Forum Settings
       
Reply To Thread

Mystic Boon and WeaponryFollow

#52 Jun 21 2009 at 9:47 AM Rating: Excellent
Edited by bsphil
******
21,739 posts
Alkimi wrote:
I've never ever missed Mystic Boon, even against VT and Einherjar mobs. Maybe I've just been really lucky, who knows.
Eh, somewhat lucky I suppose. 95%^50 = 7.7%, i.e.: you have a 7.7% chance of landing 50 mystic boons in a row, assuming capped accuracy at 95% hit rate.

The ImmortalAlchemist of Doom wrote:
Easy way to test...

Vunkerl Inlet Crabs have evasion rangin from 210-215.

1) Do a parse of a few crabs to get your acc on both melee and mystic boon
2) Get 100% Tp before engaging with another mob, use a blinding potion and keep them up at all times and parse your accuracy for both melee and mystic boon.
3) Parse multiple crabs.
4) Compare results

That should give everyone their answer.
I'm curious if this would work or not. Blinding Potions are said to give accuracy-255, and so far (if going by Drakonite's numbers) the most we've shown is that WSs have a ~+126 accuracy bonus. Makes me curious about how things like flash work, seeing as that DOES make a serious impact on hitrate, even on 1-hit WSs. Maybe flash doesn't give accuracy- at all, but just lowers your accuracy cap to 20% and gradually raises it back to 95% by the time it wears off.

Edited, Jun 21st 2009 1:09pm by bsphil
____________________________
His Excellency Aethien wrote:
Almalieque wrote:
If no one debated with me, then I wouldn't post here anymore.
Take the hint guys, please take the hint.
gbaji wrote:
I'm not getting my news from anywhere Joph.
#53 Jun 22 2009 at 5:42 AM Rating: Decent
Scholar
**
303 posts
I've completed a Mjollnir, I have almost every conceivable piece of WHM/NIN gear, and I merit on a constant basis. I can tell you with 100% certainty, that Mystic Boon can, and does miss quite often on mobs in FFXI that actually matter.

Don't perform your tests on EM/DC/EP mobs. Run out to Mamool Ja Staging Point and try it out at the Jade Sepulcher zone.
____________________________
Izzy - FFXI - Phoenix
Izzy Izumi - FFXIV - Rabanastre
BurningCosmossss - DynamisBums
#54 Jun 23 2009 at 12:56 PM Rating: Decent
Edited by bsphil
******
21,739 posts
FetalDave wrote:
I've completed a Mjollnir, I have almost every conceivable piece of WHM/NIN gear, and I merit on a constant basis. I can tell you with 100% certainty, that Mystic Boon can, and does miss quite often on mobs in FFXI that actually matter.

Don't perform your tests on EM/DC/EP mobs. Run out to Mamool Ja Staging Point and try it out at the Jade Sepulcher zone.
So show me the parse data?

What hitrate are you getting, how much accuracy are you putting into your WS gear for mystic boon?

Do you have the data to confirm 100% certainty, or are you just saying so based on your generic experiences as a WHM melee? Rather, have you been recording and examining this specific data on your own, or has this thread queued you to think about previous experiences?



Edited, Jun 23rd 2009 3:59pm by bsphil
____________________________
His Excellency Aethien wrote:
Almalieque wrote:
If no one debated with me, then I wouldn't post here anymore.
Take the hint guys, please take the hint.
gbaji wrote:
I'm not getting my news from anywhere Joph.
#55 Jun 24 2009 at 3:21 AM Rating: Default
Scholar
***
1,755 posts
you shouldn't really need much data to refute a hypothesis of 95% acc 1 hit weaponskills

(if random / independent / .95% acc) put it this way:
there is a 60% chance to miss 0 in 10 weaponskills
there is a 31% chance to miss 1 in 10 weaponskills
there is a 7% chance to miss 2 in 10 weaponskills
there is a 1% chance to miss 3 in 10 weaponskills
there is a <.1% chance to miss 4 in 10 weaponskills

any result other than a 0 or 1 in 10 miss rate is very damning against the hypothesis
____________________________
Dwayna
75WHM 75BLM
94+2 Clothcraft
Lakshmi
#56 Jun 25 2009 at 1:29 PM Rating: Default
Scholar
***
1,755 posts
haha if I post in a thread you can bet your *** bsphil will vote it down based on his own misguided sense of auto-justice xD
____________________________
Dwayna
75WHM 75BLM
94+2 Clothcraft
Lakshmi
#57 Jun 28 2009 at 2:36 PM Rating: Excellent
Edited by bsphil
******
21,739 posts
ZiGG wrote:
you shouldn't really need much data to refute a hypothesis of 95% acc 1 hit weaponskills

