On Retroactive Rewards

11011121315

Comments

  • HoundofShadowHoundofShadow Posts: 3,144 Chairperson of the Boards
    If the definition of trolling is defined as posts that provoke reactions, then there are a lot of trolls in the forum and the devs are definitely the biggest trolls in the forum.

    To jamesh, your post is too simplified and that's definitely not what I post most of the time. Typically, when it's something that doesn't involve only giving opinions, I use evidences/facts that could be verified to support my viewpoint. If you are biased against me, anything I said is argued in bad faith.

    Besides, who has the authority to determine what is right and what is wrong when all of us do not have completion information about the game making decision as a whole? Just because someone thinks that another person is wrong doesn't mean that person is wrong. Think of the debates concerning the world such as pro-life vs pro-choice, Brexit vs Remainers, Republicans vs Democrats, parties who are against min. wage and for min wage and so on. Has there any conclusion on which camp is telling the truth?

    Anyway, we are going off topic. I shall stop here.
  • HoundofShadowHoundofShadow Posts: 3,144 Chairperson of the Boards
    Thanks I'm not interested. 
  • BlerghBlergh Posts: 115 Tile Toppler

    Besides, who has the authority to determine what is right and what is wrong when all of us do not have completion information about the game making decision as a whole? Just because someone thinks that another person is wrong doesn't mean that person is wrong. Think of the debates concerning the world such as pro-life vs pro-choice, Brexit vs Remainers, Republicans vs Democrats, parties who are against min. wage and for min wage and so on. Has there any conclusion on which camp is telling the truth?
    Sorry, off topic but this is kind of an interesting debate.

    Firstly, pro-choice, remainers and Democrats. Its not about have a valid argument substantiated by hards facts or even the truth. It's not about being right or wrong. It's about belief.

    I know people will disagree with me and I am okay with that, because that doesn't diminish my belief. And I will disagree with others, but that doesn't make them wrong. It just means they have different perspectives and values that lead to them believing something else. There is nothing wrong with that. 

    Now if someone attacked, verbally or physically over my views in an effort to undermine them, I'd think that was wrong. I might even get defensive. 

    And belief isn't about cold hard logic, it's about feelings. Facts won't change a way a person feels.

    And why does there have to be one truth? I tend to find the world is a spectrum of grey, not black and white. That the truth is hardly ever whole or infallible but rather a matter of perspective bound to a specific context.

    Is light a wave or particle? Is Schrodinger's cat dead or alive? If the Earth is constantly moving through space, does that mean everyone that's claimed to stand still is wrong or lying? Is water a liquid, a solid or a gas? Are leaves green?

    I'd argue the truth is usually limited by perception and depends on the circumstances surrounding it. Its usually a subjective measure present as objective fact. 
  • AXP_ismeAXP_isme Posts: 714 Critical Contributor
    I don’t think disagree that we should be grateful that some of the mess is being cleaned up. My Christmas wish would be that they learn from this debacle and communicate earlier in a clear fashion and then listen to the feedback on those proposals. This whole thing could, and should, have been avoided. 
  • BlerghBlergh Posts: 115 Tile Toppler
    edited December 2019
    AXP_isme said:
    I would be a bit careful in comparing political positions and beliefs to what could be considered scientific facts (i.e. they can be backed up experimentally with observations that show the same results when conducted anywhere else). Light exhibits both wave and particle characteristics but people are conditioned to understand waves and particles, largely because they are observable in our macro environment, but when it comes to quantum stuff it’s hard to understand because it doesn’t agree with what you’ve observed every day throughout your life. I would posit that this isn’t really comparable to not changing your position in a discussion of which political party to support even if you are presented with facts that don’t support your existing opinion. 

    Beliefs don’t usually stand up to scrutiny under the scientific method. Political or moral relativism is not the same as relativity. Let’s not confuse those things, non-overlapping magisteria if you will. 

    Edited for clarity. 
    My point was perception colours the way we see the truth. Some will say that it is a wave. Some will say it particle. Some will say it both. But none are wholly wrong or right, it just depends on how they perceive it and their knowledge around. 

    The truth is subjective not objective. It is conditional. There is no universal truth, not even in science. 

