Thanks a lot people

Russ, why do you end up sniping so much?
Would it be possible to ask YOU to only use logic and rational thought, rather than insulting and the like?
I feel this could be more productive if you'd just post your point (which you did) and then stop insulting people. Because its kinda ironic.

 

It's simply a case of Kyle not being able to deal with the turth that stares at him everyday. He can ban people and delete threads all day long but that still doesn't wipe away what is really happening here. I repspect the owners of the site wanting to keep things clam as their jobs are to be professional but eveyone knows why Kyle will not post here and answer direct questions. He is wrong, he and everyone knows it but I guess if he never admit it somehow he is justified.

 

On Reverend's question about flaming

In Kyle's first two sections, I see a criticism using the tactics of catch phrase (B3DPolice) and assumption of the "moral high ground" (by implying that Rev's only point was to seek credit for discovery, and implying that he is being graceful and humble to grant it). These are "attacks", depending on emotional persuasion (seems to depend on the reader being on his side initially) and without providing correlation to the post(s) to which he is replying.

Now, it could be an emotionally charged opening to commentary that works to correlate it to some facts afterwards, but the rest of the post is made up completely of further attacks on a tangent completely unrelated to anything but the emotional aspect of the initial section. I wouldn't term it a "compliment", except "back handed", because it comes after what seems to be a clear attack and seems dedicated to continuing in the same vein. The purpose of the compliment seems solely related to the idea of excusing the launch of continued attacks by providing a platform and change of topic at the same time (i.e., to maintain a moral high ground to look down from).

I'd have to go with "flame".

I see no politeness (B3DPolice is rude to the site and your choice to be a member, "wasted talent" is rude to all work associated with B3D and VE, and your own opinion of it if you disagree), so "polite attack" seems right out.

I assume you meant "compliment + veiled attack", which I'd say it is. That just seems to me to be a "sophisticated" flame. Your points went completely unaddressed, and every positive attribute mention is made only to be associated with his "disappointment" in you.

I think "flaming" is determined by content and context, not by the person's reaction to receiving it.

 

Really? Where'd I insult anybody?

Walt? Oh, I'm sorry if I called it like it was: demonizing me by questioning my motives, rather than addressing the points I bring up.

You're right, I could have been a bit more polite about it. And that only proves my initial point.

 

Rev, I'm only commenting on this because you brought it up above, and you asked for opinions on what constitutes a flame. (I'll try to brief, honestly...).

I agree with you that what Kyle said here is not a flame. However, I think it's a personal insult. I absolutely see nothing complimentary about it at all, veiled or otherwise. Here's how it looked to me:

First, as I recall he didn't actually answer the question you put forth when he responded as he did. Instead, in the first paragraph he throws off on what he calls the "B3d Police" and says he never cared about "the issue" in the first place. Apparently, this is his justification for not answering your question.

Secondly, completely out of context, he basically tells you that you are all washed up, have no "influence" [a mirror into his own thinking about himself and what sort of influence he believes he has], have done nothing to help "shape" the industry [again, a veiled reference into his opinions about what he is "shaping"], and last he accuses you of a "greatness" which you have "thrown away" by virtue of the web sites with which you work, specifically something called the "B3d Police"--an organization of which I have never heard (but have no trouble figuring out.) Basically, he's said that if you worked for [H] you'd be on top of the world instead of currently residing nowhere in it, as he characterizes your position, as far as he's concerned. (*chuckle*--It's such silliness, really.)

I don't think you should be "surprised" that you got an email as you did from a sympathetic ATi engineer after reading those comments. I felt much the same way after reading them as he did. I think many other people who saw it did, too. If I was going to say something like that to someone I knew, I would never say it in a public forum. First of all, your comments in the thread did not remotely call for that kind of response. What is apparent to me is that this was Kyle's way of discrediting you, and B3d, in front of [H] forum members in the hopes they would ignore whatever it was you might have to say, either in the [H] forums, or after being banned there, in the B3d forums later on. I imagine this kind of conduct might be what Kyle means by "shaping" and "having influence" in the industry.