(if random / independent / .95% acc) put it this way:
there is a 60% chance to miss 0 in 10 weaponskills
there is a 31% chance to miss 1 in 10 weaponskills
there is a 7% chance to miss 2 in 10 weaponskills
there is a 1% chance to miss 3 in 10 weaponskills
there is a <.1% chance to miss 4 in 10 weaponskills

any result other than a 0 or 1 in 10 miss rate is very damning against the hypothesis
Only if your melee accuracy isn't close to 95% already. You'll want to be working with 50-70% hit rate on melee for testing this. The most important part right now is to collect data and present it for analysis.

ZiGG wrote:
haha if I post in a thread you can bet your *** bsphil will vote it down based on his own misguided sense of auto-justice xD
So where's your data? Drakonite is still the only other person to come remotely close, but he only posted a few numbers and his conclusion rather than a set of data.

I've already provided the data that supports my hypothesis - single hit WSs by default get a large accuracy bonus. It's up to you now to come up with data that would disprove that hypothesis. By all means, go out and parse TP/WS accuracy without swapping gear. If you are able to show mystic boon having an equivalent hitrate to your TP hitrate, I'll retract my original statement that you don't need accuracy. If your WS hitrate is much higher than your TP hitrate, then you've confirmed my hypothesis.

Either way, if you're going to ***** to me about making the claims, collect your own data and present a counter argument. Saying "lol no that's not true" doesn't cut it. Put up or shut up.

By the by, WHM59 now. If I get to WHM75 and unlock the WS before anyone else bothers try it out, fuck you all.




Edited, Jun 28th 2009 5:38pm by bsphil
____________________________
His Excellency Aethien wrote:
Almalieque wrote:
If no one debated with me, then I wouldn't post here anymore.
Take the hint guys, please take the hint.
gbaji wrote:
I'm not getting my news from anywhere Joph.
#58 Jun 28 2009 at 2:49 PM Rating: Default
Scholar
***
1,755 posts
I don't play ffxi very often, if at all. You've already claimed your hypothesis to be capped accuracy, now you are claiming it is just a significantly modified accuracy. Which is quite clear from most of the data that's been provided. The difference between significantly modified accuracy and capped accuracy should be abundantly clear to you when it comes to determining the best average damage output, in which case under the new suggested hypothesis it would appear that accuracy gear may be of benefit in *that* case.

I have provided a very simple mechanism for 3rd party players to test this out casually for themselves, we need not have to assume they are already at 95% accuracy simply because if they are testing for an accuracy bonus they aren't going to be wearing any +acc gear and are so going to be under cap.

I don't have time to play ffxi, and the past 4 days of playing it I've spent farming coffer mobs in monastic cavern for my farking blm af coat, but as I have already said a small sample would easily hold sway over a 95% acc hypothesis due to the extreme nature of the claim in the first place. It sounds as if people are not hitting the desired numbers but means very little either way; I see no reason for you to start trolling me over the fact that I turned something very blah into something that is understandable in plain english.
____________________________
Dwayna
75WHM 75BLM
94+2 Clothcraft
Lakshmi
#59 Jun 28 2009 at 2:53 PM Rating: Excellent
Edited by bsphil
******
21,739 posts
ZiGG wrote:
You've already claimed your hypothesis to be capped accuracy, now you are claiming it is just a significantly modified accuracy.
Same thing. Accuracy+200 is an extremely large accuracy boost, and also enough for you to cap accuracy on virtually anything. I don't know if it's accuracy+200 or not, the most I've seen so far is accuracy+90, but that's only because people have trouble getting their accuracy low enough to show if it's any bigger. You wouldn't need any accuracy in either case.

