Be Excellent To Each Other https://www.beexcellenttoeachother.com/forum/ |
|
Being Nice about Rev Stu thread https://www.beexcellenttoeachother.com/forum/viewtopic.php?f=3&t=882 |
Page 11 of 14 |
Author: | Grim... [ Thu Nov 05, 2015 15:47 ] |
Post subject: | Re: Being Nice about Rev Stu thread |
romanista wrote: [The pocket compute rthing really is since the iphone You didn't have a phone before the iPhone? |
Author: | JohnCoffey [ Thu Nov 05, 2015 15:49 ] |
Post subject: | Re: Being Nice about Rev Stu thread |
Cavey wrote: @JC Totally agree mate. The "cheating hi-lo" thing is frankly trivial as compared to the whole gamut of other issues, some of which you mention. To my mind, the unbelievably widespread existence of so-called "emptiers", "manipulators" and "methods" (pick your euphemism) whereupon if a machine is 'played a certain [often obscure] way', you'd come up trumps, was what did it for me. Especially where in many cases, this apparently meant the machine had to 'go on the suck' to make up for it all, and mugs like me 'without the know-how' were dutifully providing this function from our wife's lunch money and kids' clothes budget. Don't get me wrong, I blame no-one bar myself for my own past addictions and weaknesses; life's about choices. But man, I do resent the fact that these things were apparently 'bent' and for me, that meant I was playing them on an entirely false "these games are sophisticated and computer controlled to prevent cheating" premise. Thing is mate we've known this for a really, really long time. We know that bent and dodgy coders would put emptiers in and then sell the information to their mates and this is going on at a code level by the guy making the machine ! At one point there was real evidence that a coder working for one of the companies was actually sacked for doing this. That just about sums the gambling industry up for me. A couple of years back my mother (bless her sweet heart) bought me a book about London's East End and all of the criminals involved in it going way, way back. Fruit machines were originally designed by criminals for use at side shows at horse races. They had numerous ways of fleecing people. But if you really think about it if that was how it all started how on earth was it ever going to be fair? Ironically Hearthly also knows full well about these sorts of activities and at one point was a "Pro" who used to go around emptying machines with this bent info he had managed to procure. So how on earth did he not understand that fruit machines were robbing bastards? he knew that some poor cunt other than him was going in and filling these machines up blindly for him to come along and empty, leaving them as you say in "suck mode". So no, I don't believe Fair Play had anything to do with making machines fair. The sticker even pointed out that there will be gambles that you will lose due to the machine being a cunt. But did it actually stop the machine being a cunt? and did it stop people playing the machines? of course not, they already knew this years ago. But with gambling (much like drug addiction and alcoholism) you forget. You deliberately forget anything even remotely related to sense and you become unreasonable. People who take drugs know the dangers. They know what it does to them. Same goes for alcoholics. Doesn't stop them though. |
Author: | LewieP [ Thu Nov 05, 2015 15:51 ] |
Post subject: | Re: Being Nice about Rev Stu thread |
Grim... wrote: romanista wrote: [The pocket compute rthing really is since the iphone You didn't have a phone before the iPhone? Mobile gaming was shit before like 2007/8. |
Author: | Doctor Glyndwr [ Thu Nov 05, 2015 16:12 ] |
Post subject: | Re: Being Nice about Rev Stu thread |
LewieP wrote: I'm amazed anyone would give a shit about fruit machines when we all have computers in our pockets now. Of course, the mobile games that make the most money all use tactics inherited from sources like fruit machines. Plus ca change. Edit -- in case you don't know some of the hair-raising stuff freemium games studios allegedly get up to. |
Author: | Hearthly [ Thu Nov 05, 2015 16:20 ] |
Post subject: | Re: Being Nice about Rev Stu thread |
