Page 7 of 10
Posted: Fri Dec 07, 2007 2:29 pm
by guitarism
The subtle arts of irony are lost upon this one. Hit him harder next time.
Posted: Fri Dec 07, 2007 2:30 pm
by Raveen
Malicious Wraith wrote:QUOTE (Malicious Wraith @ Dec 7 2007, 02:16 PM) It seems to me that McBowlz was being completely reasonable, and you were ignoring the points that he made. Hes right that it can be both, and your wrong to try to hold the communities hand by not giving them both because "It will give them big heads", if you are going to have a big head, reading and learning about the game is not going to change that.
The point McBowlz made was "Why isn't the ACS material public for everyone?". This was answered by several people explaining that it's better for the majority to be guided through said material.
Eg. he is not right in the views of those responsible for the information in question. In fact the material was public for a time and produced worse results in terms of training new commanders than the current, closed door, system. So it's not even a subjective viewpoint, it has been proved to be less effective.
Quite why this thread has continued on for 3 pages of essentially the same arguments is a little baffling to tell the truth, as is your stubborn insistance of correctness in the face of the available facts. Is your true motivation to get access to the material without a structured course because you either don't qualify for ACS or don't have the appropriate disposition for a structured course?
Posted: Fri Dec 07, 2007 2:35 pm
by Malicious Wraith
Raveen wrote:QUOTE (Raveen @ Dec 7 2007, 09:30 AM) The point McBowlz made was "Why isn't the ACS material public for everyone?". This was answered by several people explaining that it's better for the majority to be guided through said material.
Eg. he is not right in the views of those responsible for the information in question. In fact the material was public for a time and produced worse results in terms of training new commanders than the current, closed door, system. So it's not even a subjective viewpoint, it has been proved to be less effective.
Quite why this thread has continued on for 3 pages of essentially the same arguments is a little baffling to tell the truth, as is your stubborn insistance of correctness in the face of the available facts. Is your true motivation to get access to the material without a structured course because you either don't qualify for ACS or don't have the appropriate disposition for a structured course?
If people want/need guiding, then let them have it. If not, then let them educate themselves. Some people need it, others dont. They dont need you to decide for them.
The "quality" of commanders produced by ACS is directly related to the gross requirements to get into it, compared to the information being provided to everyone, including the voobs that want to learn some of the fine art of commanding.
You put in a vet, you get a vet back.
You put in a voob, you get a voob back (and sometimes a vet if they improve).
And you act like the acs program wont continue to keep getting their vets to train, those that want the training that ACS offers will get it. Those that want the read will get it from the public information. You dont need to bundle them.
Posted: Fri Dec 07, 2007 2:37 pm
by ogorass
QUOTE In the end, the only responses which have made ANY logical sense at all were Clay's and BV's.[/quote]
Clay_Pigeon wrote:QUOTE (Clay_Pigeon @ Dec 6 2007, 04:58 AM) This comes up every time I release new material to the public. People quote the same arguments. They always fail to convince me, and I respond in the same way (or find new reasons). I just spent 40 minutes writing a detailed reply, only to realize that I wrote this same reply when this issue came up 12 weeks ago. That's way too much work. After all, in the end, the only people I really owe anything to (by way of explanations) are the admins. So from now on, this will be my default response to all inquiries will be as follows
NO!
/tongue.gif" style="vertical-align:middle" emoid=":P" border="0" alt="tongue.gif" />
BlackViper wrote:QUOTE (BlackViper @ Dec 6 2007, 03:36 PM) I guess I didn't really answer in here concerning the Cadet program. So to quote someone:
NO
Why? Because it is
my decision and I am not going to write lengthy replies every few weeks.
You the consumer have a choice, buy my product or not. But it is my product. Just like I give away free samples now, it is called "
Cadet I - Newbie guide" on the Academy. /tongue.gif" style="vertical-align:middle" emoid=":P" border="0" alt="tongue.gif" />
Hmmm... yeah.