Edited, Jun 28th 2009 5:54pm by bsphil
____________________________
His Excellency Aethien wrote:
Almalieque wrote:
If no one debated with me, then I wouldn't post here anymore.
Take the hint guys, please take the hint.
gbaji wrote:
I'm not getting my news from anywhere Joph.
#60 Jun 28 2009 at 3:15 PM Rating: Excellent
Scholar
****
4,681 posts
I've stayed silent up to this point in this thread, but no longer. The meds are kicking in, and I don't give a ****. When they wear off, I'm not coming back to apologize. Thank god for lowered inhibitions.

Bsphil is the ONLY poster in this thread putting up real data. Almost everyone else is flat out REFUSING to believe the data, because it doesn't match their preconceived notions. (I'm looking at you "Mr. I have a Relic, but I'm too **** stupid to know how to test this myself".) Honestly Zigg, shut the **** up about this thread. You may be a hot WHM when it comes to the curing side, but you sure as **** haven't proven yourself knowledgeable in the LEAST when it comes to probability and math. When you ***** up, do like I do. Acknowledge it, and stop posting in the **** thread (like I did in the "Deodorize" thread, when I realized stuff changed.). Or are you too *********** to admit when you messed up?

****, if anyone would rate you down for this post...
Quote:
haha if I post in a thread you can bet your *** bsphil will vote it down based on his own misguided sense of auto-justice
...it's me, and not Bsphil. Because quite frankly, I don't give a **** about the reprecussions. In fact, I have no problem eating the rate downs from people who think I'm a jackass.

If I were you, I'd be grateful that Bsphil is doing this testing, and stop rating him down for it. Rate me down for being an ***, but don't rate him down for presenting real data.

Bunch of crybaby brats.
____________________________
RNG:75 MNK:75 WHM:75 BRD:75 BST:75 SAM:75 WAR:75 THF:75 BLM:75
DRG:72 SMN:63 DRK:55 NIN:49 PLD:42 RDM:41 DNC:37 SCH:37 BLU:37 COR:20 PUP:22
Woodworking:88 Cooking:60 Alchemy:60 Bone:60 Leather:60 Cloth:60 Smithing:60 Gold:54 Fishing:33
#61 Jun 28 2009 at 6:30 PM Rating: Good
Silent But Deadly
*****
19,999 posts
Cyth wrote:
When you ***** up, do like I do. Acknowledge it, and stop posting in the **** thread (like I did in the "Deodorize" thread, when I realized stuff changed.). Or are you too chickensh*t to admit when you messed up?
Or at least do as I do, and just stop posting in the thread. :-D

I don't bother admitting I messed up unless I started the thread, in which case I'll get rid of the thread. The rest of the time? It's public freakin' record that I messed up. No admission from me is actually necessary.
____________________________
SUPER BANNED FOR FAILING TO POST 20K IN A TIMELY MANNER
#62 Jun 28 2009 at 7:01 PM Rating: Default
Scholar
***
1,898 posts
Cynth wrote:
If I were you, I'd be grateful that Bsphil is doing this testing, and stop rating him down for it. Rate me down for being an ***, but don't rate him down for presenting real data.
People are probably rating him down because he's a notorious *******. If this was anyone else, it wouldn't have even been an issue.
#63 Jun 30 2009 at 7:15 AM Rating: Default
Scholar
***
1,755 posts
Cyth wrote:
Honestly Zigg, shut the **** up about this thread. You may be a hot WHM when it comes to the curing side, but you sure as **** haven't proven yourself knowledgeable in the LEAST when it comes to probability and math.


well I admit I'm not exactly a great authority on math, but I am in my third year of a math degree and have started reading books to take my understanding even further :/
____________________________
Dwayna
75WHM 75BLM
94+2 Clothcraft
Lakshmi
#64 Jun 30 2009 at 7:16 AM Rating: Default
Scholar
***
1,755 posts
JingWoo wrote:
Cynth wrote:
If I were you, I'd be grateful that Bsphil is doing this testing, and stop rating him down for it. Rate me down for being an ***, but don't rate him down for presenting real data.
People are probably rating him down because he's a notorious @#%^. If this was anyone else, it wouldn't have even been an issue.

^ this
____________________________
Dwayna
75WHM 75BLM
94+2 Clothcraft
Lakshmi
#65 Jul 01 2009 at 9:02 PM Rating: Excellent
Scholar
****
4,681 posts
So let me get this straight. Because Bsphil has been an *** in OTHER threads, it warrants the rate downs for him in this thread? A thread in which he has provided a LOT of data, and hasn't been rude? (Unless you consider someone proving you're wrong to be rude. As a REAL scientist, not just a student, I can tell you that someone proving me wrong doesn't make them an ***. It makes them helpful.)