Just for the record my half of the campaign here on the IOM was done a lot less publicly but also submitted a far wider range of complaints about the behaviour of the machines. Amongst these were indeed things like streaks (which effectively circumvented the legislated jackpots, at the time £25 jackpot machines could streak to £100 in hi-tech form or as much as £200 in lo-tech form when manipulated), I treated blocks and unwinnable gambles as two sides of the same coin which meant that for an average player it was literally impossible to win a jackpot most of the time, and so on. (I've still got the letters I submitted, IIRC there were five main complaints listed.) Stu decided to go balls-out on the unwinnable hi/lo gambles side of things because he felt that was the easiest problem to convey, whereas I was going more along the lines of them being fundamentally bent and unsuitable for their stated role as 'amusement with prizes'. And yes at the time of the campaign I was making good coin out of the fruities (and continued to do so) so was arguably pissing on my own parade, but it still seemed like the right thing to do. |
Author: | Cavey [ Thu Nov 05, 2015 16:28 ] |
Post subject: | Re: Being Nice about Rev Stu thread |
I'm sure everyone here knows this already, but of course the kind of fruit machines one plays virtually on phones at casino sites (or as actual, physical machines at bookmakers for that matter) are a relatively modern phenomenon most especially in the UK - they're random, not predetermined controlled. As a result, these random games rely on the pure mathematical certainties of chance, so much so that payouts of up to 97% can be offered safe in the knowledge that the machine will reliably yield its 3% profit margin to the operator over a large number of credits, just as surely as a fair roulette wheel. From a player's perspective (and most especially the casual player, i.e. 90% or more of the total player base), a machine that (a) pays back 95% instead of 70% and more importantly (b) said payback and jackpot/large win potential is equally available to all, the machines cannot cheat because they don't even know what they did last spin, is always going to be more attractive. So it's hardly surprising that the traditional pub fruit machine, with its stingy payouts and shonky coding that favours the enlightened, isn't exactly in vogue anymore. About the only people who are pissed off by this are 'pro' players who don't get to skank other punters anymore, and perhaps pub operators for missing out on any fruit machine profits they used to rake off (providing of course they didn't have an 'emptiable' machine, in which case they would hardly miss licking their wounds at the hands of the 'pro' player, just like the rest of us). Going back to random machines, yes, Vegas has had the traditional "one armed bandit" since time immemorial, no-one is suggesting there's anything new about that. However, 'modern' random AWPs with their features, bonus rounds, gambles and trails, even skill games in some cases, *are* very much a new phenomenon and akin the pub fruit machines in terms of content and play, if not as regards how they work, their vastly improved payouts or 'level playing field' characteristics. |
Author: | Grim... [ Thu Nov 05, 2015 17:05 ] |
Post subject: | Re: Being Nice about Rev Stu thread |
LewieP wrote: Grim... wrote: romanista wrote: [The pocket compute rthing really is since the iphone You didn't have a phone before the iPhone? Mobile gaming was shit before like 2007/8. Darkest Fear was excellent, fool. |
Author: | Cavey [ Thu Nov 05, 2015 18:48 ] |
Post subject: | Re: Being Nice about Rev Stu thread |
JohnCoffey wrote: ....Flash Cash are two examples of this. Ah, MPU4 Flash Cash, what an utter shitbiscuit turd of a machine that was; one of a whole family of piss-taking Barcrests of the late-80s. Remember the Trade mag advert someone posted on one of the forums years later - a couple of burly security guards having to lift the cashbox out for oodles of profit for the operator... still, if nothing else, it's at least a fabulous looking machine. All that glitters sure ain't gold... Jogged my memory this; some geezer called 'Fruitworkz' did a fantastic emulated layout for this very game, and some old tosser reviewed it... ZOMG Spoiler! Click here to view! Eeh, fun times huh. |