Considering that you know the guy personally, I can understand why it might not bother you much at all and why you might find it sort of funny...if not hilarious... Just more infantile blabber of the type you have no doubt become accustomed to in that venue. I can definitely understand how you might see it that way....But to those of us who don't know the guy, it's hard to see anything there but a completely rancid insult that was wholly uncalled for. So try not to be surprised by how people who don't know either of you personally see such comments. Seriously, his comments had no place on a public forum. As far as I'm concerned he broke his own forum rules when he made those comments about you and the B3d website in general. And banning you guys? That cannot be overlooked, at least on my part. Kyle could change my mind and I'm sure a lot of others with an honest, well-written apology, which I've always been receptive to and had hoped I might see by now.

Oh, yea...I don't see that you and Doom breaking chairs over each other's heads in a B3d thread is even close to the same thing.... And sincerely--pardon me if this is not the kind of response you were asking for. But you did ask for one...

My own position on Kyle and [H] is that I'm sick of talking about it. Everything that could and should be said has been said. When and if Kyle at [H] has his objectivity about nVidia restored and he can shine the same investigative light on nVidia that he has shined on ATi in the past, I think all of these things will vanish into the ethereality as quickly as they appeared.

 

Russ, Peace, bro.... I don't think you are in need of an exorcism *chuckle* and I honestly can't recall ever suggesting anything like that.

I just wish you guys would quit with the fiction that KB has been "chased off"--because it isn't so. JR just posted to the effect that he was free to post anytime he'd like, so that should settle that, right?

The fact is it's [H] which has done the "chasing off", not B3d.

 

And this is directly on topic refuting that list of items I presented as "the treatment"? Walt, c'mon. You're obviously trying to undermine my points by insinuating I've got some sort of ulteriour motive for attacking this board's members and not Kyle, rather than trying to state that such activity does not happen here.

What Kyle does on his board is what he does on his board and doesn't reflect here. I don't go there, so I have no basis to comment from. Here, I notice a pack of sharks mentality, so I comment. It has nothing to do with taking sides, and everything to do with me speaking from my personal experience.

Nobody should receive "the treatment" here. This board is better than that. Our behavior should clue in visitors on how to act, rather than encourage them to be jerks--regardless of how they behave outside the realms of this board.

 

Hmmm, I didn't realize you felt that way!!

 

Hey I never treated him as an asshole, but I can find many were the reverse is very true.
Maybe not in so many words, but certainly implied, in many ways. When one asks a serious questions in a thread that he is participating in, and a question or argument is directly at him and he fails to answer or deletes the post, what do you think he’s saying when he do’s that? Nothing nice is all I can say!

I don’t think anyone here or at any other forum deserves special treatment for any reason what so ever, irregardless of who they are or what they own. If he has something valid to say and can backup his opinion or point of view with facts and can argue the merits of his or her point of view, then fine, let it happen. But if anyone takes a position and can’t validate it, that person can expect to get an argument and sometimes a flame when they continue to hold a position that can’t be justified in any way, it’s as simple and as clear as that.

 

Rev:

I've been pretty quiet on this topic as of late. It's a fowl one, and I'd rather not get too drawn in. Still, I'd like to comment on a couple of things.

The post that Kyle made in retaliation to yours on the HardOCP forums was offensive. Quite honestly, I couldn't believe that he'd say such a thing in private, let alone in public to you. I personally found it to be one of the most offensive things I've read on the net in quite a long time. In the tradition of what you would like to discuss, of an attack, compliment, or flame, lets examine exactly what he is infact saying in his response to you.