Stop rating a persons post up or down based on your feelings from previous threads. Rate the CURRENT post, not how that poster made you feel before. I've rated some of your posts in this thread down for your misinformation, as I have rated other posts of yours up for good information. I WISH people on these boards could do the same, and stop playing favorites. But apparently too many people think a person has to make them feel all warm and squishy on the inside to be a good poster.

Someone is in for a rude frigging awakening when he enters the real world, and finds out bosses, mentors, and other people that provide you with great information aren't going to kiss your ***.
____________________________
RNG:75 MNK:75 WHM:75 BRD:75 BST:75 SAM:75 WAR:75 THF:75 BLM:75
DRG:72 SMN:63 DRK:55 NIN:49 PLD:42 RDM:41 DNC:37 SCH:37 BLU:37 COR:20 PUP:22
Woodworking:88 Cooking:60 Alchemy:60 Bone:60 Leather:60 Cloth:60 Smithing:60 Gold:54 Fishing:33
#66 Jul 02 2009 at 8:14 AM Rating: Default
Scholar
***
1,755 posts
who the **** are you talking to? I don't rate anyone down, further more I DON'T CARE ABOUT RATINGS because this is THE INTERNET. No one is disputing the data provided by bsphil but there is more than sufficient doubt for any conclusions from this data on another weaponskill and the data on the weaponskill in question for people to not simply be wooed by it at first glance. As has clearly been shown it is possible to question the data using a small sample and this is what people are seeming to remember from memory, there is obviously bias in this and the memory could be flawed entirely anyway but it's there.

If you look at WHAT YOU ARE WRITING you should be able to see YOU are the one going off on YOUR OWN PERSONAL CRUSADE, YOU are the one WHO FEELS IT NECESSARY TO RATE DOWN EVERYTHING WITHOUT READING IT, which is PLAINLY OBVIOUS because you are PULLING CONCLUSIONS OUT OF THIN AIR.

/rant

2 last things:
1. math is an art not a science xD
2. you win I cba to argue with you over something so trivial, I concede anything and everything just stfu
____________________________
Dwayna
75WHM 75BLM
94+2 Clothcraft
Lakshmi
#67 Jul 02 2009 at 8:21 AM Rating: Good
****
4,229 posts
Massive rate-up for Cyth & Bsphil both. Cyth thank you for saying what I was thinking ^^
____________________________
Pergatory (Asura, Kupo LS) WHM99 ~ SMN99 ~ DRK99
"If you want to know me, look inside your heart." -Lao Tzu
#68 Jul 02 2009 at 9:15 AM Rating: Default
Scholar
***
1,898 posts
Cyth wrote:
So let me get this straight. Because Bsphil has been an *** in OTHER threads, it warrants the rate downs for him in this thread?

bsphil wrote:
By the by, WHM59 now. If I get to WHM75 and unlock the WS before anyone else bothers try it out, @#%^ you all.

bsphil wrote:
So no, parse it or GTFO. Don't come and tell me that "oh I've missed several times" as an excuse for needing accuracy gear, because all the facts are stacked against you right now.

These are from this thread. The second one was a totally out of line *****-rant directed at me for just briefly posting my anecdotal evidence which wasn't directed at him in any way. I play on 360 and don't run a parser, but no one even bothered to ask. Guess I'm still in the ********** you all" category.

And really, why doesn't he just parse it himself? Oh that's right, he doesn't even have the weaponskill. But instead of asking someone to parse for him nicely, he's bullying everyone around and saying "@#%^ you all" and it's totally typical for every thread I've ever seen him post in. He even rejected the anecdotal evidence of someone who constantly merits with WHM and a Mjollnir. Personally, I would take that over his Gekko/Sidewinder tables. Really, why doesn't he just get his own weaponskill and parse it himself, or gtfo?