Author: | zaphod79 [ Thu Nov 05, 2015 22:08 ] |
Post subject: | Re: Being Nice about Rev Stu thread |
Cavey wrote: Jogged my memory this; some geezer called 'Fruitworkz' did a fantastic emulated layout for this very game, and some old tosser reviewed it... I assume you know that Fruitworkz is JC ? |
Author: | Cavey [ Thu Nov 05, 2015 22:48 ] |
Post subject: | Re: Being Nice about Rev Stu thread |
Yep that was the joke. (And what a great layout that was, too) Ooh, FME on Beex.... Got ta be better than bitching about mind. |
Author: | Hearthly [ Mon Sep 05, 2016 19:31 ] |
Post subject: | Re: Being Nice about Rev Stu thread |
Cavey wrote: (3) Anyone who thinks 99.999% of the FME "scene" gave a toss whether or not MAME's precious rights had or had not been asserted is off their head; they just wanted to play fruities on their PCs (and by all accounts, IIRC MAME have laughably failed to cash even a fraction of the cheques their dev team appeared to be writing to said scene ooh, what, 5 years ago now? Mind you I'm well out of touch now) I'd be the first to admit it's taken a while, but a £70 jackpot DEAL OR NO DEAL fruit machine (Scorpion 5 BFM tech, completely unemulated by anything except MAME) is now playable on your PC. Door-open for now with the occasional alpha glitch, but other than that all there and complete. DX layout, full sound, proper LED displays etc. And yes Noel wittering on constantly. By all accounts it's been a substantial task to get this game working, but now that the back of the process has been broken, more should follow with greater ease. MAME surely does take its time, but it gets there in the end..... Attachment: donder.JPG
|
Author: | Mr Dave [ Mon Sep 05, 2016 19:34 ] |
Post subject: | Re: Being Nice about Rev Stu thread |
I've always wanted more Noel on my computer... |
Author: | Hearthly [ Wed Aug 23, 2017 16:00 ] |
Post subject: | Re: Being Nice about Rev Stu thread |
Naughty Stu? https://www.theguardian.com/uk-news/201 ... are_btn_fb |
Author: | myp [ Wed Aug 23, 2017 18:44 ] |
Post subject: | Re: Being Nice about Rev Stu thread |
Hearthly wrote: Glad you posted that. Wouldn't have seen it otherwise |
Author: | Satsuma [ Wed Aug 23, 2017 18:51 ] |
Post subject: | Re: Being Nice about Rev Stu thread |
I think the police should investigate some fucking crimes rather than aggressively pursue twitter spats. When my car was broken into they wouldn't even come out to fingerprint a can that the thief had clearly touched unless I had some fucking DNA. |
Author: | Mimi [ Wed Aug 23, 2017 21:44 ] |
Post subject: | Re: Being Nice about Rev Stu thread |
Satsuma wrote: I think the police should investigate some fucking crimes rather than aggressively pursue twitter spats. When my car was broken into they wouldn't even come out to fingerprint a can that the thief had clearly touched unless I had some fucking DNA. Without knowing anything about the Stu case, obviously, some Twitter 'spats' can be longstanding campaigns of harassment, vile racist and sexist, homophobic or other abuse, and whether it occurs on Twitter, over a garden fence or in an office can ruin lives. That's not saying that this case with Stuart Campbell is more or less worthy of investigation than your car, because it could be completely spurious allegations or something more sinister, and nobody knows at the moment. We had our car stolen whilst we were sleeping on Thursday night and we've had no contact from the police other than when we phoned, were given a crime ref and told to go on our jolly way. They did email a link to some victim advice, but the link was dead. Top notch. |
Author: | Bamba [ Wed Aug 23, 2017 21:52 ] |
Post subject: | Re: Being Nice about Rev Stu thread |
Satsuma wrote: I think the police should investigate some fucking crimes rather than aggressively pursue twitter spats. When my car was broken into they wouldn't even come out to fingerprint a can that the thief had clearly touched unless I had some fucking DNA. As much as sympathise with your break in, I think simplifying stuff to that degree is Daily Mail as all hell and utterly beneath you. |
