gbwead Posted September 3, 2017 Author Share Posted September 3, 2017 27 minutes ago, Sashaolin said: I used the word "wrong" to say it was not the "players rankings" but the "regular season players rankings", it was an answer to the "Jice trash spreadsheet" argument. The title was wrong and the regular season rankings are uninteresting for me, don't mix it up. I think you have to improve your definition of the subjectivity, it's clear you misunderstand what it is by saying "I made this rankings to offer a less subjective way for the awards". There is nothing less or more subjective, it's either objective or subjective and the way you used is not objective. I never asked you to include the playoffs with this formula, to answer to it while I never expressed it is called a straw man argument. I don't have to look more carefully at the formula because if the variants are subjective, the formula is subjective and the rankings are subjective. See it like this, you try to answer subjectively to the objective question "Who are the best players?". In contrary, you can answer objectively to the objective question "Who won the most matches minus the matches he lost?". I'm not going to reason with your binary mentality. I'm done. DoubleJ 1 Link to comment
RysPicz Posted September 3, 2017 Share Posted September 3, 2017 But kevola vs lucas gbwead 1 Link to comment
Sashaolin Posted September 3, 2017 Share Posted September 3, 2017 1 hour ago, gbwead said: I'm not going to reason with your binary mentality. I'm done. I can't agree more, this is exactly what it is. This binary mentality you speak about is called the logic of the truth. A statement is either true or either false, it can't be "very true" or "a little bit false", a statement 99% true and 1% false is false, a statement have to be 100% true to be true. The title was false and that's probably why you changed it. The statement about the uninteresting regular season players rankings datas is subjective, it's therefore pointless to call it true or false because we can't answer objectively to a subjective issue just like we can't answer subjectively to an objective issue. For instance, I can't say "I know gbwead is hurt by me" because we can't answer objectively to a subjective issue. And I can't say "I know gbwead is in front of his computer right now because I feel it" because we can't answer subjectively to an objective issue. All in all, I reserve myself the right to think it's weird to post the datas of the regular season when the playoffs are over while you could have already done it more than 3 weeks ago. I think I have spoke more than enough about the meaning of the subjectivity, if you still think that your rankings are objective, I will call that being thick headed. Link to comment
gbwead Posted September 3, 2017 Author Share Posted September 3, 2017 4 minutes ago, Sashaolin said: I can't agree more, this is exactly what it is. This binary mentality you speak about is called the logic of the truth. A statement is either true or either false, it can't be "very true" or "a little bit false", a statement 99% true and 1% false is false, a statement have to be 100% true to be true. The title was false and that's probably why you changed it. The statement about the uninteresting regular season players rankings datas is subjective, it's therefore pointless to call it true or false because we can't answer objectively to a subjective issue just like we can't answer subjectively to an objective issue. For instance, I can't say "I know gbwead is hurt by me" because we can't answer objectively to a subjective issue. And I can't say "I know gbwead is in front of his computer right now because I feel it" because we can't answer subjectively to an objective issue. All in all, I reserve myself the right to think it's weird to post the datas of the regular season when the playoffs are over while you could have already done it more than 3 weeks ago. I think I have spoke more than enough about the meaning of the subjectivity, if you still think that your rankings are objective, I will call that being thick headed. ok Sashaolin and BlackJovi 2 Link to comment
DoubleJ Posted September 3, 2017 Share Posted September 3, 2017 Get him @Sashaolin, Destructo Disc! TJXD 1 Link to comment
kevola Posted October 2, 2017 Share Posted October 2, 2017 On 03/09/2017 at 6:36 PM, LuisPocho said: and thats why math is not perfect, suck it math nerds Uwot DoubleJ 1 Link to comment
Recommended Posts