" before hitting Pup in the face with a tire iron.

Not that I think Solid would do that, but you never know with some people.

Back on topic. Solid accuses El Pup of looking "like an immature jerk who is petty, small, immature and cowardly." First of all, that's redundant. Second, suggesting El take matters into his own hands to test his attitude is pretty ludicrous. If Pup is as arrogant as Solid is accusing him of being (which would be quite a bit, based on Pup's posts), he isn't about to go into a bar and insult someone just to prove a point. He'd much rather do it on the forums, since he's already under the assumption that he's right. While I think that Pup is being a little full of himself, the more I read of this the more it felt like solidstate was just wasting his time and making himself look worse in the process.

Much like I'm doing now, I suppose. I mean, I could go on point out how solidstate is easily becoming every bit as arrogant, hypocritical, emotional and immature as El Pup, but to what point and purpose? I agree with solid that we should all be looking to attempt more logical means of countering points made by others, but the method with which he went about demonstrating that didn't work, for me.

I don't think the opinions of either El Pup or solidstatemind are completely invalid. But when you take such pains to point out the flaws in someone else's argument in such a way that the flaws in yours become so glaring, the original impetus for this communication gets lost in a sea of noise.

At least when Miss Mayes makes an effort to communicate, in my opinion, the noise is somewhat musical.

 

[El pup]

I would like to start off this response by quoting a portion of something on your escapist profile: "Despite what you might wish, you're really NOT the center of the Universe..."


Now to address this.

I'm going to address this one first because it won't be as long:

I address the 'right' to disagree in my reply to El Pup. Please see below. Or above if you wish to review Samcanuck's exchange with me.

Let my ego get the better of me? You really think that? You think I'm trying to score brownie points? Trying to be insulting again, are we? Dude, again, please feel free to go find any proof other than your own personal opinion that that was my motive instead of you just making a spurious accusation. Go look at any one of my 800+ posts and try to figure out my demographic if you think I'm lying about my age or my profession in my profile. I don't need to make 'brownie points', and frankly it's really weak that you'd throw that out there in your own defense.

I have to ask are you being willfully blind? Or are you just more invested in appearing to be right than actually proving your right, because I have said again, and again, and again, and again, and again, and again AND AGAIN:
find me one example of where I attacked anyone for rationally expressing an opinion. Just one. Sorry, but if you can't or even if you choose not to, your statement is INVALID. If you make statements, it's your job to back them up, not the audiences' job to scramble for your proof. So, if you don't have "half a brain click name in that quote to see post" and provide the specific statement you were referring to (there has to be one good example, doesn't there? You know, since I was the guy you just had to provide as an example of a fanboy?), then why the hell would you expect somebody reading your statement to search and find what you might mean? Oh, wait. Is that the purpose? You want to make the accusation without havinng to back it up yourself? I'm sorry, you're not everyone's father, and you can't pull the 'just because I said so' card.

And the kicker is, if you bothered to read my whole post, I said : "I generally enjoy the music, but this experimental stuff isn't my thing" or, more accurately: "I usually at least like RMM, but this song was not good", only in a polite way.

And Xavier, while it might be more comfortable if you honestly think that I'm opposing any criticism of RMM, the truth is, I have repeatedly stated that I object to El pup's arrogance and insults, not to the substance of his criticism. To provide just a single example, if calling her not "the brightest peanut in the turd" isn't a prime fucking example of "doesn't expresses themselves in a manner that isn't ranting dribble", well, I'm sorry, but there is nothing I can do for you.

Last, please see the final line after my response to El Pup.

---

Now, on to El pup: I'm going to try to trim this a little bit to keep it a not-colossally-insane length. I apologize if I cut out something that is germane.

How are you NOT doing this for your ego? You admit to lying about white knighting then justify being a white knight as "...I white knighting about civility? Yes, I was. And yes, I will. You talk that immature bullshit you did in your post and I see it, and I will jump down your throat, feet first."

You see yourself as a crusader of civility, yet act uncivilized and use doing it for good as your justifications for your lack of control.