Author: | Satsuma [ Wed Aug 23, 2017 22:28 ] |
Post subject: | Re: Being Nice about Rev Stu thread |
Bamba wrote: Satsuma wrote: I think the police should investigate some fucking crimes rather than aggressively pursue twitter spats. When my car was broken into they wouldn't even come out to fingerprint a can that the thief had clearly touched unless I had some fucking DNA. As much as sympathise with your break in, I think simplifying stuff to that degree is Daily Mail as all hell and utterly beneath you. I don't think so. Some crimes are just worse than others. The CPS are due to start treating twitter exchanges the same as face to face abuse which means more resources will be poured into 'digital crime'; by the same token, petty crimes, vehicle theft, etc are on the rise and there's less police to investigate. I'm sure some digital abuse can be very troubling but by the same token just clicking delete on your twitter app is not the same as getting your car nicked which you need to get too and from work so you can pay for your mortgage. |
Author: | myp [ Wed Aug 23, 2017 23:10 ] |
Post subject: | Re: Being Nice about Rev Stu thread |
Yes, you should delete Twitter if you're being abused. Come on Sat, you're better than this. |
Author: | Satsuma [ Wed Aug 23, 2017 23:18 ] |
Post subject: | Re: Being Nice about Rev Stu thread |
Yeah, or buy a new car, wallet, satnav or whatever. |
Author: | Bamba [ Wed Aug 23, 2017 23:21 ] |
Post subject: | Re: Being Nice about Rev Stu thread |
Satsuma wrote: Bamba wrote: Satsuma wrote: I think the police should investigate some fucking crimes rather than aggressively pursue twitter spats. When my car was broken into they wouldn't even come out to fingerprint a can that the thief had clearly touched unless I had some fucking DNA. As much as sympathise with your break in, I think simplifying stuff to that degree is Daily Mail as all hell and utterly beneath you. I don't think so. Some crimes are just worse than others. The CPS are due to start treating twitter exchanges the same as face to face abuse which means more resources will be poured into 'digital crime'; by the same token, petty crimes, vehicle theft, etc are on the rise and there's less police to investigate. I'm sure some digital abuse can be very troubling but by the same token just clicking delete on your twitter app is not the same as getting your car nicked which you need to get too and from work so you can pay for your mortgage. Some crimes could be possibly construed as worse than others but saying that no resources should ever be spent on the 'lesser' thing is nonsense. It's like saying that until the NHS has cured cancer they shouldn't splint broken arms. |
Author: | Curiosity [ Wed Aug 23, 2017 23:36 ] |
Post subject: | Re: Being Nice about Rev Stu thread |
Especially since it depends what you get from the internet. If it's your livelihood or your support network, or whatever, and it turns into people sending you death threats and whatnot, then it's not just as easy as clicking delete. Especially if you've had problems with stalker types or weirdos before. |
Author: | Satsuma [ Thu Aug 24, 2017 0:18 ] |
Post subject: | Re: Being Nice about Rev Stu thread |
Bamba wrote: Satsuma wrote: Bamba wrote: Satsuma wrote: I think the police should investigate some fucking crimes rather than aggressively pursue twitter spats. When my car was broken into they wouldn't even come out to fingerprint a can that the thief had clearly touched unless I had some fucking DNA. As much as sympathise with your break in, I think simplifying stuff to that degree is Daily Mail as all hell and utterly beneath you. I don't think so. Some crimes are just worse than others. The CPS are due to start treating twitter exchanges the same as face to face abuse which means more resources will be poured into 'digital crime'; by the same token, petty crimes, vehicle theft, etc are on the rise and there's less police to investigate. I'm sure some digital abuse can be very troubling but by the same token just clicking delete on your twitter app is not the same as getting your car nicked which you need to get too and from work so you can pay for your mortgage. Some crimes could be possibly construed