By Rakso, Patriarch & Rules Ayatollah (Rakso) on Friday, June 01, 2001 - 08:34 am: Read the subject line.
HE IS MINE.
(Translation: I have mixed feelings about this rebuttal article, but I feel that the issue has not been fully clarified, at least not to our community's satisfaction.
I request the honor of first crack at articulating our misgivings about that mini-series on Star City, which is what Ferrett wants, anyway.
"Little patriots" my foot...)
http://www.starcitygames.com/php/news/expandsub.php?Article=1484
June 01, 2001
Understanding Type One Sucks: The Cliffs Notes Rebuttal
by Matt Smith
A man will let a few things slide in his life. You can call his collection crap, you can question his playing skills — heck, you can even NOT read his articles — but don’t call him out on his writing.
Let’s start with a couple observations, things for you to chew on, before I shamefully have to defend my article — a thing no writer should ever have to do.
Put away that bag of apologies, Ferrett; if the reader didn’t understand the article then it was by no fault of your own.
After the posting of the article I received between twenty and twenty-five rebuttals, some of which I haven’t responded to yet, NONE of which came from people who didn’t write something nasty about me in the bdominia threads or at Star City.
I understand that after reading the title, most people probably didn’t bother reading into the article. This preconceived ideology would lead to a misunderstanding of the article... But we NEVER do that in life, do we? (That’s sarcasm.)
I’m taking it in the backside in two ways because of the article: I knew that I was going to receive mail, but I wrote the article in this style for a reason. I thought the article I wrote was done brilliantly; it’s the rebuttal article that I hate to write.
I was hoping to do a little defending, some explaining, and give a reason why my article was written the way it was. Fortunately for us, you can read Darren Di Battista’s article from Tuesday. He shares, albeit somewhat aimed towards my head, some of the myths that non-Type One players have.
I found his writing to be informative — although it should have been written in third person. Example?
"Darren Di Battista has seen the rise of at least five new decks in the last few months, two of which Darren Di Battista has created himself."
A patriot for Type One for sure, but I think this patriotism has made Battista a bit jumpy. A reader should never assume they know more than the writer does; you’re in the writer’s hands, you’ll go where he leads you.
And the bdominions, those lovely little patriots, went exactly where they were supposed to — email.
Okay, Okay, Okay... Let me explain something first, then I’ll go into the explanation of the article. As writers, we have to ways to address you — the audience. We can invoke or evoke an audience. It’s controversial to say which works best, but by becoming the other side of the audience I had hoped to get my point across — call it reverse psychology. How does it work? Let me show you:
Yeah I’m with you — Type one sucks.
But then again, maybe it doesn’t.
I’m still one of you, though.
I wonder why it doesn’t suck?
The myths that were presented in the article are exactly that: Myths. I don’t expect an avid Type One player to agree with this, and that may be why so many people just stopped reading and started responding. Lovely! I want to hear from you — in fact, I want you to fill The Ferrett’s mailbox with Type One rebuttals. Ever wonder why Bdominia is the ONLY noteworthy source of Type One information? Ever wanna change that? Are you going to do that by sitting in BDominia bitching about the stagnation of Type One? It’s easy to think that Type One is flourishing when that’s all you ever play. Do you realize that most magic players have NO idea what sets are allowed in Type One? No idea about what’s restricted, even what type of decks are out there — save that blue is in most of them. It’s hard to understand the state of an element when you live in a vacuum.
So let me say that the article was a bit satirical, and it may have seemed confusing if you’re reading it from a vacuum. I should have written it like Darren Di Battista — without the insults, of course.
I can’t argue with any of the other points in Battista’s article. I agree with most all of them (other than Channel-Fireball being a combo…of sorts — it’s definitely a combo, it’s just not used much anymore). He pretty much gives evidence to the arguments that I set out, and that’s what I was hoping for. I want the reader to look at my article and say, "He still plays Type One — I wonder if what he says is true? Maybe I’ll look at the restricted list, or maybe I’ll try and throw together a Type One deck." I suppose Battista’s article is a compliment of sorts.
Because I don’t want this article to become ugly, here are a couple of decks viable in Type One. Do you know the idea behind each of them? Know what colors are in them? Should you find out? (Yes!) MonoBlue, Keeper, Oath, Butter Knives, Pox, Fleshreaver, WW, Parfait, Zoo, 4C Sligh, Three Deuce, Counter-Burn, not to mention a number of decks that are viable after each new set comes out. If you aren’t at least familiar with Type One, then you are not a complete Magic player.
"I hope a whole bunch of people send rebuttals, I’ve already sent one in."