QUOTE About a dozen of people that answered to this thread are (or were) in some way involved in ACS and/or CDT, be it runing it or creating the material. Most made valid points, so it seems to me, that the only answer you are ready to accept is a big, red, bolded out 'NO'... rolleyes.gif[/quote]
QUOTE And, in the end, since they are the gods of the ACS program, we'll all bow to their divine will. And maybe, occasionally, sacrifice someonething to them.[/quote]
^Now that was not reasonable, was it? I dislike trolls and flamers and I have no intention of being nice to them.
Posted: Fri Dec 07, 2007 2:38 pm
by MrChaos
Now you've done it!!!
The Awesome Ones is getting right, proper, reasonable, and snary with you * grabs his morning plate * /ninja.gif" style="vertical-align:middle" emoid=":ninja:" border="0" alt="ninja.gif" />s into the background
Posted: Fri Dec 07, 2007 2:39 pm
by Malicious Wraith
ogorass wrote:QUOTE (ogorass @ Dec 7 2007, 09:37 AM) ^Now that was not reasonable, was it? I dislike trolls and flamers and I have no intention of being nice to them.
Pointing out an inconvenient truth is something you dislike? Then change the truth to something you do like.
Posted: Fri Dec 07, 2007 2:47 pm
by Raveen
Well MW, both ways have been tried and the results (in terms of improvement rather than absolute ability) are in the opinion of a) those in charge, and b) the majority of the community at large are better now than they were with open material.
It may not be ideal for everyone, but, as I said, it serves the majority of people best (as demonstrated by the results mentioned above).
So I ask once again, what is your problem with this? Is it because you don't meet the "gross requirements" for ACS?
Posted: Fri Dec 07, 2007 2:49 pm
by guitarism
"If I'm not allowed to do it, it must suck so it must change to fit me"
Posted: Fri Dec 07, 2007 2:49 pm
by ogorass
Malicious Wraith wrote:QUOTE (Malicious Wraith @ Dec 7 2007, 03:35 PM) If people want/need guiding, then let them have it. If not, then let them educate themselves. Some people need it, others dont. They dont need you to decide for them.
The "quality" of commanders produced by ACS is directly related to the gross requirements to get into it, compared to the information being provided to everyone, including the voobs that want to learn some of the fine art of commanding.
You put in a vet, you get a vet back.
You put in a voob, you get a voob back (and sometimes a vet if they improve).
And you act like the acs program wont continue to keep getting their vets to train, those that want the training that ACS offers will get it. Those that want the read will get it from the public information. You dont need to bundle them.
You seem to not get it still.
Malicious Wraith wrote:QUOTE (Malicious Wraith @ Dec 7 2007, 03:39 PM) Pointing out an inconvenient truth is something you dislike? Then change the truth to something you do like.
Um. WTF are you getting at? You seem to support the statement that both BV and Clay do what they do because they want power and profit? They (and a whole lot of other people involved in both ACS and CDT) put tremendous effort to run those. For free. Knowing that making any kind of demands regarding how those programs are run are just silly. It's the least they can get for all the work and effort put into running and creating those courses is having a say how do they want to get them run.
Posted: Fri Dec 07, 2007 2:52 pm
by Malicious Wraith
Raveen wrote:QUOTE (Raveen @ Dec 7 2007, 09:47 AM) Well MW, both ways have been tried and the results (in terms of improvement rather than absolute ability) are in the opinion of a) those in charge, and b) the majority of the community at large are better now than they were with open material.
It may not be ideal for everyone, but, as I said, it serves the majority of people best (as demonstrated by the results mentioned above).
So I ask once again, what is your problem with this? Is it because you don't meet the "gross requirements" for ACS?
1. Some people dont want to hunker down for the read, the course, the instruction, the post-game debriefings, etc... ACS has a very large dropout rate.
2. I didnt meet the ACS requirements until WELL into my commanding experience. It would have helped to have the information available earlier.
3. I dont support an information monopoly in the hands of an elitist community. And thats what you are, there is no denying that fact.
Want more reasons? I can think more on it.