Hacking DIOS MIOS/Devolution ethics thread

[tueidj]

I specifically mentioned sk0ld in my post to make the point that anything he says should not be considered as representing the opinions of "the DIOS MIOS camp" since he's basically just a self appointed spokesperson who has no record of contributing anything besides vitriolic posts towards user issues, lambasting (see what I did there?) people for not donating enough and expressing his general disdain for this forum and its users. The fact that he claimed to have been "following a snake in the grass for about a month now" when I had only been working on Devolution (in private without telling anyone) for a couple of weeks should be enough to show that he isn't a reliable source, if not then I can also produce some chat logs from April/May between crediar and myself discussing details of our individual projects - hardly behaviour that would suit sk0ld's fabricated image of arch-rivals.
To say "some degree of rivalry exists between the developers of DIOS MIOS and Devolution" when you have no statement from the actual DIOS MIOS developer and a negative confirmation from the Devolution developer is indeed irrational behaviour - you (and others) have allowed yourself to believe second-hand information over my first-hand explanations.

 

[CheatFreak47]

What is right and what is legal are not necessarily the same thing.

I was mostly talking ethics there, Simply because legality isn't very consistent on the internet, what with different countries having different legal polices and such. But ok.

 

[wiismodrome]

To say "some degree of rivalry exists between the developers of DIOS MIOS and Devolution" when you have no statement from the actual DIOS MIOS developer and a negative confirmation from the Devolution developer is indeed irrational behaviour - you (and others) have allowed yourself to believe second-hand information over my first-hand explanations.

Arch rivals? Who made that claim?

The post from skOld is not the only piece of information which led to the notion that some degree of competition may exist. As a counterpoint, is it normal for people to report those whom they consider to be valued friends for TOS violations?

As for your own explanations, they are evaluated very cautiously, due to a variety of factors, and not accepted prima facie.

 

[DeadlyFoez]

Just because some people say that there is a competition does not mean that there is in fact a competition especially when the developers of both apps have not said that there is a such said competition.

Hell, I can go out of my way and say that XFlak (sorry man) is having a competition against (insert name here), but just because I say it does not make it true. People imagine things all the time and try way too hard to find thing in between the lines, but just because one person finds something to point at does not make it the case. Tueidj has already done so much more to show otherwise.

This discussion is rather pointless from what I can see.

You either like one app, or you like the other, or like them both, or hate them both. It does not make your opinion a fact. Evidence is the only factual thing here, and trying to put pieces together to try to support the idealology of a fact does not make your idealology a fact.

I personally don't care much about devolution or DIOS MIOS, but I do care to to defend what is factual. And the fact is that this thread is just completely unnecessary because it is not helping anything, only stirring up the bullshit.

 

[wiismodrome]

I personally don't care much about devolution or DIOS MIOS, but I do care to to defend what is factual. And the fact is that this thread is just completely unnecessary because it is not helping anything, only stirring up the bullshit.

Hmmm... what you stated as a fact is, in fact, just an opinion.

However, given your apparent interest in facts (which I happen to share), why not explain the facts related to this situation as you understand them. If you have knowledge pertinent to DIOS MIOS and Devolution and their respective developers, would it not be useful to share it with others in order to dispel disagreements?

 

[tueidj]

So basically you're saying you won't believe anything I say or any evidence I present simply because you don't want to. Finally it's been admitted, you can drop the facade of "intellectual discussion" since you're obviously only willing to hear what you want to hear and we can all avoid these threads like the complete waste of time that they are.

 

[DeadlyFoez]

Where's your facts of what the developers have said that make you think there is a competition? I am unable to produce evidence beyond what has been said here that says it, but you have made claims about things using 3rd party people as your evidence which just does not stand up in this discussion.

People have reported XFlak's googlecode page as being a TOS, when in fact the people who reported him did not have any competing app, thus no personal interest to gain anything for their own work. It's one thing when someone reports a violation for it being a violation, and that was the case with this.

 

[wiismodrome]

So basically you're saying you won't believe anything I say or any evidence I present simply because you don't want to. Finally it's been admitted, you can drop the facade of "intellectual discussion" since you're obviously only willing to hear what you want to hear and we can all avoid these threads like the complete waste of time that they are.

That is a perfect example of a straw man: http://rationalwiki.org/wiki/Straw_man

That is not what I said at all and you know it. Seriously, be honest with yourself.

 

[CheatFreak47]

And the fact is that this thread is just completely unnecessary because it is not helping anything, only stirring up the bullshit.

Yeah, it really is stirring up bullshit. I'm done with this thread.

 

[DeadlyFoez]

Tueidj is being honest. You're being blind. I have had many reasons in the past to dislike tueidj, but I side with him on this. You're making something out of nothing.

There is not going to be any win that is in your favor and you will just pointlessly rebut anything that is said, so this discussion is pointless. Trust me, you are not making any difference here, thus this is all a waste of time.

 

[wiismodrome]

No, he is not. He intentionally misrepresented what I stated and dismissed the misrepresented claim. That is dishonest.

Answer this: If a person has a history of using fallacious arguments, why would a rational individual accept their claims uncritically?

I did not say that I was unwilling to entertain evidence, just that I would not accept it prima facie.

