nVnews shenanigans.

[Sazar]

Dear Sazar and Co!

Actually it's funny to see these 'soldiers' of these so-called 'news sites' or whatever is the usual word for these amateur sites...
The main problem is there's nobody with real journalistic experience or background. It's pretty obvious for me.
I published tons of reports and articles over the 90s in REAL newspapers (weekly, monthly - I even got my own two-page monthly section finally) and tv news (mostly eco-news) and I think VERY FEW websites gets even close to the thing we called professional standards.

Because, dear web-new-whatever editors, this is a PROFESSION.
Being like this it supposed to be LEARNED, not experienced, my mates - there's NO WAY to learn journalism on your own.

Self-teaching isn't working in this field, my dear web-posters, although I have to admit there are a few sites which still counted as 'clear' on my list - but really few...

NVN isn't one of them - just check this case.

This particular case, as Hanners pointed out its essence, is about the 'profession' again: somebody posted something on his news site, in a very confusing way. When it - the way he did it - has been questioned, 'soldiers' claimed it wasn't intentional.
I actually believe this - because this is the 100% clear evidence they weren't even aware of whole possibility. That's the clear sign of amateur approach. It's not an actual wrongdoin' or something - it's just a very typical, common manner of these "news" sites nowadays.

PS: No offense here - just hard to see when somebody talking about a profession which is obviously absolutely unknown for him (if not, that's even worst)...

t2k... since when is making an observation on a website about an upgrade reason to raise questions about the journalistic integrity of the site owner?

while I appreciate your journalistic credentials I fail to see what possible basis they have in this 'discussion'

integrity btw is not a learned art... it is something one has or does not have unless you have been taught otherwise... mike himself already has a profession... most people on sites have a profession and work @ that profession and indulge in broadening their horizons wrt hobbies and the like by joining and participating in discussions on websites such as this...

keep in mind that the issue here is a few peoples interpretation of a single tidbit on the front-page... when read in context it seems odd that a problem exists...

your introduction of journalistic standards is a little beffudling given that it is well known that most of the sites we frequent start off as hobbies or whatever else and grow from there... not many tech sites start of with the thought of upholding professional journalistic standards...

btw... I don't much fancy being called a soldier nor appreciate being looked upon in a condascending manner while a free pass is given to the person who has shown a rather disturbing tendency to start threads like this... I cannot fathom why this is unless your standards are extremely biased to one side of the equation over the other...

if this is the case it brings up the question... why should I even bother given credence to your professional journalistic standards when your bias is so blatantly clear on this issue?

if this is not the case... well read... I will refrain from calling you a soldier or any other such thing and wish you well in your professional endeavors...

 

[T2k]

Arrogant? Sure, but you've gotta be to fit in here don't you? You are obviously so very professional

Yes, I am.

Moreover I'm proud of it.

and whatever...

I don't know what's that...

did you really have to re-post your own post from just a few posts back?

Yes, it was intentional.
If you don't understand why, read again, over and over.
I believe you'll get it finally...

 

[Sazar]

You're a real piece of work Digi...we answered your questions. You even stated yourself that "Thanks Gafami, that does clear it up nicely. Just for clarification, I was ASKING about that, I was not accusing." If you had more questions after the thread was closed then start another thread with those questions...geez. We closed it because some people were starting to take aim at EB and B3D ya dang goofball! We did that in YOUR best interest...good freaking grief man. I really don't know why I bother humoring you sometimes. I also find it odd that the mods here are letting this garbage heap of a thread continue. The last time I was here for any lengthy period of time DB came in and requested that we stop the focus on nV News...that was way, way tamer than this laughable crap.

The question remains unanswered, what is the big deal about letting Mike answer the question and be done with it.

I thanked Gafami for his information, but as I outlined above that doesn't necessarily negate Snipe's statement.

The question remains unanswered, your avoidance of the question is just making it look worse.

both your questions were answered...

read back a few posts ago where I posted joerg's statement wrt the server...

as for what mike has to say

Accept my apologies if I mislead anyone, but that was not my intention. My goal was to show how two popular games, that are widely used as benchmarks, react differently depending on the CPU being used. Unreal Tournament 2003 thrives with the Athlon 64 while Halo does not.

I could have left out mentioning the graphics cards since switching them around would make little difference in performance. At least that is what I have been led to believe in the reviews I have read.