    Heisenberg's uncertainty principle kind of suggests perception changes everything. When something is observed the truth shifts, compared to when it is unobserved. How we interpret and build the world around us is entirely built on our perception. And that creates our truth. 

    That is the same in science and poltics. 

    Experimental fact is hardly immutable or objective or formed without belief. Every field has a half-life of facts largely to falsification. Because our belief in science shifts. 

    I've read a wealth of data of that supports the big bang, also seen a lot of data that supports the big bounce. Does that make either true or false? And does it negate either experiments data? 

    Or does it mean that belief and science aren't separate, that what often informs the interpretation of the data and how it is interpreted is belief? And if that's the case is it any difference than poltical debates using science to support thier beliefs? Are theories just the poltics of science? 

    I wouldn't say it is experiment or data that gives science its objectivity - as almost every experiment will have flaws in design. I say its peer review, investigation and the debate generated by different perspectives and competing theories. It that debate that helps us reframe the data and push it forward to a new truth or fact. 


    Edit: sorry meant the observer effect not uncertainty principle. Got distract while editing. Sorry. 
  • KletvarKletvar Posts: 85 Match Maker
    edited December 2019
    Thanks for this post.  I was about to quit my alliance and drop out for a while.  I'll put that on hold for now.
    Same, same. I said to my alliance that after the pve that gives Mysterio and Fury covers (i need only one more pink or blue to champ Mysterio, so i wanted to champ him before i rage quit) i'll probably be gone, but this gives me at least a bit of hope that things are gonna be better. 

    Still, the cut of HP and CP is what mostly pisses me off, so i still may quit. Idk.
  • fight4thedreamfight4thedream GLOBAL_MODERATORS Posts: 1,194 Chairperson of the Boards
    ***Mod note: Had to remove some posts and issued a warning for a rule 7 violation. Please keep this thread on topic. While some of the off topic conversation is interesting I do ask that you either take it to PM or make use of the off topic forum. Thank you.
  • AXP_ismeAXP_isme Posts: 714 Critical Contributor
    Happy to leave this one be, given fight’s interjection. @Blergh, I don’t think we’re going to agree but that’s fine. 
  • BlerghBlergh Posts: 115 Tile Toppler
    AXP_isme said:
    Happy to leave this one be, given fight’s interjection. @Blergh, I don’t think we’re going to agree but that’s fine. 
    Yeah. Hardly anyone does. It's what makes it a fascinating subject and why there are so many views on the objectivity of science like the view from nowhere or the theory-ladenness incommensurability stance I was taking. Cheers for the chat. And will shut up now. 
  • whitecat31whitecat31 Posts: 569 Critical Contributor
    edited December 2019
    If the definition of trolling is defined as posts that provoke reactions, then there are a lot of trolls in the forum and the devs are definitely the biggest trolls in the forum.

    To jamesh, your post is too simplified and that's definitely not what I post most of the time. Typically, when it's something that doesn't involve only giving opinions, I use evidences/facts that could be verified to support my viewpoint. If you are biased against me, anything I said is argued in bad faith.

    Besides, who has the authority to determine what is right and what is wrong when all of us do not have completion information about the game making decision as a whole? Just because someone thinks that another person is wrong doesn't mean that person is wrong. Think of the debates concerning the world such as pro-life vs pro-choice, Brexit vs Remainers, Republicans vs Democrats, parties who are against min. wage and for min wage and so on. Has there any conclusion on which camp is telling the truth?

    Anyway, we are going off topic. I shall stop here.
    Right and wrong are usually social constructs based on what the majority of society sees as right and wrong, this is usually based on general consensus. Example:  The Letters of Secession written by the succeeding states stated the Civil war was fought based on slavery.  Two populations had widely different views about what was right and wrong and a war was fought over it.
    The winner of these conflicts usually determines the result.  Currently, the vast majority of the population believes that slavery is wrong.

    Our perceptions of right and wrong can be influenced by many sources. Some of those sources can be insidious, especially, if on the fringe or with selfish agendas. Other sources can be tainted by group think. Some sources will try to distort facts based on emotions. Many sources just report facts as they see it, but might get attacked by contrary sources, to muddle legitimacy.