The introduction to his message sets up the tone for the response. He sets the reader immediately on the topic of credit, and of your absense from posting with the "great unwashed masses". This has absolutely nothing to do with your questions for him, and changes the readers thoughts on the subject at hand to your credibility. The implication is that he's been posting there all along as part of the so called "unwashed masses" while you are only doing so to demand credit for something which Kyle has claimed ownership of. (that is, first knowledge of issues with UT2k3). His choice of words sets you up as an elitest, willing to claim ownership of other people's work to fulfill your own agenda.

After the initial setup, he states that you can have all of the credit. This is an interesting situation for Kyle. Does he want to be associated with knowledge about the trilinear problem with UT2k3 given the articles on his website? Given that he doesn't seem to want any of the credit, I'd say no. Despite this, he felt it necessary to tell everyone that he did infact discover it long before B3D, even though he doesn't want any of the credit for it here. Again here he implies that this is what Reverened is really after, getting 100% of the credit for finding the problem. Notice also that he claims he "will state" that B3D is fully responsible for getting the issue fixed, but does not actually make that statement. To actually make the statement "Beyond3D is infact 100% responsible for ucovering the issue" would cement it in readers minds. By saying he "will state" that you are responsible implies that he's willing to make the statement, but that it's *not* how things actually *are*.

Now things start getting interesting.

What a loaded statement. Wasted talent thrown away, and for what? Now that Kyle has setup the reader to think of yourself and B3D as greedy individuals after the credit for other people's work (except for the fact the B3D did all of their own research and Kyle only has his word to back him up), he assumes authority over you. Immediately he starts talking about your wasted talent, as if his position at HardOCP makes him qualified to pass judgements on your accomplishments and position in the industry. In this short statement he both condemns you as "wasted talent", and props himself up as an authority qualified to make that kind of a judgement.

And finally, to end it, a reminder. Reverend is tainted blood, wasted talent. Somone to be pitied for having fallen to such a level as to post for the "B3DPolice". So basically according to Kyle Reverend is an example of wasted greatness, a lost talent who has fallen from grace. He is also a stuck up individual only willing to speak with the so called "mighty unwashed" so that he can claim credit for something Kyle discovered long before B3D ever did. Kyle is an individual who cares nothing for credit, and is enough of an expert (and Success!) in the industry that he has the authority to claim that Reverend is a talent wasted, that he could have helped shape the industry, but didn't by working for such places as B3D and VE.

Quite honestly Reverend, what Kyle has done is not flame you, but use you as a tool to further his perception of authority in the industry. Though this may not be immediately offensive as the more crass posts on the internet, it's by far more evil in my opinion.

Thanks,
Nite_Hawk

 

Russ, just as I said when I told you I wasn't demonizing you, I have never insinuated that you have "alterior motives" for your viewpoint. That's entirely your construction on my remarks. What I've repeatedly said ever since you raised this non-issue a couple of weeks back in another thread to which I also responded, is that your viewpoint is very one-sided and seems predicated on the notion that remarks made in these forums have no foundation or catalysts elsewhere.

How can you even understand the complaints people have from statements [H]'s made if it's true that you "...don't go there, so I have no basis to comment from." That is exactly the only point I've ever made with respect to your position. By your own words, you are seeing only *half* the discussion, and it's *no wonder* it looks tainted to you.

OK, so even if you "don't go there," what do you think of all the remarks quoted verbatim from the [H] forums in that huge thread about the [H] Trilinear Filtering article? I cannot speak for you, but as I said in that thread I could not imagine such comments being made officially by a webmaster in the forum of a site like [H]. I was was frankly shocked and appalled at many of those quotes--if I hadn't seen them I wouldn't have believed them. I was appalled by the fact that Dave B. bravely ventured over there with some information to contribute to the debate and he gets banned from the site, accused of an "agenda" and referred to as a "policeman" (which I had to admit was so bizarre it was quite funny...)That's the kind of thing that upsets people, though. I see nothing unusual or odd about negative reactions to things like that. And when people experience negative reactions they often express themselves.