Contrary to popular belief, I was not intentionally trying to degrade the Radeon 9800 Pro. I have used it often and I chose to install it in the system I had been using before giving the system to my son.

further

I would say I most likely thanked Inno3D, Galaxy, eVGA and our readers. I might of thanked NVIDIA I just don't remember. I think if I had posted "Thanks for the server NVIDIA" on the front page many would have noticed. I rent my server from Server Matrix moving from Rackshack. The monthy bill is charged on my credit card. I pay Joerg and Muya by paypal. NVIDIA doesn't pay me or any member of my staff. The site has never operated at a profit in the last 5 years. I invested $3200.00 of my own money in the site last year alone. I give my staff and moderator's money and other computer hardware to help with reviewing and as appreciation for helping out. That's it plain and simple. If Sniping Waste is saying I posted thank-you NVIDIA for the server on the front page and removed the post an hour later he/she is wrong. If he/she is saying NVIDIA is giving me money he's wrong again.

obviously you appear to be more adept @ asking questions HERE than actually reading the threads @ nvn where they have been responded to...

 

[Sazar]

*** disclaimer ***

I would like to apologise to all b3d members and dave if anything I have said has appeared to reflect badly on either b3d or members @ b3d... it was not my intention to do so.. nor did I wish to see this 'situation' grow to be as protracted as it obviously has become...

accept my apologies... I will endeavor to be more level-headed in my postings and responses wrt sensitive matters...

thanks...

Sazar...

 

[John Reynolds]

of course, being a fansite, the only way we could possible broaden our horizons would be to go out and buy our own nVidia graphics cards since it's not like nVidia is going to want to send us one (apparently. I've been trying for the last ~8 months). I assume the opposite is true for nvnews.

edit: What would be interesting to see is the reaction we would get if we happened to start up a nV fansite, a sort of sister site to Rage3D. I'm sure that would give aneurisms to some of you trying to classify us then.

My post wasn't meant in any way as a slam on Rage3D. I was merely trying to make a point that if a fansite of one IHV can be criticized for not broadening their coverage then in fairness all fansites should be duly criticized.

 

[T2k]

Dear Sazar and Co!

Actually it's funny to see these 'soldiers' of these so-called 'news sites' or whatever is the usual word for these amateur sites...
The main problem is there's nobody with real journalistic experience or background. It's pretty obvious for me.
I published tons of reports and articles over the 90s in REAL newspapers (weekly, monthly - I even got my own two-page monthly section finally) and tv news (mostly eco-news) and I think VERY FEW websites gets even close to the thing we called professional standards.

Because, dear web-new-whatever editors, this is a PROFESSION.
Being like this it supposed to be LEARNED, not experienced, my mates - there's NO WAY to learn journalism on your own.

Self-teaching isn't working in this field, my dear web-posters, although I have to admit there are a few sites which still counted as 'clear' on my list - but really few...

NVN isn't one of them - just check this case.

This particular case, as Hanners pointed out its essence, is about the 'profession' again: somebody posted something on his news site, in a very confusing way. When it - the way he did it - has been questioned, 'soldiers' claimed it wasn't intentional.
I actually believe this - because this is the 100% clear evidence they weren't even aware of whole possibility. That's the clear sign of amateur approach. It's not an actual wrongdoin' or something - it's just a very typical, common manner of these "news" sites nowadays.

PS: No offense here - just hard to see when somebody talking about a profession which is obviously absolutely unknown for him (if not, that's even worst)...

t2k... since when is making an observation on a website about an upgrade reason to raise questions about the journalistic integrity of the site owner?

I haven't raised that question, Sazar. Be accurate - otherwise I have to call your whole understanding in question.

while I appreciate your journalistic credentials I fail to see what possible basis they have in this 'discussion'

Read my post again and try to interpret first.

integrity btw is not a learned art...

Again: I didn't even use the word 'integrity', I never indicted anything like that.

I couldn't because I am not following your site or Mike or whoever wrote this piece.

Again: be accurate.

it is something one has or does not have unless you have been taught otherwise...

Again: it wasn't the question.

mike himself already has a profession... most people on sites have a profession and work @ that profession and indulge in broadening their horizons wrt hobbies and the like by joining and participating in discussions on websites such as this...

It has nothing to do with my notes.

keep in mind that the issue here is a few peoples interpretation of a single tidbit on the front-page... when read in context it seems odd that a problem exists...

Keep in mind, my obviously misleaded friend: the problem is that you don't even SEE what's the problem.

your introduction of journalistic standards is a little beffudling given that it is well known that most of the sites we frequent start off as hobbies or whatever else and grow from there...