 

[zerofalcon]

Both devs are doing what they think is the best/correct for themselves; their fans (users) are twisting this whole topic with feasible reasons but careless arguments. Both projects are online and being developed, both have their personal goals to reach, and in the end, the rest of us are only waiting for updates on both loaders and EVERY UPDATED FILE is already online no matter the hosted site.

 

[JoostinOnline]

wiismodrome, you are ridiculous. You ignore what tueidj says about his own app/intentions/feelings, but ask other people for information on the subject. You then act like speculation and second-hand sources are solid evidence for how crediar feels. When anyone points out the giant flaws in your arguments (if the can even be called such), you start yelling about strawman fallacies.

All you are doing is stirring up trouble. Please do the whole forum a favor and stop it.

 

[wiismodrome]

wiismodrome, you are ridiculous. You ignore what tueidj says about his own app/intentions/feelings, but ask other people for information on the subject. You then act like speculation and second-hand sources are solid evidence for how crediar feels. When anyone points out the giant flaws in your arguments (if the can even be called such), you start yelling about strawman fallacies.

There was no yelling involved.

In fact, tueidj clearly did make a straw man of what I wrote. That is undeniable. Read what I wrote and then read how it was rephrased to imply something completely different. Do it while imagining that someone else wrote it, as that might help reduce disconfirmation bias. Misrepresenting another's claims is equivalent to lying. That is blatantly dishonest and morally reprehensible. It speaks to the integrity of a person when they cannot engage in honest dialog, and instead resort of making up caricatures of what others say in order to dominate them.

Why would a reasonable person accept the testimony of an individual who engages in such dishonest tactics at face value? If someone was willing to twist what you say and lie to you with a straight face, would you be eager to believe what they say without considering the integrity of the source? Given this established pattern, it is not unexpected to see an attempt discredit the primary source of counter-evidence, which in effect implies that skOld was being dishonest. What reason do we have to come to that conclusion? Why would he make anything up? Unless there is a plausible reason to think otherwise, it would be reasonable to take his statements at face value. And why should a reasonable person accept an individual's attempt at discrediting another's testimony when that individual has a history of dishonestly representing what others say?

Further, the direct questions that I asked were not answered, like whether someone is likely to report a person they consider a friend for TOS violations. Also not addressed was the issue of hosting crediar's files, even though crediar clearly expressed that he did not want anyone else to host his files. But, as it is, it would not be unreasonable to interpret the file hosting as a deliberately hostile act. Moreover, given the obvious hostility and disrespect for others displayed in tueidj's responses above, such behavior would not be out of character. Of course, if crediar actually asked tueidj to host the files, that would change the situation entirely.

 

[pwsincd]

fascinating .. wiismodrone reminded me i gotta go watch grass grow , and that paint dry.. ffs man stfu.

 

[JoostinOnline]

Given this established pattern, it is not unexpected to see an attempt discredit the primary source of counter-evidence, which in effect implies that skOld was being dishonest. What reason do we have to come to that conclusion? Why would he make anything up? Unless there is a plausible reason to think otherwise, it would be reasonable to take his statements at face value. And why should a reasonable person accept an individual's attempt at discrediting another's testimony when that individual has a history of dishonestly representing what others say?

Yet more evidence that you are ignoring tueidj, even though he is the only one who can give reliable answers.

I specifically mentioned sk0ld in my post to make the point that anything he says should not be considered as representing the opinions of "the DIOS MIOS camp" since he's basically just a self appointed spokesperson who has no record of contributing anything besides vitriolic posts towards user issues, lambasting (see what I did there?) people for not donating enough and expressing his general disdain for this forum and its users. The fact that he claimed to have been "following a snake in the grass for about a month now" when I had only been working on Devolution (in private without telling anyone) for a couple of weeks should be enough to show that he isn't a reliable source, if not then I can also produce some chat logs from April/May between crediar and myself discussing details of our individual projects - hardly behaviour that would suit sk0ld's fabricated image of arch-rivals.
To say "some degree of rivalry exists between the developers of DIOS MIOS and Devolution" when you have no statement from the actual DIOS MIOS developer and a negative confirmation from the Devolution developer is indeed irrational behaviour - you (and others) have allowed yourself to believe second-hand information over my first-hand explanations.

 

[tueidj]

Are you or are you not calling me a liar? Because it sounds like you are, but when I pointed that out in my last post you said I was lying.

 

[chop]

I think I might go back to using NeoGamma.

 

[wiismodrome]

Are you or are you not calling me a liar? Because it sounds like you are, but when I pointed that out in my last post you said I was lying.

The word 'dishonest' is probably more appropriate, because it is dishonest to misrepresent the claims that others make in order to dismiss them.

In post #43 I said:

As for your own explanations, they are evaluated very cautiously, due to a variety of factors, and not accepted prima facie.

To which you replied in post #46:

So basically you're saying you won't believe anything I say or any evidence I present simply because you don't want to. Finally it's been admitted, you can drop the facade of "intellectual discussion" since you're obviously only willing to hear what you want to hear and we can all avoid these threads like the complete waste of time that they are.

Do you think that this honestly reflects what I wrote?

 

[JoostinOnline]

wiismodrome, I've reported you for trolling.