as worse than others but saying that no resources should ever be spent on the 'lesser' thing is nonsense. It's like saying that until the NHS has cured cancer they shouldn't splint broken arms. You'll have to refer me to where I said no resources should ever be spent on twitter abuse. I've said that prosecuting twitter abuse the same as face to face abuse is nonsense. The odd comment that someone disagrees with can easily be dealt with by blocking someone. It's easy crime for police to pursue these crimes: get a couple of screen grabs, trace the IP address, etc etc, you're nicked sonny Jim. If greater resources are pumped into investigating these complaints we'll never get any resources reinvested in investigating low level crime. Burglary, vehicle theft and the like are routinely dealt with over the phone and the most the police will do is issue a crime reference number and circulate details. Low level crime is rising and it's the one crime that affects ordinary people the most. Ask anyone who has had their house broken into. I had a client who was knocked off his bicycle and the driver took off leaving him with major injuries. The police weren't interested in canvassing for CCTV footage from local shops. I had to do that on his behalf. He was issued with a crime reference number. Once I'd located the vehicle details it was an uphill battle to reinvigorate the police to investigate the accident. I don't blame the police; they don't have the resources, but the crime stats are worrying and to see valuable police time pumped into another twitter spat is a concerning trend. What we should be doing is empowering users and having Twitter and the like respond to complaints and reports about abusive behaviour blocking users, users IPs and whatever. The government should be putting pressure on these companies to make sure they police themselves without wasting police time. Twitter makes millions of pounds from UK users and businesses and it's astonishing that the government are satisfied to use valuable police time and resources to deal with these complaints. a better solution would be to compel twitter to police itself better with U.K. police being the last resort. |
Author: | Mr Dave [ Thu Aug 24, 2017 6:33 ] |
Post subject: | Re: Being Nice about Rev Stu thread |
Bear in mind it's not so simple. If he starts posting stuff in twitter, you can guarantee that his horse of Nationalist arse holes will go after you as well. |
Author: | Joans [ Thu Aug 24, 2017 7:05 ] |
Post subject: | Re: Being Nice about Rev Stu thread |
Mr Dave wrote: Bear in mind it's not so simple. If he starts posting stuff in twitter, you can guarantee that his horse of Nationalist arse holes will go after you as well. https://twitter.com/scottish_horse? |
Author: | Mimi [ Thu Aug 24, 2017 7:37 ] |
Post subject: | Re: Being Nice about Rev Stu thread |
Satsuma wrote: Ask anyone who has had their house broken into. *Waves* I had my house broken into and was robbed by two men when I was trapped at home, inside. And as mentioned a few posts ago, we had our car and my child's belongings stolen a week ago, from our driveway, whilst we slept. Both were frightening, horrible experiences. I was also bullied online on, of all things, Etsy. I have no idea what started it. I think it may have been jealousy after I was featured in a few magazines and started getting asked to write articles, but can't be entirely sure. Then I was featured on DeviantArt's feature section, and that just started some kind of hate campaign. The things that were said about me and ridiculous nasty things said of me by some stranger started to spread. I was part of a community on Etsy with chat rooms and forums, and slowly this woman's campaign against me gained traction, DeviantArt took down the feature on me due to being bombarded with messages from this woman and, by now, her miniature army hate. I went onto the chat incognito and they were all chatting about how best to take down my website: bombarding it with vile comments, buying small things on Etsy and leaving very negative comments... they did both and got my shop not only removed but me banned and my Paypal account stopped. I went to Etsy with all the evidence: threats