And yet guys like you still has this kinda' big face however can't even understand my concerns regarding such a simple case like this.

not many tech sites start of with the thought of upholding professional journalistic standards...

It doesn't mean nobody has to choose the professional approach.

btw... I don't much fancy being called a soldier nor appreciate being looked upon in a condascending manner while a free pass is given to the person who has shown a rather disturbing tendency to start threads like this...

I wasn't talking about dw or anybody else - I was talking about a confusing post onthe front of a 'news' site and I called this a typical amateur behavior, together your reactions like this.
That's it - try to keep your focus on the subject.

I cannot fathom why this is unless your standards are extremely biased to one side of the equation over the other...

Wrong again - did you actually understand what I'm writing?

if this is the case it brings up the question... why should I even bother given credence to your professional journalistic standards when your bias is so blatantly clear on this issue?

if this is not the case... well read... I will refrain from calling you a soldier or any other such thing and wish you well in your professional endeavors...

Look, my friend: you are obviously huffy but I don't really understand, why. You don't even understand my point, namely he/you wasn't/weren't even aware of making confusion, due to your 'news' site title. He/you couldn't be because of his/your missing, hmm, lets just say, missing years in this profession.
Instead of admitting it - it was an amateur act - you just made out something on your own and shooting on that.. but I never raised questions regarding of his integrity.
It wasn't my point, my friend.

Edit: typos

 

[ragejg]

...

http://www.nvnews.net/vbulletin/showthread.php?p=295539#post295539

answered... by Mike...

 

[ragejg]

...

...and digi, the thread closing (yours) was nothing more than a movement of protocol. Your questions appeared to be answered, and due to this issue being messy and full of pot-shots, we didn't wanna let the discussion degenerate any further. Simple as that. No lame ass copout. That's not my bag.

 

[Sazar]

[

snipped due to length

t2k... from reading your post about journalistic standards it would seem very clear to me what you meant... unless you feel I am implying something you never meant or considered implying in which case this whole thread itself is moot...

I read your post many times before I answered m8... you were a little condascending in your dismissal... and I failed to see what basis your post has with mike's post hence what I posted...

the question of integrity is the central issue in this thread... it is the 2nd time that the same person has raised a similar question about the integrity of the site... ergo my inclusion of the term... you should understand that point if you wish for me to understand your post to be what you intended it to be...

the problem you are putting forth wrt amateurs and journalistic standards... while valid... would apply to 99% of all websites out there...

back to the post on the front page... if it is read in context as it is meant to be is innocent enough...

I understand your point... I understand what you are insinuating... I took issue with sections of your post... perhaps it is due to your command of the english language that some points come across unclearly but the gist of your message was understood... as I said in my original post I could have mis-interpreted sections...

 

[MaxPower_NVN]

I understand your point... I understand what you are insinuating... I took issue with sections of your post... perhaps it is due to your command of the english language that some points come across unclearly but the gist of your message was understood... as I said in my original post I could have mis-interpreted sections...

How could you possibly misinterpret him Sazar? With the relentless bolding he should make perfect sense. Kind of ironic in that "professional" writing styles very rarely employ bolding to make their points. Perhaps he'll start in with the clever use of uppercase if we're lucky.

 

[T2k]

[

snipped due to length

t2k... from reading your post about journalistic standards it would seem very clear to me what you meant... unless you feel I am implying something you never meant or considered implying in which case this whole thread itself is moot...

I read your post many times before I answered m8... you were a little condascending in your dismissal... and I failed to see what basis your post has with mike's post hence what I posted...

the question of integrity is the central issue in this thread... it is the 2nd time that the same person has raised a similar question about the integrity of the site... ergo my inclusion of the term... you should understand that point if you wish for me to understand your post to be what you intended it to be...

the problem you are putting forth wrt amateurs and journalistic standards... while valid... would apply to 99% of all websites out there...

back to the post on the front page... if it is read in context as it is meant to be is innocent enough...

I understand your point... I understand what you are insinuating... I took issue with sections of your post... perhaps it is due to your command of the english language that some points come across unclearly but the gist of your message was understood... as I said in my original post I could have mis-interpreted sections...

Although it's obviously my second language, I think I made my point clear regarding amateur approach.

I fyou still don't understand, that's not my problem - that's yours, my friend.

FYI: illusions are dangerous after a certain point.