It is generally not considered to be a great opening to a reasonable, non-antagonistic discussion with someone to begin with a diminuitive. Particularly when the person you are addressing happens to be likely somewhere around twice your age.

To be completely honest, it's because I was out of town on a business trip for the weekend, came back, and saw I had been refferenced in ALOT of the posts. I don't want anyone to feel left out because I couldn't adress each and every individual.

Do you honestly believe I am some manipulative sociopath trying to get everyone to gang up on you? When I posted my ORIGINAL post I was expecting to get flammed (by fan boy "white knights" such as yourself). I was shocked to see I did not.

Wow. Really? Are you really that arrogant? You think your 'courageous words' somehow freed the chains of the 'oppressed RMM-Hater-Minority?' You must not read any other forums on this site. People here can ***** just fine on any subject, and frequently do. (And more power to them, incidently. You know, as long as they're civil.)

No, I'm sorry, the reason the dissenters posts showed up after yours is because your post was on the first page of comments, a page which, logically, is going to be dominated by fans, because fans watch the vid as soon as it's available.

Also, and not to further burst your bubble, but very relevant to our discussion about good argumentation? Your "conservative estimate" is completely wrong. My quick scan through the posts yielded a count of about ~38 positive comments, about ~29 negative comments (ONE OF WHICH WAS MINE), and 21 neutral arguments, with the balance of the 134 total comments being people such as ourselves bickering back and forth. Even if you figure in a substantial margin of error (I admit, I did it pretty damn fast), you wouldn't come anywhere close to 29 negatives being equal to or more than 59 positive or neutral posts.

Go count 'em yourself if you don't believe me, rather than just assuming your own perceptions are absolutely correct. (The point being: one of the things they teach you when you do scientific studies is that your perceptions will definitely impact the data you gather. It's why they have 'control groups'.)

To show you what I'm reffering to read this

I can actually pinpoint when and where I started not liking her and her work.

*snip, but totaly agree*

It seems she's begining to let herself go after the VERY TINY taste of success she has had. She's surrounded herself with "yes" people who so much as praise whenever she takes a dump and wipes properly, she thinks everyone cares about the issues she does and demonizes those who don't, She's even going so far as starting "celebrity beef." It's just sad because she has talent and it is a unique thing she WAS doing... It just seems like all the talent has been wrung out of her and all that is left is a shallow withered husk.

I also really enjoyed her earlier work but recently it seems like she has been channeling Yoko Ono and not in a good way. The Yahtzee love song really brought it into focus. It is blatantly obvious Yahtzee loves video games. He just chooses to show that love like a disapproving parent. Constantly pointing out any faults he finds so that future iterations can be closer to perfection.

I don't get that vibe from the Mayes videos. It seems she loves video games like she would love the talent agent that is going to get her to the big time. Her recent songs just seem to be music with video game titles in them so that they can be put up on the Escapist website.

I didn?t want to post on this video thread because I didn?t want to increase the thread's comment count, but my thoughts on Mayes and Yahtzee didn?t warrant its own thread. So thank you El pub for giving me an excuse to get my thoughts out in the open.

So yes, I do believe there was SOME validation to what I said there.

If you wanna use my EXACT words, it was "Do not like", so being nuetral also counts as "not liking" if you wanna get technical meaning the 59 outweighs the 30-some-odd.

I don't wanna get technical. My point was as of lately people have not been as happy with rebbecca mayes as in previous times. However I do question your number counts (seeing as you lied about not being a white knight before), but hey I'm not gonna go through and count each one for the sake of clarifying my point of 'She's losing touch.'

Excising most of the irrelevant examples. Just scroll up a couple of posts for said examples.

Ad Hominem is a general category; it includes several types of logical fallicies including 'ad hominem abusive', which may or may not be factual, but are not relevant, and generally are only introduced to impugne the character of the person who is the target of the argument; and while you probably thought that you were being witty, the point is that you introduced 'arguments' that really aren't relevant under any scrutiny, which is a no-no if you want to be taken seriously. Examples I would offer are: 'Attention-whoring', 'cheap publicity stunt by a raging feminist', when referring to a song that the speaker had said 'was ACTUALLY GOOD' (this post was about how RMM had decayed, remember?)... I could go on, but it'd just be belaboring the point.