of violence and rape (yes, a group of women, exclusively women, were discussing how to rape me with all manner of objects), and how these people, first met in Etsy, spread this all around the internet. I used to do quite well on Etsy, I was part of a large collaborative project that took place at Edinburgh museum, and I made a little livelihood from that. They took all that away from me. The living but also the thing that made me the person that I was. I was shaking constantly, for days, and it led me to a period of depression where I just couldn't see the point of ANYTHING any more. Etsy did apologise, and sent me a huge parcel of gifts, but when I got the nerve up to try again it was associated with the old account and I was banned. I contacted them, apologies again, then after another couple of days, closed again. After a third time I gave up. We don't know who has complained and over what words, but words can do a lot of damage whether they are typed in a newspaper, said to someone's face, or posted publicly online. ESPECIALLY if you have a large group of strong-minded followers. I think I can safely say that I sympathise with your car being broken into, with ours taken and my family now unable to get about, and after my own break in, but I also know how devastating a prolonged campaign of words can be, and it's entirely dependant on the individual cases as to which is 'worse'. |
Author: | DavPaz [ Thu Aug 24, 2017 9:19 ] |
Post subject: | Re: Being Nice about Rev Stu thread |
That's vile, Mimi. Cottage industry rivalries are horrifying sometimes. A friend of my mother-in-law makes a decent living from making greetings cards, but she's had to struggle all the way. It's a great way to ruin a hobby, so I hear! |
Author: | Zardoz [ Thu Aug 24, 2017 9:23 ] |
Post subject: | Re: Being Nice about Rev Stu thread |
Mr Dave wrote: his horse of Nationalist arse holes Don't saddle him with this. |
Author: | TheVision [ Thu Aug 24, 2017 9:39 ] |
Post subject: | Re: Being Nice about Rev Stu thread |
Zardoz wrote: Mr Dave wrote: his horse of Nationalist arse holes Don't saddle him with this. Neigh time for jokes here Zardoz. |
Author: | Mimi [ Thu Aug 24, 2017 9:54 ] |
Post subject: | Re: Being Nice about Rev Stu thread |
DavPaz wrote: That's vile, Mimi. Cottage industry rivalries are horrifying sometimes. A friend of my mother-in-law makes a decent living from making greetings cards, but she's had to struggle all the way. It's a great way to ruin a hobby, so I hear! Oh, it's a long time ago now, but it could have been in literally any other area of discussion that takes place on the internet on any platform where words can be exchanged and/or made public. I just think it's impossible to say that one type of crime is lesser than another when both can be so wildly varying in severity. Someone stealing your pen, your purse, your laptop, something from your car, your actual car, burgling your house whilst on holiday and burgling it whilst you are petrified inside all feel different in severity to me, but they may each feel more or less severe to others. Online disagreements, arguments, sexual and racial abuse, harassment, campaigns of harassment, inciting others to harass, threats of rape and personal injury/death similarly perhaps have varying degrees of severity. The thing is, nobody knows what's being investigated, hopefully just a disagreement which will quickly be cleared up, but that it is more or less serious or affects the alleged victim more or less than any of the types of theft is something that is difficult to surmise at present, I think. |
Author: | Mr Dave [ Thu Aug 24, 2017 10:59 ] |
Post subject: | Re: Being Nice about Rev Stu thread |
Joans wrote: Mr Dave wrote: Bear in mind it's not so simple. If he starts posting stuff in twitter, you can guarantee that his horse of Nationalist arse holes will go after you as well. https://twitter.com/scottish_horse? Horde |
Author: | Hearthly [ Tue Sep 04, 2018 11:41 ] |
Post subject: | Re: Being Nice about Rev Stu thread |
Stu news! http://www.heraldscotland.com/news/1668 ... tion-case/ Quote: KEZIA Dugdale’s defence of a £25,000 defamation claim is being paid for by the Labour Party in London, it is understood.