Last, why would you think that statements about various aspects of current 3D technology made on a web site other than B3d would not generally be discussed in B3d forums--especially since B3d is a 3d-centered web site? In fact, B3d was near the center of the 3dMk03 expose' and its findings placed it nearly diametrically opposed to the spin [H] tried to engineer, by insinuating that it was all a petty scheme cooked up by ExtremeTech because ET was apparently "jealous" that if got "passed over" for the "D3 Preview"--a game which apparently won't ship until 2004? It's fine with me if you don't see that kind of screwiness in a negative light--I have no problem with whatever opinion you have. But please, lambasting B3d forum members for not always reacting in a manner that suits you, when they react to the equivalent of having an intellectual pie thrown in their faces, strikes me as completely unrealistic.

What I'm saying is that any discussion of these matters which ignores their provocation is unproductive. The buck stops with [H], is what I'm saying. And, contrary to the insinuation otherwise, the *facts* are that nobody has banned Kyle from posting here--except Kyle. All subjective declarations as to why Kyle won't post do not change the fact that he has been invited to post on several occasions by both the staff and the readership here and has elected not to do so by his own volition. Only thing stopping Kyle from posting here is Kyle, right? Contrast that with Kyle announcing in his forums that Dave B. has an "agenda" which Kyle does not identify, and that Dave B. is not a part of the [H] "community," and therefore can have nothing worthwhile to contribute, hence Dave B. is banned. (Wouldn't it have been nice if Kyle would have let his "community" decide whether Dave's info had merit?)

Anyway, it's a moot point as Kyle is free to post here whenever he likes, subjective opinions of why he doesn't notwithstanding. Russ, now that I have hopefully succeeded in explaining myself we can just agree to disagree like gentlemen....

 

Yes, I know he's a pain on his board, pigheaded, etc.
Yes, its irritating.

NO, it does not give you carte blanche to be jerks back. Two wrongs does not make a right.

As I said, and you cut from the quote of mine above:

As you said, we'll have to agree to disagree. That doesn't mean that when this topic comes up again I won't stand up and re-iterate that I believe the group behavior on this board toward some people can be downright shameful.

 

Rev:

To keep it real simple, based on the reason ([H]arder than Trilinear Filtering on a GFFX.) for your post, your questioned was not answered and a character assassination type response from Kyle ensued. Based on [H] forums own rules of posting on topic only, this would be a flame. Do I really have to call a person an ass for it to be considered a flame? Could I not insinuate such without saying it? You were called an ass in not so many words because he did not like the reason for your post. Proof of this, he changed the subject and never answered the question or clarification that you asked for.

His wording in this case seems to indicate you were called an ass for posting, a thief for trying to take credit and stupid for actually being with B3D.

That's what I read.

 

imho The ONLY reason Kyle doesn't post here is because he has NO ANSWERS for the valid questions he gets here. If he tried to side step the issues and lay on the crap here like he does at his own forums, he would be castigated severely, and imho, Fairly.

The guys here have tried to get him to participate, but that would mean He would be put in the position of defending an indefensable position. THAT'S what he can not deal with. Not the Flames he gets here. Thats just smoke and mirrors. An excuse to get him out of having to deal with the hard questions that people have a right to an answer to.

I have visited his forums and seen the type of answers he gives to people who ask these VALID questions concerning his Stance on the issues. His actions speak louder than words... and damn him.

I've read all the threads about [K] here at B3D and there have been a few posts that were flames pure and simple, but they are a rather small percentage of the total. "Sticks and Stones" eh? He's a big boy and I'm sure He can hand out the same stuff back to flamers that some people here think drove him away, at least if you've read some of his posts at [H]'s forum you would believe so. The fact is he has nothing to argue with as far as facts are concerned about his stance on 3dMark, Ut2003 and all the rest of the Nvidia machinations.

Unfortunately for him. This is a generally sharp group of minds around here, and the BS he spews on his site won't float around here. I(We?) expect him to stand up like a man and explain his recent actions. We want ANSWERS and all he gives is opinions, half truths, and psuedo facts manipulated to suit his purpose.

