mrwednesday wrote:Actually, everything you quoted from Adder is true and documented by woot.
I freely admit some of it is, where my problem lies is how Adder and others interpret derby results. Is it true that they became popular quite quickly? Yes. Is it true that they have a high frequency of wins? Yes. How, though, is any of this indicative of cheating. Do you maybe not understand the causation/correlation idea? Perhaps a simple parable will help illustrate the concept. A Russian Tsar noticed that one province in his empire had the most sick people. He saw also that it had the most doctors. He put two and two together incorrectly and determined that it was the doctors that caused the sickness, and promptly ordered them all shot. Now if we apply the lessons from the parable to your accusations of cheating, what can we glean? Perhaps their popularity is due to their large following on other sites and the easy appeal of their designs, which though we both dislike them (though I can admit have popular appeal) are made to sell well. Adder and you, however, seem to view the success of any style you view as “not worthy” as incredibly suspicious if they do well in the derby. Why this is is beyond me.
They were immediately popular and no one had ever won with similar designs. The quality has decreased or at the very least not gotten better and they have increased their win percentage since the move to the new fog and hotness which would hide any vote tampering. While you may disagree with the conclusions reached, you also cannot argue that they have bee caught making fake accounts in the past (seki on DA) because it is a fact and documented. They also (potentially within the rules) had their family and friends sign up for tables at otakon so they could have an increased presence beyond what they were allowed to personally sign up for. They also disregarded the rules about displaying only 50% fanart until they were told by the con directors that they had to display original work. ramy said this himself.
I think I will address this paragraph point by point.
- They were immediately popular and no one had ever won with similar designs. I have no idea how this is supposed to show cheating. As you freely admit, ramy and seki were very popular on several sites before coming to shirt.woot, and nowhere does it say that it is forbidden or discouraged to advertise or bring in fans from other sites.
- The quality has decreased… which would hide any vote tampering. Nice run-on. Firstly, since you have such a derisive view of those who purchase their shirts, do you really think that they care if the quality of the designs goes down? If it has, it certainly has not to a notable extent. It has seemed somewhat impressive in its constant mediocrity. Regarding win percentages, again, how does this show cheating? If they are already winning, why would they possibly want to make it look more suspicious by artificially increasing the win percentage? The idea is nonsensical. And again, why would they need to hide their “vote tampering”? Woot knows the votes, and they are the only ones who matter who could care about cheating. What would ramy and seki achieve by trying to boost their win percentages in the advent of the new fog? There is no motivation, and any attempt to argue otherwise is inherently moot.
- While you may disagree … said this himself.Am I supposed to care about their prior activities on Deviantart? The difference between face accounts there and on woot is huge, since , again, they would be paying thousands of dollars to win by the amounts you claim they fake, and would need to pay even more if they wanted to actively increase the percentage of votes they win by, another point you make. Why would they do this? It effectively cancels out all their profits. Again, no motivation, point is moot. Regarding their activities at Otakon: I actually read through the DA journals of the persons involved despite my deep-seated loathing for that horrible site and found your milquetoast disclaimer describing their antics as “potentially within the rules” was quite the understatement. What they did, as admitted by one of the self-described “victims” was completely within the rules, and the butthurt tears that resulted mean no more than the self-righteous anger at the supposed sins of (gasp) bringing in friends from other sites to help vote. As for the whole 50% fan art thing, who cares? It has nothing to do with the subject at hand (an internet t-shirt competition, in case you have forgotten) and serves only as vaguely insidious character assassination.
What is funny is that you evidence against is even more speculative and to be honest based on less than the accusations that Adder is making.
Are you joking? My evidence is your clear lack thereof, and is not speculation but simple logic and common sense to anyone with a clear head. I am not accusing anyone, simply pointing out the flaws in your argument which I feel have gone uncalled-out for far too long.
Even the wording you use shows that there is no evidence for any of it but you assume that it "must" be happening.
I’m confused. Are you referring to the mocking part of my past post where poke fun at the causation/correlation confusion that you and Adder seem to suffer? I’m not saying that they must be cheating, mrwednesday, but precisely the opposite. Perhaps I was mistaken in assuming that the sarcasm was clear.
As of this point, you can argue that Adder's points are circumstantial evidence of their actions here but it is evidence. You have no evidence whatsoever that anything you have stated is true.
Ah, and here we have a perfect wrap-up to a post, an ad homenim accusation wrapped up in a strawman, tied with a bow of deceptive language. You admit in the first sentence that the sacred tenets of your accusations of cheating are merely circumstantial, an illuminating viewpoint. You close by saying that I have no evidence of anything that I’ve said. Really? Really? Are you illiterate? I have backed up every single statement I have made with either facts of the record of common sense, and that is an objective fact. Compared to the “evidence” provided by you and Adder, I seem like a veritable Sherlock Holmes.