Hozzászólások - ImLittleJon

Idézet: Evilgrape - 2010.09.01. 16:14:12

A) Wrong thread; this thread is for stekkos to proactively explain why he rejected stuff (and occasional debates to ensue)
B) I know what the NHL is, but I certainly don't know who the first person ever drafted is
C) I'm a big fan of both the NBA and the NFL, and I couldn't tell you who the first person drafted in those leagues was, either
D) Depending on how the guideline is implemented, your question could be found acceptable under the proposed Googlability change, so you might want to go vote and comment in that thread

I see your point, Gemini. I would just say that we've seen the results of the status quo. Let's try the other way and see how it goes, and if we like the current way better, we can always switch back later.

Idézet: stekkos - 2010.09.01. 13:07:04

It actually does. It's an idiom. Grammatically, it shouldn't be valid, but it is common usage, at least in the US.

13 votes is not that bad considering how much traffic these forums get. They should really put that last 5 posts widget into the game itself. That would drive a lot more traffic to the forums.

Idézet: Phalanxii - 2010.08.31. 15:36:05

I'd be happy with that. Unfortunately, the policy seems to be that edits are not allowed, only deletes.

Idézet: Dentaio - 2010.08.31. 08:04:57

The element Sodium (Na) has 11 electrons. Individual sodium atoms can be ionized, ending up with 10 electrons. But the element still has 11. So, in your example, metallic sodium and ionic sodium are not elements. They are instances of elements.

I'm not trying to prove that the number of electrons should be the correct answer. Just that it is a valid answer that can be supported by reasonable arguments. And therefore, the question should be deleted, since it has more than one correct answer.

Idézet: Phalanxii - 2010.08.31. 03:47:22

Yes, but the question didn't ask what uniquely defines the identity of each element. It asked what the most important difference between elements is. And from the standpoint of what bonds it can form, that is the number of electrons.

Idézet: Viridel - 2010.08.30. 18:47:00

W2 players that I know of who are working on this quest at the moment:

me
Sbart
Schioru
Koriey
S10MATT
MsPiggy

Some of them are out of your level range, but included in case anyone else of lower level wants to join in.

Idézet: Dentaio - 2010.08.30. 10:02:46

Depends on what is meant by "most important difference". In terms of what can't you change without changing what element it is, that would be the number of protons. In terms of what other elements it can form bonds with, that would be the number of electrons. Also, an element can not be ionized. A particular oxygen atom can be ionized, but that does not change how many electrons the element Oxygen has.

Elements have the same number of protons and electrons, so there are two correct answers to this question. Please delete.

Stekkos said he thought it would be better if we made our quiz suggestions into new threads, so everyone can vote on them, so here goes.

I think how easy a question is to answer via Google should be one factor considered when giving out the "specialized knowledge" evaluation. As a player, I would much prefer a narrow question that I can find the answer to easily, rather than a broad question that I can't. So here's my proposal for how this could be implemented in a manner which is clear and easy to apply for both evaluators and question posers. If you copy/paste the entire question into Google, and the correct answer appears on the search results page, so you don't even have to click into a link, then the question should pass the "specialized knowledge" test, no matter what. Questions that don't pass this Google test could still pass based on the old criteria. I realize that Google can present different results based on geography, but I expect that would come up very rarely.

Idézet: LydonB - 2010.08.28. 20:58:55

There's no way the game developers will change so fundamental a rule, so this is all an academic debate.

Idézet: LydonB - 2010.08.28. 20:58:55

If there's something in your mind that you think might offend someone, it's best not to speak it. Typically, that's a lesson that one's parents impart to their children before they are old enough to play with computers.

Idézet: LydonB - 2010.08.28. 20:58:55

Some would say the status quo is being abused. How could/would this scenario be abused? More speciically, abused in a way that's worse than the current situation? The only way I can think of would be to register a bunch of dummy accounts to try to affect the bonuses, but that's easily dealt with, either by only factoring in characters of a minimum level, or by some kind of weighting by level scheme, or both.

Idézet: MartinBV - 2010.08.28. 19:52:13

Yes, please. Let's keep the language civil.

Idézet: MartinBV - 2010.08.28. 19:52:13

The answer may be correct, but I don't think you can say the question is. Within the stated guidelines, the question is not a good one. It is a mathematical question, which is an explicit category for rejection. Beyond that, it is stated an a manner which is obviously unclear. I understand the intent of the question, but the first reaction of almost everyone who reads it (including me) is "huh?".

Idézet: LydonB - 2010.08.28. 16:14:29

That's certainly not the only solution. Personally, I think issues like this should be solved in a manner involving market forces. If the goal is to get an even distribution of players among the hordes, you allow the horde bonuses to fluctuate based on how many players are in that horde. The fewer players in a horde, the greater the horde bonus.

Idézet: Viridel - 2010.08.23. 23:51:18

The online translator says that means "Database error". There, I gave you some info.

Idézet: D00ml0rd - 2010.08.22. 20:40:15

I'm not saying that the English Royal Navy answer isn't correct. I'm saying that the US Military answer is also correct. See http://usawocc.army.mil/History/index.htm, which says:


So there are at least 2 valid answers among those given.

Google says there's at least two Warrant Officer Corps, one that started from the English Royal Navy and one that started from the U.S. Army Mine Planter Service.

Idézet: preter - 2010.08.21. 21:12:39

The name of the monster is "gigantic maxym". You can have a greater gigantic maxym, a tiny gigantic maxym, etc. So for it to register, you would need to get a gigantic gigantic maxym.

Idézet: stekkos - 2010.08.21. 05:25:04

But in another part of her list, she said each question would have to be checked by 5 evaluators, so that would mean a lot more evaluations to do.

Idézet: Czernovski - 2010.08.18. 16:02:56

I completed the quest with 1 level of the execution skill. Since you didn't complete it with 0 levels, I think you've proven that you do need to have that skill.