-

however, i never want to be accused of giving constructive criticism, soooooo:

yer all douchbaggers!!!!!!!1one

Makes sense to me.

Would listing credentials in your profile be sufficient? I have an article going up in a little bit, and I added mine. (Though there isn't much to add) lawl

-

Staton said:

Love cardgamedb, post there a lot and its really helped me improve in the game but i have to disagree with this,

putting a shiny emblem under your name doesn't make your credibility go up, or at least it shouldn't. Saying you hold more weight than someone else answering a question because of your title on a website seems a little odd. Ktom doesnt have any titles, emblems, flair whatsoever but when he answers a question people listen, not because he has a different title or icon but because he knows what he is talking about and is right more often than not.

jack merridew said:

While you are correct about credibility, we have labels of some kind for almost everything today that identifies how credible someone is. For example, if someone without an MD next to their name told you that spray paint is one way to eliminate skin cancer, you would be quite hesitant to follow such advice. However if they had an MD next to their name, then you are more inclined to believe such words even if it does sound out of the ordinary.

We all know who has more experience and the advice those players give is quite credible until they start giving piss poor advice. When you first enter this forum, you don't know that ktom is someone who gives the most reasonable ruling based on past precedences until you read more posts or hear additional sound rulings. If ktom had some title "Forum Judge", then you expect his rulings or opinions to have more credibility than Player X.

It's also not about a shiny title. It's about who is giving them away as well. If a person in a prestigious position, finds that person to be quite credible, then they will give them a title that they feel can be represented with confidence. If Joe the town bum is giving out these titles, then we know they hold very little weight.

It is clear that there is a misconception as to what each members title on cardgamedb might represent.

jack merridew said:

I was thinking non-rules question. So something like "What do you think this deck needs to cut?" or "Which agenda should I be using with this deck in mind?" stuff like that. I think it adds a bit of weight because we obviously are thinking about these questions more than the average player. We are writing about this game in terms of deck building and play strategy and therefore have to think about these kinds of questions more than the average player. If you are speaking just in a rules sense, then yes you are correct.

Yes... and how many have a major title next to your name (IOW Stahleck, world, or national titles)?

That is sort of the point. Drew is a great guy and built a fantastic resource center for the game, but I don't trust him to have vetted you guys as having any more specific knowledge about the game from a practical standpoint, and if he had, I'm not sure I would trust his vetting process, since I haven't sat across the table from him over the last few years and seen major innovative decks and/or outstanding play. Basically, until someone has proven by repeated high level performance they know what they are talking about I see no reason why I should trust their opinions over my own let alone someone else with as much (or as little) history of performance who disagrees.

Kennon was asked/tapped to do the Lanni decks for the box by FFG and, they have a small number of players who contribute articles. Ktom officiates at Gencon for them... these are the people without major titles I would trust over everyone else without said repeated high level performance.

This isn't to slam anyone else, continually writing high level articles that players use to build decks and improve their play (and can see the positive results from doing so) will eventually earn you the respect, but just be a writer of articles should in and of itself not confer anything.

I wrote 7 articles today on how to perform open-heart surgery. If anyone wants to offer them to their Dr. for use in an upcoming procedure you have my permission. www.weekendheartsurgeon.com.

edit: it's so much fun to be a dildo

dcdennis said:

I doubt there are very many Ned and Shagga MDs performing heart surgery, but thank you for your insight.

Penfold said:

Like I said, some more than others. I specifically used Will and me in the example since we probably have the most "weight" behind us.

Hmmm...

I just want to set the record straight that I joined the Small Council because I wanted to write regular articles and it would help with scheduling, not because I think I am a better player than anyone else.

Well I don't think any of us joined because we think we are better per say. We just all tend to think about and discuss the game a lot and felt that it would be beneficial to the AGoT community to publicly discuss our thoughts.

I think the confusion for some people comes when they don't know the experience of the the various writers. Some of the small council members have been playing aGoT for a long time and have done well at large tournaments. Some are brand new players. For someone who is also new to the game and just getting to know the community, seeing a "Small Council" who is writing articles the initial perception would be that all the writers are experienced players with good records.

I agree with the "credentials" thing...not that people need titles, but some sort of short bio is helpful. For example, I think it's probably helpful for context if people know that I've been playing this game since 2005, and that Targaryen was almost always my favorite house, and also that I've even done alright at a few tourneys in the past year or two.

In fact, I even taught Finite how to play this game back when he first moved to DC (lolz...that's going to rile him up, even if it is only half true). ~ At the very least, being a founding member of the DC meta has to give me some street cred, right?

The point being, we probably should present the readers with at least a few factual notes about how long we've been playing, what tourneys we've performed well at, and what types of play style we have. I think it's totally fine if the answers to these questions are "less than a year, none, and still working on that." Transparency is a good thing, and people will appreciate the writing for what it is. It might also be helpful if we note areas that we are uncertain on. For example, despite playing this game for 7 years, I'd have to say that I'm still a terrible Baratheon player...possibly worse now than when I started. Every once in awhile I try to build a Baratheon deck that's just flat-out terrible. Sometimes it's nice for readers to know just how far to "trust" the information they are accessing. (P.S. I never play house Lannister, but I've been on the losing end of that match up enough times to be able to provide a few insights.)

-

Mathias Fricot said:

Lol, sorry. Couldn't help it.

Is it terrible when I troll my friends?

Mathias Fricot said:

/chuckle

-