I also particularly like how, in your response, you completely ignored the insults part of '...insults and ad hominem attacks'. Ad hominem attacks actually bother me less than the insults, to be honest. Why? We all can make logical mistakes. Human beings are emotional creatures, emotions cloud logic, and when we are wound up discussing something we are passionate about, we tend to lose track of reason. Insert some Spock quote from Star Trek here.

Two things I abhor, however:
1) insults, particularly when flung from under the cloak of Internet anonymity, don't make you look smart, clever, or witty; they make you look like an immature jerk who is petty, small, immature, and cowardly. And make no bones about it:
"she became desperate for attention"
"like a pathetic 4 year old BEGGING for her parents to buy her a new doll"
and the one I personally find MOST odious:
"Rebecca isn't the brightest peanut in the turd"

Okay, Mr. Avatar-that-says-"BE A MAN", and yet isn't manly enough to reveal any details about himself in his profile: Go to a bar and find a guy who is at least your size and tell him to his face that you don't think he's "the brightest peanut in the the turd". Hopefully your hospital room will have WiFi so you can tell us how that went.

2) the inability to admit when you are wrong. Even if it's just about your attitude, or the way you put something you said. I'm interested to hear this, because in your digression about the definition of ad hominem arguments, you never bothered to actually address the primary point that insults and ad hominem arguments invalidate the worth of your argument, rather than any factual accuracy you may have had.

1) This is why forcing people to put their info on display is a HORRIBLE idea. White knights and trolls who feel they must destroy whatever hurt their ego would attempt to cause physical harm.
However here's another one of lifes great ironies (begin irrelavent story about myself)... I can hold my own in a fight VERY well. I'm 6ft so most of the time I have a height advantage. The last time I got into a fight though was probably when I was 19 and in Juarez (before the gang wars broke out there). Some guy tried to fight with me because his girlfriend who didn't speak english was talking to me about something I didn't understand. He started pushing/punching me so I hip tossed him and bashed his head in the floor so he got the message... then got the hell out of there cause I wasn't gonna go to a mexican jail.(end irrelavent story)

In real life... I do the same thing. I don't get in to fights because people aren't LOOKING to get in to fights over some stupid words. People IRL get in to fights for self defense, or cause they are insecure and think it's a good idea to act like a jealous duche.
I'm much worse in real life... Because in real life I'm also funnier given that inflection and tone are two advantages.

2) Irony much? I am not admitting I'm wrong because I don't feel I am. Much like you are doing the same. Your frustration comes with me not declairing you the official victor. If you like I can tell you "you win"... I'm not responding to "win", I'm responding because a) I always try to respond to anyone TRYING TO GET ME TO RESPOND TO THEM, b) This isn't a competition. You keep telling me I am wrong, I am justifying I am not.

I would add that list "You don't talk in detail about the totality of Rebecca Mayes's career in a thread titled 'Rebecca Mayes Muses War For Cybertron'. You talk about how you feel about the specific video." Thing is, you had already posted that you didn't like the video-- and did I say anything about that post? NO! I commented on the post in question because you had already stated your opinion, and then decided for some reason (given that you keep repeating that YOU somehow inspired people to start trashing RM, I'm guessing that you felt vindicated by being the 'first' negative poster) to dump more bile on the pile, out of the scope of the original topic!

There was a quote from you I felt was appropriate for this
"Got a problem with it? Contact the Moderators."

I feel it is appropriate for me to address her career in ANY video because she tries to cross link all of her work (blogs, game people, feminist views, etc.) it would of been relavent if adressed how great her entire career was if it was POSITIVE, so I see it as appropriate to adress the NEGATIVE as well (I just went in to more detail). It was EFFECTIVE at the least.