But yeah Cyth, I really don't know what the big deal is. I don't think he even has a single default post in the entire thread, and has one rated good. Who cares about karma?
Cyth wrote:
Someone is in for a rude frigging awakening when he enters the real world, and finds out bosses, mentors, and other people that provide you with great information aren't going to kiss your ***.
I have no idea how this is relevant to anything even going on in the thread honestly. If anything, constantly being a **** like people can so often be on the internet because it's easy is not something that usually goes over as well in the "real world." And lol for calling someone who can run a parser a mentor.
Cyth wrote:
I've rated some of your posts in this thread down for your misinformation, as I have rated other posts of yours up for good information. I WISH people on these boards could do the same, and stop playing favorites. But apparently too many people think a person has to make them feel all warm and squishy on the inside to be a good poster.
That's a great motto to follow, and I'm pretty sure that most people on the WHM boards do that most of the time. It goes both ways. Alot of people get excellent posts no matter what they post because of who they are or the color of their name.

Edited, Jul 2nd 2009 1:02pm by JingWoo
#69 Jul 02 2009 at 11:10 AM Rating: Good
**
684 posts
Quote:
Alot of people get excellent posts no matter what they post because of who they are or the color of their name.


This is because their average post gets rated up to excellent anyways. If they were posting garbage, it wouldn't stay this way.
#70 Jul 02 2009 at 12:18 PM Rating: Good
Avatar
**
957 posts
Quote:
But instead of asking someone to parse for him nicely, he's bullying everyone around and saying "@#%^ you all"


The ****? Have you even READ this thread? He has basically asked for us WHM's to PARSE IT because he doesn't have WHM at 75 for like 5 posts straight.

The "If I get to WHM75 and unlock the WS before anyone else bothers try it out, @#%^ you all." if you didn't realize; was a comment on exactly this.
He shouldn't have to level WHM to 75, get the WS, and parse it simply because people here are too hard-headed to parse themselves.
If you consider someone asking you to BACK UP YOUR DATA or to prove your theory "Rude"; then I don't know what to tell you.

And as far as it goes; none of you have tried to do any test whatsoever. How about instead of crying and attacking the poster; you go out and test it yourself? That's what I did.

My very small simple size (5 WS's) at the ridiculously low hitrate of a WHM with NO accuracy gear whatsoever on Greater Colibri was enough to convince me.
And I was the FIRST person on the thread to call him out on it.

____________________________
It is better wither to be silent, or to say things of more value than silence. Sooner throw a pearl at hazard than an idle or useless word; and do not say a little in many words, but a great deal in a few.
- Pythagoras
#71 Jul 02 2009 at 2:15 PM Rating: Excellent
Edited by bsphil
******
21,739 posts
Drakonite wrote:
The ****? Have you even READ this thread? He has basically asked for us WHM's to PARSE IT because he doesn't have WHM at 75 for like 5 posts straight.
Thank god someone else caught this. Fynlar specifically told me to do the testing myself after I had already said I didn't have WHM75. Thought I was just going insane.

JingWoo wrote:
And really, why doesn't he just parse it himself? Oh that's right, he doesn't even have the weaponskill. But instead of asking someone to parse for him nicely, he's bullying everyone around and saying "@#%^ you all"


Really?

bsphil, on May 23rd 2009 7:44pm wrote:
If I had mystic boon (or WHM75) I would test it myself. I can get more detailed data on True Strike if you'd like though.


bsphil, on May 24th 2009 11:52am wrote:
My WHM is only 50.


bsphil, on May 24th 2009 5:29pm wrote:
Fynlar, on May 24th 2009 4:07pm wrote:
Quote:
tl;dr: don't need accuracy for mystic boon
And yet you still haven't actually tested Mystic Boon.
Still don't have WHM75. You do it. I'm willing to test other single hit non-mystic boon WSs. Time for you to pick up the ball.


bsphil, on May 24th 2009 9:43pm wrote:
Feel free to do some testing of your own.


bsphil, on Jun 23rd 2009 3:56pm wrote:
FetalDave, on Jun 22nd 2009 8:42am wrote:
I can tell you with 100% certainty, that Mystic Boon can, and does miss quite often on mobs in FFXI that actually matter.
So show me the parse data?

What hitrate are you getting, how much accuracy are you putting into your WS gear for mystic boon?

Do you have the data to confirm 100% certainty, or are you just saying so based on your generic experiences as a WHM melee? Rather, have you been recording and examining this specific data on your own, or has this thread queued you to think about previous experiences?


The only promising results (aside from Drakonite's confirmation) that were claimed were from FetalDave, and he hasn't responded again with data since making his claim.