 

[T2k]

I understand your point... I understand what you are insinuating... I took issue with sections of your post... perhaps it is due to your command of the english language that some points come across unclearly but the gist of your message was understood... as I said in my original post I could have mis-interpreted sections...

How could you possibly misinterpret him Sazar? With the relentless bolding he should make perfect sense. Kind of ironic in that "professional" writing styles very rarely employ bolding to make their points. Perhaps he'll start in with the clever use of uppercase if we're lucky.

FYI pretty silly 'maxpova' : I'm not publishing here, if you haven't noticed.

I just tried to be sure even kids like you can understand the matter.

(OFF Wait... am I replying to somebody who calls himself some 'maxpova' or whatever? I have to go to sleep. Immediately...)

PS: /me console offline

 

[MaxPower_NVN]

FYI pretty silly 'maxpova' : I'm not publishing here, if you haven't noticed.

I just tried to be sure even kids like you can understand the matter.

(OFF Wait... am I replying to somebody who calls himself some 'maxpova' or whatever? I have to go to sleep. Immediately...)

MaxPower is in reference to an episode from "The Simpsons" (one of the best works of satire of our generation..but I doubt that you watch cartoons, prolly beneath ya). I know you're not publishing (the way you act though you could've fooled me). I'm no kid and bolding doesn't help anyone to better understand this. "or whatever" ahahahaah to quote a wise, wise professional "what is that?". IMO you take yourself just a tad bit too seriously. My experience has taught me that those that take themselves too seriously are usually not taken seriously at all by others. I've gotta go too, I'm laughing so hard that I ca n bar e ly tipe!

 

[Sazar]

t2k.. this is not about you... this is not about me... this is not about max...

I get your point... albeit I have a different view on this matter...

also fyi... your hammering continuosly of this whole amateur angle does not lend extra credence to what you wish to propagate...

I am sorry I don't agree with what you say in its entirety though I have made it clear that I understand the gist of your comments...

 

[Althornin]

MaxPower is in reference to an episode from "The Simpsons" (one of the best works of satire of our generation..but I doubt that you watch cartoons, prolly beneath ya). I know you're not publishing (the way you act though you could've fooled me). I'm no kid and bolding doesn't help anyone to better understand this. "or whatever" ahahahaah to quote a wise, wise professional "what is that?". IMO you take yourself just a tad bit too seriously. My experience has taught me that those that take themselves too seriously are usually not taken seriously at all by others. I've gotta go too, I'm laughing so hard that I ca n bar e ly tipe!

ah, a sure sign of a good point - resorting to mocking ones opponent and claiming laughter!
Nice ad hom attack - try again, biatch.

 

[MaxPower_NVN]

MaxPower is in reference to an episode from "The Simpsons" (one of the best works of satire of our generation..but I doubt that you watch cartoons, prolly beneath ya). I know you're not publishing (the way you act though you could've fooled me). I'm no kid and bolding doesn't help anyone to better understand this. "or whatever" ahahahaah to quote a wise, wise professional "what is that?". IMO you take yourself just a tad bit too seriously. My experience has taught me that those that take themselves too seriously are usually not taken seriously at all by others. I've gotta go too, I'm laughing so hard that I ca n bar e ly tipe!

ah, a sure sign of a good point - resorting to mocking ones opponent and claiming laughter!
Nice ad hom attack - try again, biatch.

Wow, name calling now that is a true example of an ad hominem (I think that's what you meant) attack. Look up that little Latin term and you'll see that my argument did, in fact, include logic and reason. So, you're the better example of it than I am.

edit: forgot to capitalize Latin

 

[ragejg]

...

max, saz, etc....: aren't all of us here? Couldn't we like, form Voltron or something?

... This thread does need to die tho... doesn't it?

 

[MaxPower_NVN]

Re: ...

max, saz, etc....: aren't all of us here? Couldn't we like, form Voltron or something?

... This thread does need to die tho... doesn't it?

LOL, that'd be cool. Yeah, this thread isn't up to B3D's standards methinks and I'm admittedly not helping matters now. Sometimes people set themselves up like a big fat softball on a tee though and it's...just...so...hard...to....resist.

 

[ChrisRay]

Literally I would leave it alone. continous posting here just encourages our drama queen

move on more interesting threads out there.

 

[MaxPower_NVN]

Literally I would leave it alone. continous posting here just encourages our drama queen

move on more interesting threads out there.

Good point.