You also seem to have a HUGE problem with how mean what I said was. Lets face it, if you saw a forum topic in the most talked about thread saying "Rebecca Mayes is letting the little fame she's had go to her head" you would be in THERE white knighting because you are trying to do it to end "rude" and inappropriate ways of talking about what you like (but probably use and excuse such as 'this filth doesn't belong on the escapist).

You put yourself out there publicly you are putting yourself up to BE judged publicly.

First off, feel free to disagree over whether or not this is the correct forum. I admit that it is somewhat debatable. However, that is actually the least of my complaints. A misdemeanor among felonies. While I'll let the 'correct place' slide, I still think you would've had even MORE success getting responses in the Off-Topic forum, if only because it's simple logic to believe that many, many people who tried RMM and disliked it don't even read these comment threads. If you're truly interested in providing honest feedback to Rebecca, I think you may have tried sending her a message, or would've started a discussion amongst Escapists in general, and not just trying to incite controversy in an area which is likely to be pro-Rebecca,

In re: J.D. Salinger, I'll be frank: it is absolutely and completely ludicrious that you are again trying to make an irrelevant comparison to a famous figure, this time Salinger instead of Dawkins. In this case, you are trying to compare a work of fiction with what is supposed to be a critique of an artist. Again, if J.D. Salinger used the same authorial voice he used in 'Catcher' in a critique of, say, James Joyce's "Ulysses", it never would've seen the light of day! I shouldn't have to even explain why. It bothers me that that you have done this not once but twice: it brings up a very disturbing question: given that you are repeating behavior, you are either too ignorant to recognize the difference and you believe these comparisons you make are somehow legitimate, or you are so invested in 'being right' that you are willing to try to haze over the weakness of your position with absurdly faulty syllogisms. I don't know which option I find to be more disturbing.

You're missing the point of an analogy. It is meant to convey a point using something YOU SHOULD be familiar with. for future referance so your overly sensitive feelings don't get hurt (Protip:"Despite what you might wish, you're really NOT the center of the Universe...") use this

This is like if X told Y how to do Z.

Fill in the blanks and you can finally be less "disturb[ed]" for what seems to be YOUR PROBLEM with me using analogies.

Ooh, nice touch: demonizing me by trying to place me in association with Glen Beck, who many people are sure to hate. Sadly, this is erroneous on many levels- I have said that I am not crusading for RMM, and I am not. In fact, I said that I disliked the transformers song. I have said that I was primarily taking issue with the fact that you were insulting and rude. Am I being a white knight about that? Guity as charged! Got a problem with it? Contact the Moderators. (As I side note, tt would've been far more effective and relevant if you had compared what I'm doing to Yellow Journalism, or perhaps even a wierd form of Jingoism. But way to swing for the fences, dude. Sorry you came up short.)

Once again, do you HONESTLY belive I am a sociopath out to get you? That I am attempting to manipulate everyone by not using positive examples that reflect you as the white knight you so feel you should be portraid as? I'm arguing against you, OFCOURSE I'm gonna use negative examples... but it's also hard to think of any positive examples of someone doing something that they claim originally not to be doing.

Once again feel free to use my Mad Lib X, Y, Z formula so you can feel better about yourself.

What is sad is you attack, then once struck back you attempt to play victim in hopes of gathering other white knights to rush to your side and defend you (they wont). I hope you are not as pittyful (I mean this in the litteral definition) in real life.

By the way, how is ANYTHING your complaining about different from what you are currently doing? Is it because you feel you are justified by having a "nobel" cause? WHO DOESN'T "FEEL" THEY HAVE A NOBEL CAUSE? Terrorists attack because they feel they are doing it for a nobel cause, does that make it right? Isreal and Palistein fight because they are doing it for a "nobel" cause. Hell, I'd like to meet the guy (other than MAYBE one or two cerial killers) who doesn't believe their gross over reactions are not for a nobel cause...

OK, leave off the 'where I post' bit. I'm willing to concede that is actually a minor (but not irrelevant) beef. See above.

And was I white knighting about civility? Yes, I was. And yes, I will. You talk that immature bullshit you did in your post and I see it, and I will jump down your throat, feet first. As I explained to Samcanuck, the moment we let you get away with slinging insults like we were on a grade-school playground, is the moment that the Pandora's box opens and every single argument will eventually devolve into who comes up with the best insult. And frankly, the Internet already has a 4-chan.

