Re: Quake? No, thanks.

Posted by pyx / bamboosh on January 29, 1998 at 23:48:07:

In Reply to: Re: Quake? No, thanks. posted by Guess who..(Naughty^NoT) on January 28, 1998 at 14:51:24:

> Well I too think it would please both side of interests very much,
> but I quote :
> "But if you say this just to promote an attitude of selfishness, and
> your only purpose is to take most of the net capacity and use it for
> your pleasures and others displeasure, then its a matter of a totally
> different case."
> But I doubt you were talking about net spilitting here though, that's more
> a reply to me wanting to put up some dedicated servers. And I admit that my
> interests aren't very admirable, but then again it wouldn't hurt you guys either.

Its positive that you admit your interest arent very admirable.. hehe.. and I
agree with you ;-)

> I'll quote myself
> "I think I'm not doing this out of selfhisness or out of respect, more out of the
> advantage this gives both sides."

Yes, I see, but are we now talking about the splitting of the net, or are we talking
about the network capacities we must share if the net stays as one? If it is separated,
it will ofcourse be an advantage to both sides, but if stays as one net, then its very
hard for the opposite sides to agree. But lets forget that.. I was
questioning the attitude and analysing your meaning behind the words you said when you
said you wanted to split up.. I sound like a teacher :->

>> I did respect you before the you wrote this reply, but i find it
>> a bit hard to respect you now, as you said in own words, that
>> you are selfish and speak out of own interest.
> OK, we had a misunderstanding there. I thought you were talking about
> spilitting up TG and you were talking about putting up dedicated servers.
> Well once again I'm not talking out of my own interests, but what I feel
> is out of everybodys interest. If they decided to do so, then that would
> please both you and me wouldn't it.

We both agree with the fact that splitting up the network would be best. But
I was questioning the motives for the statement, not the purpose. And you said
you said it out of selfishness, not out of beeing helpfull. When you put it
that way, it is understandable that people think something like "we quakers cant
get a net by ourselves, so fuck it, we'll take up all the network capacity
anyway."

> And if you decide you don't respect me becouse I want what's good for the
> entire TG, hey that's you're problem. Could eb a result of my misunderstanding though :)

No, we agree of the splitting of the network.. that would be a clear advantage. Again, I
can say I was questioning the motives.

>>> And please explain to me how you
>>> intend to use the net to constructive purposes.
>> Hehehe... Arent you embarassed to say this?
> First of all I didn't say anything I asked how you intend to use
> the net to constructive purposes. Sorry if my bad english messed it up.

Maybe it was just an honest mistake of bad formulation or something.. but
if you really meanth saying "how you intend to use the net to contructive
purposes", then shows an entire different attitude.

> Hard to explain to a guys who only sees quake as a game
> where the purpose is to get most kills.

Isnt that how you win the game? Sure, its got nice environments,
you get a really 3D feeling, nice sound, animations.. But
what do you do in the game? You dont pick flowers.. :->

> Well I think this reply answers that question and I'm glad we can do so
> in a very civilized fashion,

Yeah, me too :-)

> although this isn't the perfect place of doing so.
> I hate these small windows.

I know, my eyes are starting to hurt.. You should be able to maximize it.

>> So your nick is "Naughty Not"? OK, fine :-)
> Well actually my nick is just "NoT", but I didn't want to confuse you so I added Naughty..

Hehe, am I getting a vibe here? ;-)

pyx

Follow Ups:

• Re: Quake? No, thanks. NoT 13:29:02 1/31/98 (0)

Post a Followup

Name:
E-Mail:
Subject:
Comments: : > Well I too think it would please both side of interests very much, : > but I quote : : > "But if you say this just to promote an attitude of selfishness, and : > your only purpose is to take most of the net capacity and use it for : > your pleasures and others displeasure, then its a matter of a totally : > different case." : > But I doubt you were talking about net spilitting here though, that's more : > a reply to me wanting to put up some dedicated servers. And I admit that my : > interests aren't very admirable, but then again it wouldn't hurt you guys either. : Its positive that you admit your interest arent very admirable.. hehe.. and I : agree with you ;-) : > I'll quote myself : > "I think I'm not doing this out of selfhisness or out of respect, more out of the : > advantage this gives both sides." : Yes, I see, but are we now talking about the splitting of the net, or are we talking : about the network capacities we must share if the net stays as one? If it is separated, : it will ofcourse be an advantage to both sides, but if stays as one net, then its very : hard for the opposite sides to agree. But lets forget that.. I was : questioning the attitude and analysing your meaning behind the words you said when you : said you wanted to split up.. I sound like a teacher :-> : : >> I did respect you before the you wrote this reply, but i find it : >> a bit hard to respect you now, as you said in own words, that : >> you are selfish and speak out of own interest. : > OK, we had a misunderstanding there. I thought you were talking about : > spilitting up TG and you were talking about putting up dedicated servers. : > Well once again I'm not talking out of my own interests, but what I feel : > is out of everybodys interest. If they decided to do so, then that would : > please both you and me wouldn't it. : We both agree with the fact that splitting up the network would be best. But : I was questioning the motives for the statement, not the purpose. And you said : you said it out of selfishness, not out of beeing helpfull. When you put it : that way, it is understandable that people think something like "we quakers cant : get a net by ourselves, so fuck it, we'll take up all the network capacity : anyway." : > And if you decide you don't respect me becouse I want what's good for the : > entire TG, hey that's you're problem. Could eb a result of my misunderstanding though :) : No, we agree of the splitting of the network.. that would be a clear advantage. Again, I : can say I was questioning the motives. : >>> And please explain to me how you : >>> intend to use the net to constructive purposes. : >> Hehehe... Arent you embarassed to say this? : > First of all I didn't say anything I asked how you intend to use : > the net to constructive purposes. Sorry if my bad english messed it up. : Maybe it was just an honest mistake of bad formulation or something.. but : if you really meanth saying "how you intend to use the net to contructive : purposes", then shows an entire different attitude. : > Hard to explain to a guys who only sees quake as a game : > where the purpose is to get most kills. : Isnt that how you win the game? Sure, its got nice environments, : you get a really 3D feeling, nice sound, animations.. But : what do you do in the game? You dont pick flowers.. :-> : > Well I think this reply answers that question and I'm glad we can do so : > in a very civilized fashion, : Yeah, me too :-) : > although this isn't the perfect place of doing so. : > I hate these small windows. : I know, my eyes are starting to hurt.. You should be able to maximize it. : >> So your nick is "Naughty Not"? OK, fine :-) : > Well actually my nick is just "NoT", but I didn't want to confuse you so I added Naughty.. : Hehe, am I getting a vibe here? ;-) : : pyx Optional Link URL: Link Title: Optional Image URL: