Thanks a lot people

[Fred da Roza]

The problem was that I never had any proof that he was getting paid off one way or another by nVIDIA and something like that could lead to legal action against me because of my slanderous attitude against him.

Did Kyle have any proof when he made his slanderous accusations about Extreme Tech's motivations for exposing nVidia's cheats in 3DMark03? As someone already said he can dish it out but he can't take it.

 

[K.I.L.E.R]

The problem was that I never had any proof that he was getting paid off one way or another by nVIDIA and something like that could lead to legal action against me because of my slanderous attitude against him.

Did Kyle have any proof when he made his slanderous accusations about Extreme Tech's motivations for exposing nVidia's cheats in 3DMark03? As someone already said he can dish it out but he can't take it.

I do believe that Kyle is no angel but I should not revert to slander to criticise him. If I do it will also make me look like a child.

I'm not defending Kyle's actions, I'm just saying that we should be more like Dave. If Dave went into [H]'s forums and started being a complete ass, we would not percieve Kyle banning him as a bad thing. Of course, Dave wasn't an ass and he was banned.

That would raise several questions while the first wouldn't.

 

[Reverend]

A meeting in between would only improve this site.

WHAT?

Are you suggesting that such a meeting won't improve HardOCP (instead)?

I cannot believe this.

 

[nelg]

Quite honestly, if Kyle has in fact been chased from B3D, it has worked in his favor. Disregarding the flames and names a lot of important observations and questions have been raised about issues that his site has commented on. IMHO Kyle would not have been able to satisfactorily answered these here at B3D. Now armed with the excuse that (if that is the case) that he will not post here because of the name calling, he no longer has to answer his critics in an impartial arena. There is no overlooking the influence of his site. Some, like me, just want it to become consistent in its procedures and accountable to its readers.. I do think that Russ is correct with his suggestions (and will follow it myself) on how not to behaves but if I have to wade through a little bit of flames to get to the truth it is worth it. It does not seem to be possible on [H]’s forums.

 

[K.I.L.E.R]

Sarcasm noted Rev.

A meeting in between would only improve this site.

WHAT?

Are you suggesting that such a meeting won't improve HardOCP (instead)?

I cannot believe this.

 

[Bouncing Zabaglione Bros.]

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

The cycle is triggered off as more articles and editorials come in repeating the same nonsensical viewpoints, or as Kyle apologists like Blackwind appear and exhibit the same revisionist theory in order to "defend the indefensible" whilst not actually arguing the salient points.

While the same problems are going on in the world of website reviews and manufacturer cheating, you should expect these issues to be revisited time and time again. While the issues are current, they will be discussed.

If it bores you, you don't have to participate in these threads if they don't interest you.

 

[swanlee]

The problem is people are frustrated at Nvidia frustrated at Kyle and for those frustrated it seems at this point as nothing is really going to be done about it. Nvidia are going to get away with this as no mainstream press has picked up on it and even if they did they'd have a hard time explaining it in laymen's terms that made sense to everyone. Kyle is going to get away with this cause he will just ignore all other sites and delete and silence people on his own forum.

In the end WE lose and that is what spawns 22 page threads, people are angry at Nvidia for committing consumer fraud and taking millions of dollars away from people and oem's when there video cards are not actually as good as Nvidia made them seem to be. We would like to see some justice in this case, Nvidia should be held accountable for mis leading and committing fraud against it's customers Kyle should be held accountable for knowing what Nvidia was doing months before the stories broke and helping Nvidia commit this fraud.

Until Nvidia and Kyle are held accountable for what they have done I would not expect to many people to just calm down and talk about the flowers.

 

[WaltC]

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.

Uh, Blackwind, "free speech" isn't "touted" in these forums, it's actually granted and observed. (Which is probably the only reason your posts are suffered here, don't ya' know...) As you know, some in the B3d staff have no "free speech" rights at all in the forums you defend.