In response to the inevitable 'why not just let the mods handle it and hit 'report'?' question: The mods have a limited set of tools at their disposal. If a post is just somebody spewing a stream of epithets, I do hit report. But there are many posts that I feel have intelligence and reason (ie- a glimmer of hope) behind them, and if the original poster could just leave out the logical fallacies and outright insults, they would actually contribute. I feel in that sort of situation, the Mods can't effectively act without throwing the raw material out with the dross-- ie.- applying a or a ban is an overreaction because ther is some reasonable material there, and that is exactly the category you fall into, El pup.

This is like shit telling vomit it stinks. Have you considered it MAY not warrent a ban hammer (or even a warning) because it WAS relavent? Just because you don't FEEL this is where it belongs or that the whole thing I wrote was inapproiate, doesn't mean it is.

"Despite what you might wish, you're really NOT the center of the Universe..."

BTW, How much of an EGO must you have to feel that you are fighting for all who believe in civility?

Oh, except for the fact that I was responding to your post. I do not believe that it is unreasonable that the response to your post should be expected to be seen in the same forum as the post itself. And before you go off on the "but why should I post in a different forum...", again, please recall that I have said your post would be more relevant if you posted elsewhere. And you know what? If you had just posted the "-Transformers: It seems like she's not even trying anymore." paragraph only, rather than a treatise on "I can actually pinpoint when and where I started not liking her and her work", I still wouldn't have said 'boo' about it. But you, for some reason, decided it was appropriate to expand the scope of your examination, and do so in a derisive fashion.

So there is a special exemption for you so long as you are doing it for the right reasons? Thats not very consistent... And yes I get what you are saying 'Forum threads should stay should stay on topic and those who stray or offend the OP's should be told to fuck off', but as you ALSO said: "First off, feel free to disagree over whether or not this is the correct forum. I admit that it is somewhat debatable."

So where is the basis for ANYTHING you say if this MAY or MAY NOT be the right place to post it?

Uhm, no. You are intentionally misinterpreting a single statement I made. Rather than providing only your interpretation of a single, small quote, please provide multiple examples. I say this because we've had several exchanges, and while you have a semi-legitimate point with my original quote: "Thing is, most of the people posting here don't agree with you, and you're pretty much wasting both their time and yours by trying to evanglize in this forum," the truth is, I've maintained a pretty stable stance throughout our exchanges: one that is: "I believe that, if you truly wish a constructive discussion of the subject matter you raise and not just an argument, you wouldn't go to a forum where it is reasonable to conclude that most people are going to be RMM fans." I still say that if you were really interested in providing constructive criticism, and not more concerned with being a clever, witty, and tough-mr.-insult poster looking to pick a fight, you could've found a variety of more productive (not to mention constructive) ways to do so.

Where am I looking to pick a fight. Another guy on page 2 of this attacked my opinion and I replied In jest even stating he had a point, but I didn't agree.

You are the only one I've "attacked" and I used that term loosely seeing as I haven't pulled off the gloves and it's not much of an ATTACK so much as it is DEFENDING when some overly zealous white knight tries to insult you over and over yet fails to see his own hypocracy because he makes a special set of rules for himself because he believes he's justified to act how ever he please in what ever he feels is worthy of defending.

You also seem to feel ATTACKED even though YOU are the one who PUT yourself in THIS possition. YOU are playing the victim (for pity or marder points I can only assume) because you feel like you should be able to tell someone to shut up if you don't like where and how they are saying it.

"You are not the center of the universe.."

Very simply, Ms. Mayes may be a member, but she is also a contributor, and while you can hide behind shallow rationalizations that you can't start a thread against a member (wait, didn't you suggest above that I should start a thread about what you said??? Huh? Are you contradicting yourself or just trying to get me in trouble?), I'm pretty sure you could get away with posting about Rebecca Mayes Muses, provided you weren't rude or insulting. (Too bad you were in fact both.) I say this because it doesn't take a genius to figure out that the Escapist staff were trying to prevent cat-fights among regular posters, rather trying to shield posted content from criticism.