By the by,

JingWoo wrote:
I play on 360 and don't run a parser, but no one even bothered to ask. Guess I'm still in the "@#%^ you all" category.


You don't need a program to parse WS accuracy for you. Get one of these and one of these. If it's under 95% hit rate after a significant amount of testing, maybe we can look into having someone else parse with a program to track melee accuracy as well to confirm.

ZiGG wrote:
No one is disputing the data provided by bsphil but there is more than sufficient doubt for any conclusions from this data on another weaponskill and the data on the weaponskill in question for people to not simply be wooed by it at first glance.


There have been detailed parses showing the accuracy bonus is extended to Tachi yukikaze/gekko/kasha, wheeling thrust, wasp sting, true strike, daze, and armor piercer (the last two being ranged WSs!) that I'm aware of. The reason I'm claiming that all WSs by default have a large accuracy boost is because they're so unrelated, that by induction they all have the boost.

Range Damage 
Player            Range Dmg   Range %   Hit/Miss   R.Acc %  R.Low/Hi    R.Avg  #Crit  C.Low/Hi   C.Avg     Crit% 
Fantoccini            14844   29.59 %      85/19   81.73 %   166/233   174.64      0       0/0    0.00    0.00 % 
 
 
Weaponskill Damage 
Player                 WSkill Dmg   WSkill %  Hit/Miss   WS.Acc %   WS.Low/Hi   WS.Avg 
Fantoccini                   
 - Armor Piercer            21820    88.99 %      19/1    95.00 %   1013/1305  1148.42


95% hit rate on Armor Piercer (ranged WS), but ~82% hit rate on regular ranged attacks (with a wind maneuver up during TP for ranged acc and haste). Just another basic example of a random WS showing this same accuracy bonus.

Here's another one from Suzaku on PUP:

Range Damage 
Player            Range Dmg   Range %   Hit/Miss   R.Acc %  R.Low/Hi    R.Avg  #Crit  C.Low/Hi   C.Avg     Crit% 
Fantoccini             2668   23.09 %       23/9   71.88 %    90/139   116.00      0       0/0    0.00    0.00 % 
 
 
Weaponskill Damage 
Player                 WSkill Dmg   WSkill %  Hit/Miss   WS.Acc %   WS.Low/Hi   WS.Avg 
Fantoccini                   5849    50.62 %       9/0   100.00 %     613/785   649.89 
 - Armor Piercer             5849   100.00 %       9/0   100.00 %     613/785   649.89


That's a low sample size, though I did land 9/9 with only ~72% ranged accuracy. Only a ~5% chance of that happening if there was no accuracy bonus involved, but a ~63% chance if there is an accuracy bonus.



Edited, Jul 2nd 2009 5:58pm by bsphil
____________________________
His Excellency Aethien wrote:
Almalieque wrote:
If no one debated with me, then I wouldn't post here anymore.
Take the hint guys, please take the hint.
gbaji wrote:
I'm not getting my news from anywhere Joph.
#72 Jul 02 2009 at 3:39 PM Rating: Default
Scholar
***
1,755 posts
what part of "no one is disputing bsphils data" does bsphil not understand.
he even says its an accuracy bonus not a capped accuracy, (and ive said all this before) which was the whole point in the first place "is accuracy capped or not and if so lets ditch it all and get some better stat mods on there". I *DON'T* care about it, I don't play the game at all and am simply reiterating the facts that have been presented to me. Maybe zanshin procs more on weaponskills, maybe it doesnt proc at all on weaponskills I dont know. The numbers seem fine.

What I DO care about is getting mass rated down in the general discussion forum in the thread where the guy asks about the gambler's fallacy. There's nothing wrong with my numbers or my reasoning and I resent the ignorance involved in mass rating me down over it. I also do not take kindly to life lectures from some punk net-knowitall who's ignorance and imbalances are as plain as their attempts at net-superiority. (and just to be absolutely clear phil I'm talking about Cyth not you)

Edited, Jul 2nd 2009 7:40pm by ZiGG
____________________________
Dwayna
75WHM 75BLM
94+2 Clothcraft
Lakshmi
#73 Jul 02 2009 at 9:28 PM Rating: Excellent
Scholar
****
4,681 posts
Sticks and stones, sticks and stones, young man.