Secondly, baselessly accusing great numbers of unidentified people of being "character assassins" when you fail to point out whom is "assassinating" whose "character," is the equivalent of childish name-calling, isn't it? (albeit, it's at least polite.)

Of course, using the word "asshole" is indicative of impolite childish name calling. (If you think you'll bait the moderators here to ban you by using such invective I would only tell you they are smarter than that.)

 

[digitalwanderer]

On Kyle and arguing, I'd just like to point out that his biggest response to me interview with myself has been to say it's a slap in the face to every jew on the planet to trivial the holocaust by calling him "Seig Kyle"...

I just don't think he can GET the points raised against him even anymore, he's too far deep in denial.

 

[RussSchultz]

Uh, Blackwind, "free speech" isn't "touted" in these forums, it's actually granted and observed.

Actually, the crux of my argument is that "free speech" is definately curtailed here by the mob mentality. If you so happen to disagree with a certain set of people or hold a certain viewpoint, you are hounded and harassed until you either leave or stop talking.

I'm not saying anything about the moderation. There's no problem with that.

 

[Evildeus]

Still talking about Kyle and [H]?

My view, you can criticize someone point of you, never insult someone.

 

[Forbidden Donut]

On Kyle and arguing, I'd just like to point out that his biggest response to me interview with myself has been to say it's a slap in the face to every jew on the planet to trivial the holocaust by calling him "Seig Kyle"...

I just don't think he can GET the points raised against him even anymore, he's too far deep in denial.

I agree with Kyle on that point. I understand that it the name was made in jest (although I understand the dictator reference), but that doesn't change the fact that it makes a joke out of something that probably isn't appropriate to joke about. If anything, it shows very poor taste, in my opinion.

 

[Malo]

I agree with Kyle on that point. I understand that it the name was made in jest (although I understand the dictator reference), but that doesn't change the fact that it makes a joke out of something that probably isn't appropriate to joke about. If anything, it shows very poor taste, in my opinion.

why? when I read the interview with himself, I didn't associate it at all with jews or the holocaust. To associate that at all is moronic IMO.

i think it's just kyle trying to put himself on a pedestal in reaction to the interview to swing positive attention to himself trying to sound altruistic.

 

[micron]

that doesn't change the fact that it makes a joke out of something that probably isn't appropriate to joke about. If anything, it shows very poor taste, in my opinion.

I feel the same way, as do alot of people...
I also dont understand the whole "interview yourself" concept. Most forum members know that you like attention DW, but that little elite bastards article devoted to yourself wreaked of arrogance. You obviously didnt feel important enough in the community, even though your EVERYWHERE, so you took it apon yourself to MAKE yourself important.....or at least try to look that way.

 

[micron]

when I read the interview with himself, I didn't associate it at all with jews or the holocaust.

You probably arent a jew then.

 

[demalion]

Your commentary makes less sense to me as less specifics are included.

Uh, Blackwind, "free speech" isn't "touted" in these forums, it's actually granted and observed.

Actually, the crux of my argument is that "free speech" is definately curtailed here by the mob mentality.

Russ, "free speech" does not mean "everybody is right". People say things that are fallacious, egotistical, one-sided, illogical, and even flat out wrong.

People are free to say things. But other people are free to point out if they think that what they've said is flawed. Isn't it preferrable for both sides to make some effort for logical and useful discourse when doing this, and target criticism at a failure to do so? If not, why not?

Saying Kyle shouldn't be criticized attacks the viewpoint of those who maintain that he should, and you are using labels like "mob mentality" as a general label for people of the latter viewpoint. How is it that this attack doesn't fit your complaint of "If you so happen to disagree with a certain set of people or hold a certain viewpoint, you are hounded and harassed until you either leave or stop talking", except as you picked who is the "certain set of people"? "Virtue-by-lack-of-numbers"? Where did discussion of the merits, or lack thereof, of viewpoints disappear to in your consideration?

IMO, things like "logic" and "productive discussion" are specific and useful criteria for seeking "curtailment", and a label like "mob mentality" is decidely not. Especially with the flaws I see, as I outlined earlier, in your prior list.