---

The end-all-be-all is this: Xavier and El pup, I don't think you're brainless. If I did, I wouldn't have bothered investing the time in responding to you, and I wouldn't have taken great pains in my replies to be neither dismissive nor demeaning. That said, it is pretty clear to me, from your attitudes, thaat you are both reasonably young/inexperienced and overconfident.

I will say this and no more:
Grow. Abandon insults and other base canards. Adopt logic and be able to defend what you think or believe. Trust me, it will make you shine while compared to your peers.

Or forget what I'm saying and just keep on believing that, unlike every other person your age throughout history, you are infallible, and repeat the mistakes that almost everybody does.

Either way, I'm finished investing time on this.

First of, lets bring up why you are a complete hypocrit right here:
"I don't think you're brainless."
"If you had half a brain"

A bit contradictory.

In my opinion, it's about time you finally decided to shut up and let go. It will save you from further embarrassing YOURSELF. You are the one that has cause other people to call you out on YOUR OWN CLAIMS. You don't have anyone else to blame other than yourself. Just because you wear a fanboy 'white knight' cloak doesn't mean you are not as guilty or wrong as the people you criticize.

A cop beating a KKK member who is preaching in a park isn't right, it's just overkill and bad form on the cops part.

If you were truely doing the RIGHT thing, you don't lose control just because you feel your justified. After all, a complete loss of control is not very civilized.

You seem to have a hard grasp on just because you don't like the way something is done, doesn't mean the whole world is gonna bend to your ways. You need to learn just because you don't like that this gets posted in the feed back column doesn't mean it's wrong and it sure doesn't mean I have to appologize and do what YOU say to make YOU feel better for something that is YOUR problem. A few people have addressed me, and I am not arrogant or rude in the least to them.

I treat you with the same respect you show me, none. I'd even go so far as to say I treat you alot better because believe it or not... the gloves are STILL ON. As Ms. Mayse (who I Learned followed when I wrote for El Chauvinisto) can tell you, I can be MUCH meaner, and hit WAY BELOW THE BELT.

I don't, because I am maintaining control. I am being civilized. Which is more than I can say for an internet tough guy wanting people to get physically hurt because they don't agree with what you say. More than I can say for someone who expects people to quit using analogies that demonise him (and is honestly supprised when this happens EVERY TIME). More than I can say for someone who doesn't follow their own advice and must make special rules for themselves so they do not seem like a hypocrit. More than I can say for someone who is expecting to demonize me as "arrogant" when you have picked fights with anyone (as well as demonized) anyone who has called YOU a hypocrit.

You are like a child who wants to impress a girl in class, so you pick a fight with another kid in class, but then once you realize kicking his ass may not be as easy as it looks you immediately try and get sympathy and state rules to the fight you started:
"You can't hit me while my glasses are on..."
"You're not allowed to make fun of my mother..."
"Don't you DARE say anything bad about THAT GIRL I SO DESPERATELY LOVE..."

then you start realizing you bit off more than you can chew, pick fights with everyone who tells you how stupid you were for fighting to begin with, then tries to take on all commers again in hopes of impressing his lady... (which will ofcourse all be in vain because she doesn't even know you name)

 

[El pup]

So does this mean I can finally stop having to justify how harshly I scolded Rebecca yet?

 

[El pup]

Actually wait a second.... I take back what I said...

"A war for Cybertron started on A war for cybertron"

Not only did Rebecca call it, She full circled a symbolic creation of the type of war portraid in the game.

SHINE ON YOU CRAZY DIAMOND!

lulz

 

[Locastus]

I don't get whats with all the first time posters laying down harsh criticism. Relax, it's not like you paid to see it!

I really liked this song, but then I watch Rebecca's vids because it's nice to hear an alternative voice presented in a quirky style.

I liked the music, I got that it was a tribute straight away, and found it entertaining.

What more can you ask for?