    Truth is usually determined by facts and vice a versa.  There are also frequently strong beliefs that are repeated over again, that people see as Truth, which are not facts.  For example, certain groups have spent many millions of dollars over a long period of time to tell many people the before mentioned Civil War was fought over states rights and not slavery. They have attacked historical sources and even written history books to be put in various school curriculum to alter perception. Even though the Letters of Secession specifically spell out the war was about slavery, a vast amount of people will repeat "states rights" and are completely unaware of the Letters of Secession. 
    So to answer the question "Who has the authority to determine what is right and wrong?", It is the people with the money, power, and that have an agenda, who will influence public perception over the actual facts of a debate. 

    Examples of this influence are in affect for the debate subjects you mentioned.  

    The choice argument. The bible is frequently used as a reason to deny the choice. People with money, power, and agendas have spent hundreds of millions of dollars and rewritten many versions of the bible to intentionally distort it. This is especially apparent with a verse called Exodus 21:22. There are many different variations of this verse.  Some can easily interpret older versions of the passage of Exodus 21:22 to say a forced miscarriage was not murder based on how murder was talked about in the same passage in the verse Exodus 21:12 and the punishment of the forced miscarriage does not equate to murder. But you are going to have to find bibles at least 60 years old, to read it and even find the word miscarriage.  Also there are other non biblical documents that equate with the older versions, for example in the Antiquities; Hittite laws; or the Talmud. Also if this interests you good luck reading the various interpretations of the ordeal of Bitter waters. 

    Some would say that the minimum wage raises have been researched and there is no evidence that shows a correlation between raising of minimum wage and inflation. Many have shown there are huge benefits to the population as a whole, each time when minimum wage is raised.  It is well known that various business lobbying groups, who have the money, power, and agenda, have influenced public perception over that research, by spending tons of money to demonstrate contrary research. Why? Because this saves them tons of money in the long run. So any evidence that is contrary to their message is systematically attacked. Some might point out that many economists who are anti-minimum wage get paid a lot more money from various sources.

    I won't touch on Brexit or political parties.  Except to repeat the theme. There is a strong argument that fringe groups have spent billions of dollars to influence public perception, in an attempt to get people to vote against their own best interest of the majority, in favor of the fringe.

    Now I am not trying to have a debate on any of these subjects, and you can easily find information to contradict what I wrote. Of course where that information came from, should be weighed. Because:
    It is the duty of a truth seeker, to use critical thinking skills to weigh out the validity of the information to determine if it is fact or tainted.
  • RickOShayRickOShay Posts: 440 Mover and Shaker
    Yes please please stay on topic.
    There's plenty enough already to sift through in 16 pages without the extra fluff.
  • UNSHMDUNSHMD Posts: 6 Just Dropped In
    Thanks for the rewards, but personally it didn’t change much since it’s an exact clear explanation ahead of the update that would have change something i would have waited till the update before leveling some heroes in order to get the mighty tokens, so I’m still disappointed on that aspect. So maybe next time don’t rush it take a day or two more to come up with a clear explanation of what will take place.
  • GronkSmashGronkSmash Posts: 45 Just Dropped In
    Did anyone get retroactive shards for Spiderman Black Suit from Infinity war spidey? I earned 12 covers but didn't get the 500 backlogged shards to make 13 😞
  • krakenoonkrakenoon Posts: 281 Mover and Shaker
    So, just my 2HP...
    The intended purpose of this restructuring is said to be helping with 4* dilution. As a player in the 4*transition, I feel the need for this heavily. I also understand that older vets have had to spend much longer to get to 4* play (able to rely on 4*s as a norm)  than I will after this (supposedly). The lack of shards given due to tiers already given does absolutely nothing to help in my getting to 4* play.
    Forgoing retroactive rewards to avoid a double dip hurts us all,  new players and vets alike. When characters are updated with shards, we will all eventually be hit by this if we get no or a severely diminished amount of shards.
    I understand the will be difficulty in making this right now & moving forward, but myself and others purposely bailed on the deal of the year because we refuse to support this restructuring.  I will continue to play for now, but have promised myself to spend no more real money in game until this is made right. If it isn't and what we all think is happening happens, I might just fill my free time playing something mindless like hero wars instead.
Sign In or Register to comment.