Quote:
I don't rate anyone down, further more I DON'T CARE ABOUT RATINGS because this is THE INTERNET.
Quote:
What I DO care about is getting mass rated down in the general discussion forum in the thread where the guy asks about the gambler's fallacy.
Make up your mind. I haven't read the thread about the gambler's fallacy, but not sure why this was brought up. Oh well.

Quote:
1. math is an art not a science xD
Just because Math and Music have a few correlations, does not make math an art. Math is not about how you feel about the numbers. It's the basic language of the universe. It's the basis of sciences. It is not art.

Quote:
But yeah Cyth, I really don't know what the big deal is. I don't think he even has a single default post in the entire thread, and has one rated good.
He was massively rated down to default in almost all of his threads, when I first was able to read this thread in mid June. (I was away from any internet for over a month, hence me not speaking up sooner.)

Quote:
I also do not take kindly to life lectures from some punk net-knowitall who's ignorance and imbalances are as plain as their attempts at net-superiority.
Which imbalances and ignorance of mine would you be referring to? Any examples? Or is it just the fact that I called out people such as you for making ignorant statements? I mean ****, I call it how I see it. Do you have the testicular fortitude to do the same? Or do you just want to sling insults without backing up the reason for said insult?
____________________________
RNG:75 MNK:75 WHM:75 BRD:75 BST:75 SAM:75 WAR:75 THF:75 BLM:75
DRG:72 SMN:63 DRK:55 NIN:49 PLD:42 RDM:41 DNC:37 SCH:37 BLU:37 COR:20 PUP:22
Woodworking:88 Cooking:60 Alchemy:60 Bone:60 Leather:60 Cloth:60 Smithing:60 Gold:54 Fishing:33
#74 Jul 03 2009 at 12:00 AM Rating: Excellent
Edited by bsphil
******
21,739 posts
Cyth wrote:
Quote:
1. math is an art not a science xD
Just because Math and Music have a few correlations, does not make math an art. Math is not about how you feel about the numbers. It's the basic language of the universe. It's the basis of sciences. It is not art.
Science in its purest form is math! Somewhere out there there's an xkcd comic for this.

ZiGG wrote:
what part of "no one is disputing bsphils data" does bsphil not understand.
But the inference I draw from my samples of data is being very widely disputed. Now I'm stonewalled by the fact that nobody who is disputing me is putting up data that would confirm their doubts, and because I don't have WHM75 myself.

ZiGG wrote:
I *DON'T* care about it, I don't play the game at all
Why are you here?



Edited, Jul 3rd 2009 3:07am by bsphil
____________________________
His Excellency Aethien wrote:
Almalieque wrote:
If no one debated with me, then I wouldn't post here anymore.
Take the hint guys, please take the hint.
gbaji wrote:
I'm not getting my news from anywhere Joph.
#75 Jul 03 2009 at 4:42 AM Rating: Decent
Scholar
***
1,755 posts
science in its purest form is math, but math in its purest form isnt science ;)
they both ofcourse deal with realities held together by self-contained logic but the goals of the two subjects are very different.
uh cyth, you honestly cant find anything ignorant about? 1. ******** about me not knowing anything about math or 2. giving me life lectures because you think im some kind of mommas boy? :/ w/e im signing out of this thread very tedious and not a lot of love xD
____________________________
Dwayna
75WHM 75BLM
94+2 Clothcraft
Lakshmi
#76 Jul 03 2009 at 7:37 AM Rating: Excellent
Scholar
****
4,681 posts
Quote:
im signing out of this thread very tedious and not a lot of love xD
Quote:
75WHM/Garuda
Anna reborn?

But seriously, those are my examples of ignorance? Calling out your math expertise, or lack thereof? And giving a "life lecture"? This seems a little silly, but I'll ask it anyway.

Zigg, do you know what ignorant means?
____________________________
RNG:75 MNK:75 WHM:75 BRD:75 BST:75 SAM:75 WAR:75 THF:75 BLM:75
DRG:72 SMN:63 DRK:55 NIN:49 PLD:42 RDM:41 DNC:37 SCH:37 BLU:37 COR:20 PUP:22
Woodworking:88 Cooking:60 Alchemy:60 Bone:60 Leather:60 Cloth:60 Smithing:60 Gold:54 Fishing:33
Reply To Thread

Colors Smileys Quote OriginalQuote Checked Help

 

Recent Visitors: 1 All times are in CDT
Anonymous Guests (1)