The former Scottish Labour leader is being sued by nationalist blogger Stuart Campbell after she accused him of making homophobic remarks, which he strongly denies. She will face a courtroom cross-examination next year after a sheriff gave the green light for a full hearing. |
Author: | Grim... [ Tue Sep 04, 2018 11:49 ] |
Post subject: | Re: Being Nice about Rev Stu thread |
Quote: Responding to Labour paying Ms Dugdale's court fees, Mr Campbell said: "After a full week of Scottish Labour bleating loudly about how Alex Salmond should have paid his own legal costs, the hypocrisy of this would be – well, it'd be about what I'd expect, to be honest." Zing! |
Author: | JohnCoffey [ Tue Sep 04, 2018 14:52 ] |
Post subject: | Re: Being Nice about Rev Stu thread |
She was on I'm A Celeb, IIRC. I thought she was quite pretty. I also see Stu is still getting other people to fund his obsessions, too. Although based in Bath since 1991, Campbell was the most prominent and active pro-independence blogger during the 2014 Scottish referendum campaign. He raised tens of thousands of pounds through crowdfunding campaigns to pay his salary and costs, and for other contributors to the Wings over Scotland blog. Some things never change..... |
Author: | Grim... [ Tue Sep 04, 2018 14:54 ] |
Post subject: | Re: Being Nice about Rev Stu thread |
I've read he's not actually a real reverend. |
Author: | JohnCoffey [ Tue Sep 04, 2018 14:54 ] |
Post subject: | Re: Being Nice about Rev Stu thread |
Grim... wrote: I've read he's not actually a real reverend. |
Author: | Doctor Glyndwr [ Mon Apr 01, 2019 15:08 ] |
Post subject: | Re: Being Nice about Rev Stu thread |
Remember when Campbell wrote that: Quote: Later, Lara finds herself standing on the roof of a flatbed truck which is thundering along a desert canyon in pursuit of her friend Anaya's jeep. Lara leaps off the cabin roof and, in a Matrix-esque bullet-time cut-scene, somersaults and spins through the air ahead of the lorry, shooting its driver through the windscreen and landing neatly in the passenger seat of the jeep. Never mind the fact that the instant her feet left the roof, what would actually happen would be that gravity and physics would catapult her "backwards" like a Wile E Coyote contraption gone wrong, at an effective reverse speed of 50 mph (depending on whatever speed the lorry was doing, given that unlike Lara it's still having forward-propulsive force applied to it) and smush her messily all over the canyon floor. Don't try this at home, kids. Then for years he would pop up on random gaming forums saying this was correct, despite basically everyone in the world telling him it was nonsense? As one forum put it (I can't find the canonical link for this now): Quote: So, this seems like a pretty petty issue to take Stuart to task for, just fucking up some physics. But it's triviality is exactly the point, because Stu has never admitted he was wrong about it. At the time, Stu had his own forum which was full of sycophants (he would ban anyone who criticised him - the whole thing is now sadly deleted after Stu managed to alienate even his biggest fans), and even they were saying "great review Stu, but I think you're a bit wrong about the truck physics". Stu wouldn't accept it and started throwing around bans. He even had professional physicists come on to tell him he was wrong (extremely politely and obsequiously) and he wouldn't have it. Years passed and if the matter came up he insisted he was still right. In fact, here's a comment thread from an article written in 2011 that offhandedly mentions Stu's review where the debate comes up again, and Stu actually wades in to insist that even after all these years he's still right, and it's the world that's wrong. I have no doubt that if he was asked about it today he'd still insist he was right. The fact that this is so trivial is important. Here's an issue where Stu has been undeniably, empirically, mathematically proven wrong, and the stakes couldn't be lower, and yet he is absolutely incapable of admitting fault. The Hillsborough thing is just another example of this - he said a stupid thing borne of ignorance, which while it was terrible, could be quite forgivable for someone who had just followed the press and didn't know anything about the science of crowds to say. But it's an opinion Stuart publicly held, so he physically cannot accept it was wrong. Well: https://twitter.com/Rainmaker1973/statu ... 0630444032