Do I misundersand you? Do you have a reasonable argument for disagreeing with this opinion? Are questions like these "hounding"?

If you so happen to disagree with a certain set of people or hold a certain viewpoint, you are hounded and harassed until you either leave or stop talking.

What if the viewpoint is demonstrably fallacious, egotistical, one-sided, illogical, or flat out wrong, Russ? Does the person proposing it have the "right" to repeat it as often as they want, and not be challenged by reasoning and facts supporting a disagreeing response? Is that the "free speech" you are proposing?

If you want to criticize people for "attacking" a viewpoint without giving addressable support to their "attack", please make the distinction clear, as I said before...I think you are failing to do so.

If you want to criticize people for continuing to "attack" a viewpoint that someone continues to propose, even when the person being "attacked" is not providing addressable support, I'll disagree. If this were to be your intent, would stating my disagreement, or pointing to where I'd provided support for it, be "hounding"? If so, why are you "free" to repeat such an assertion without addressing that support, and I'm not free to ask for such clarification again when you do so?

Did I misunderstand something you've said? Did I miss a reply to my previous post replying to your list, which could have answered these questions?

Reminder: "addressable support" refers to a body of facts, reasoning, and other argument, conducted in a fashion that provides clarity and points for someone to address further discussion towards. Things that are not like "I don't care what you say, this is my opinion", "I'm not going to discuss with this you, I don't like your post", or "Someone told me this was true, and I'm sure they're right". Places it is often typically absent in these forums are in speculation threads and where NDAs interfere with conversation, but those instances aren't involved with asserting things about people.

 

[Joe DeFuria]

But anyways, you don't have to be a dick when you speak out against "injustice". It belittles the fight, and does nothing but increase the divide.

Just a side question, does you entry in this thread:

http://www.beyond3d.com/forum/viewtopic.php?t=7148

Constitute "being a dick".

 

[RussSchultz]

Yep. Make sure you read the whole thread though. Doesn't excuse being rude, of course. I was just irritated enough for being called a bigot because I was at lunch and didn't answer his beck and call.

Besides. You know you wanted to say it yourself.

 

[micron]

People are free to say things. But other people are free to point out if they think that what they've said is flawed.

If people were merely pointing out that what Kyle is saying is flawed, I dont think that Russ would be complaining. It's going beyond all that though in the mannerism in which people are using to criticize Kyle. I'ts hardly constructive.

Isn't it preferrable for both sides to make some effort for logical and useful discourse when doing this, and target criticism at a failure to do so?

I think that what your describing is in fact preferable, but that isnt whats happening here, Kyle is repeatedly being called names, and Russ is pointing out that it reflects badly on this website, regardless of whether or not Kyle deserves it, or people think he has it coming.

you are using labels like "mob mentality" as a general label for people of the latter viewpoint.

Demalion, can you honestly say that the actions of forum members here cannot be viewed as such?

What if the viewpoint is demonstrably fallacious, egotistical, one-sided, illogical, or flat out wrong, Russ? Does the person proposing it have the "right" to repeat it as often as they want, and not be challenged by reasoning and facts supporting a disagreeing response?

Challenging a persons views with reasonings and facts is the way that it should be done!...we all know this!, it's the damn name calling that is unacceptable to me! It really looks bad, and this group is so much better then that...

 

[K.I.L.E.R]

Bullshit!

If you or anyone else doesn't hold a viewpoint you are saying that you end up acting like a fucking child?
Maybe you don't give a shit if you come across as an immature brat but others try not to look like that.
You don't speak for the community either.

Good riddance to you.

Uh, Blackwind, "free speech" isn't "touted" in these forums, it's actually granted and observed.

Actually, the crux of my argument is that "free speech" is definately curtailed here by the mob mentality. If you so happen to disagree with a certain set of people or hold a certain viewpoint, you are hounded and harassed until you either leave or stop talking.

I'm not saying anything about the moderation. There's no problem with that.