They say "If you can't stand the heat, get out of the kitchen" and he did!, but It's not the "Heat" of the "Flames" here that drove him away, it was the "Heat" of expecting the Truth from him.

He knows the questions he'll get here and he has no answers.

Thats why he doesn't visit.

 

Man this whole thread started by Killer just seems like one long troll. I find the whole premise laughable that somehow Mr Bennet doesnt post here because of his treatment here.

As dave pointed out right at the start, show me the egregious comments directed towards Kyle that causes him to not participate in this Open forum.

 

Thanks for the personal response. Unfortunately it has yet to address what I asked or commented on. B3D personnel, whether Dave or other should address it accordingly. While free speech is touted here, character assassination is not a becoming attribute I would want taking seed on a forum I am responsible for. There are various levels of moderating just as there are various levels of responses. Your response would be comparable to [H] Moderation and B3D moderation. A meeting in between would only improve this site. Rev is the only one I have seen make an effort to that end. As is obvious, not everyone agrees with Kyle and no one is asking you to. Being assholes does not make you right.

Take for example half the post within this very thread. Which are constructive? Which are not. Yours? Constructive, it layed out a starting point of definition. Kyle posting consisting of Kyle this Kyle that do not find a means to and end.

 

Well, I'd prefer that the boards be self regulating - that is, the members dont condone or accept personal attacks - and they let new members know that.

i'd also prefer that new members who get into discussions actually answer points raised against them without throwing up a wall of strawman attacks and misdirection.

Of course, it would seem that you view calling "us" "assholes" to be fine. If thats the case, then what is so bad about someone else calling kyle a "shill" or a "insert perjorative here"? Pick a path.

As for the "kyle this kyle that" posts, it is simply people justifying their opinions or actions. Now, maybe the justifications hold water for their particular opinion/action, and maybe they dont - but to condemn them all is not fair.

I'd suggest that you dont HAVE to defend Kyle like his honor is your life also. If he wants to free himself from the criticisms here, he has to do but one thing: show up, and explain himself. Dont you understand what all the "kyle this kyle that" posts are? They are practically a cry for him to come prove them wrong! All it would have taken from the FIRST opposition and disparaging remark about him was Kyle posting here in response and actually explaining himself - in a logically consistent manner. Or even posting defending himself ANYWHERE in such a manner. But he has yet to do so, and so people are left to wonder, and the mound of evidence seems to grow. But hey, i guess he doesnt really care to have people UNDERSTAND - he'd rather label them and then disparage them.
Or at least that's how i see it, based on the extreme lack of response from kyle. If he wants to clear it up, he can (if he actually has reasons) - but thus far, i've just seen him use it as another tool to ignore findings that throw him in poor light.

 

Myh point was a question - you didn't provide an answer to that question.

How so?

Well, I can't go over to the forums to make any comments at the moment. However, you don't see everything. I still have an open dialogue with Brent and I have sent Kyle a mail since then, however I had no acknowledgement that he's read it since there was no reply. As I said, time is precious and I don't need to waste it when there's no responce.

 

Worst of all (IMO) is the incessant preaching to the choir. News Flash, people: we all know how we all feel about Nvidia's repeated and undocumented driver tricks that subvert the objective value of benchmarks: they're bad.

And we also all know how we also all feel about Kyle's repeated parroting of the Nvidia corporate line every time it gets caught: also bad.

Great.

You agree, I agree, we all agree.

So why then the need to discuss our feelings in mind-numbing 22 page threads.

EVERY.

SINGLE.

DAMN.

TIME.

?

How about we focus on what's new, interesting or unusual about the current incident? Because in most cases there is something worth discussing every time. That's why I don't want to just take the obvious way out and refuse to read those 22-pagers.

The point is, I spend my time reading the B3D forums because I'd like to read something new. And, sorry folks, but your righteous indignation is NOT new.

Come on folks. When even Walt agrees with me you know something's not right.