|
Author: | BikNorton [ Mon Apr 01, 2019 18:10 ] |
Post subject: | Re: Being Nice about Rev Stu thread |
The boards reduce drag for 90% of the motion. The guys on the trampoline are adding forward bias. I mean, stu is wrong, but Newton still gets a say. Now, if they do it again in a vacuum... |
Author: | Grim... [ Mon Apr 01, 2019 18:23 ] |
Post subject: | Re: Being Nice about Rev Stu thread |
Doctor Glyndwr wrote: Stu wouldn't accept it and started throwing around bans. He even had professional physicists come on to tell him he was wrong (extremely politely and obsequiously) and he wouldn't have it. Yeah, none of that happened. Except for the first four words, anyway. [edit] the quote makes it look like Doc said the above, whereas he's actually quoting someone else. |
Author: | Cras [ Mon Apr 01, 2019 18:32 ] |
Post subject: | Re: Being Nice about Rev Stu thread |
Indeed the argument was on rllmuk I believe, where he couldn't ban anyone. |
Author: | myp [ Mon Apr 01, 2019 18:41 ] |
Post subject: | Re: Being Nice about Rev Stu thread |
Were we his biggest fans? That’s a sad indictment of his career if true. |
Author: | Cras [ Mon Apr 01, 2019 19:03 ] |
Post subject: | Re: Being Nice about Rev Stu thread |
Given that we left rather than give him any money, and he now has crowdfunded his political commentary career, I suspect we were not. |
Author: | Grim... [ Tue Apr 02, 2019 12:22 ] |
Post subject: | Re: Being Nice about Rev Stu thread |
Well, we might have been at the time. |
Author: | romanista [ Tue Apr 02, 2019 12:39 ] |
Post subject: | Re: Being Nice about Rev Stu thread |
Cras wrote: Given that we left rather than give him any money, and he now has crowdfunded his political commentary career, I suspect we were not. Recently I thought: he might have been a bit ahead of his time then... seeing the rise of Patreon recently.... that would have been a model most onus wouldn't have objected too that much (I pay for my favorite podcast €1 per episode, wouldn't have mind a quid per extensive game essay), it was just the way it was presented at time it felt weird and wrong... |
Author: | myp [ Tue Apr 02, 2019 12:46 ] |
Post subject: | Re: Being Nice about Rev Stu thread |
It was possibly more of a ‘last straw’ moment. |
Author: | Cras [ Tue Apr 02, 2019 12:49 ] |
Post subject: | Re: Being Nice about Rev Stu thread |
I was there to talk to you clowns though, not because of Stu's content. |
Author: | MrChris [ Tue Apr 02, 2019 14:11 ] |
Post subject: | Re: Being Nice about Rev Stu thread |
MrChris wrote: I genuinely have no idea how I ended up there. I hadn't heard of Mr Campbell, as I didn't have an Amiga. Nor, indeed, did I buy games mags at all. Still, I was incredibly cuffed at my discovery of such a lovely, well run forum, especially as the only other forum I had frequented before WoS was the one at http://www.rollonfriday.co.uk which is full of cuntish, opinionated right wing lawyers*. *What do you mean "is there any other sort"? I still can't work out how I ended up on WoS... And I remained there despite Stu, not because of him. He was, is, and always will be, a complete cockwomble. |
Author: | Zardoz [ Tue Apr 02, 2019 14:46 ] |
Post subject: | Re: Being Nice about Rev Stu thread |
Cras wrote: I was there to talk to you clowns though, not because of Stu's content. But I did enjoy a lot of his reviews. |
Author: | Zardoz [ Tue Apr 02, 2019 14:46 ] |
Post subject: | Re: Being Nice about Rev Stu thread |
MrChris wrote: I still can't work out how I ended up on WoS... |
Author: | myp [ Tue Apr 02, 2019 14:53 ] |
Post subject: | Re: Being Nice about Rev Stu thread |
I found AP2 and went from there. |
Page 11 of 14 | All times are UTC [ DST ] |
Powered by phpBB © 2000, 2002, 2005, 2007 phpBB Group http://www.phpbb.com/ |