"I was actually discussing the idea of posting a link to this thread or another one that we start on Star City as a kind of group rebuttal to the points raised in the article. I was actually tempted to break my tagline and talk for once and post an article myself…If more events were held in the format, more people would try to play"
"People are wrong everyday, and BD members are no exception."
"Before T2 was the big game in town, when people would play in a weekend tournament, I still remember that tourney from…3-4 years ago? Pox won, if I recall…Pox! What a concept…"
"I just wrote an article recently for my groups site called Why Type 2 sucks. I think I’m going to send it in."
"Ferrett prolly posted it knowing we’d all go look at it, prolly got 1000+ hits just for today."
"If the Ferret ACTUALLY posts type 1 stuff, then I’d be more than happy enough to write him about my own WW deck."
"I suppose I could try if I’m able to write articles to StarCity, despite my not-so-perfect english just to "educate" people about T1…"
"Ok, so I think I’ll post a point by point rebuttal to his arguments, and maybe some example decks that are only possible in T1"
"Eschew Obfuscation, people. Really. Eschew it but good."
"I think that article helped highlight a fairly disturbing fact."
"Greetz from a, kinda frustrated by this article, but otherwise completely satisfied T1 player who likes T1 fine the way it is."
Those are some of the replies to my article at Beyond Dominia. I especially like the last one. I like the format fine the way it is.
Here goes my explanation for the article — intended for those who read the title and first paragraph, then skipped to the end:
The title: Type One Sucks. Let’s look at this through the reader’s eye Socrates style. Why does Type One suck? What is this guy talking about? Type One doesn’t suck! Type One? I haven’t heard about that in years.
I had originally titled the article: Type One, the most electrifying format in Magic.
The story: When I started playing, there was no such thing as Type One. We played with the cards we had and most often this equated to playing with ALL the cards we had. After a while, I learned to shave the deck down and play with certain cards that were strong. As a young Magic player, one might get confused along the way. Heck, even as old Magic players we are often confused. I believed that to play a good deck, you had to have expensive cards to support it — we all did. That’s why Mox Ruby is worth more than Camouflage. But it wasn’t until my reintroduction to the game that I noticed it wasn’t the weapons (powerful cards) that wins you games. To win the game, you really have to know the game. What factors into winning? Knowing the metagame certainly helps. How about knowing all the cards that are available to you? Knowing the rules of the tournaments, the errata on certain cards, restriction to the environment. There is certainly more to the game than just the Power Nine.
I start the story by explaining the man carries with him a fire. The fire embodies the game, Magic’s spirit. His torch goes out and he meets a group of people who light it for him. This is something I think has happened to all of us; for one reason or another, we depart Magic. When we come back, we find that rules have changed and cards we used are not as good as they once were.
After a while, playing a format where the same deck seems to always win often leads to boredom. Magic is dependent on change. One deck might be the standard now, but the field will change with the introduction of new sets. You’re in for some trouble if you’re happy with the current state of Magic — change is inevitable.
I was thinking the other day. You know it would be really awkward for my friend to start playing Magic again. When he played it was about Channel-Fireball. It was about playing with the P9 — nearly all of us owned them. I bet if he played today, he’d be in for a surprise. He’d most likely have to adapt. Change. Most people can’t fathom that Type One has changed, though. They see it as they remember it from ages ago. Why is that I wonder? How do we erase stereotypes?
Too often, Magic becomes an argument between right and wrong. My format is better than yours is; casual play is more honorable than pro play, this and that. I try to write to cross those boundaries. If you’ve read my previous articles at www.ccgprime.com, you’d recognize that I try to address issues that mean something to a few people. I challenge readers to do the same.
At the end of my story, I mention that wit is the key element and it is. The love of the game burns in all of us for different reasons. If that fire isn’t fed, we’ll lose it. I believe the best Magic players can fight with any weapon, any arena, any format, and at any time.
Was Type One Sucks a vitriolic and widely-unfounded anti-Type One article? No; it was just the opposite. I laid myself on the line, took the criticism in the hopes that I could spring new life into a format that I love. If you’re unfamiliar with my methods then, by all means, contact me. That’s why I put my email address at the end of my articles.
Viva,
--Smith
Smirk on IRC
S2***i@o***i.com
"Shawn Jackson: The man who never met a Magic card he didn’t like."
P.S.: I’m trying to answer all emails sent to me; if I haven’t gotten to yours yet, beware! I’ll be contacting you soon. Mwaha…Mwha…Mwhahahaaa.
By SliverKing on Friday, June 01, 2001 - 08:48 am: Be cautious about your responses. Another deluge of complaining BDominia-ites will just turn it into a flame war. What we want from this is greater mainstream acceptance of Type 1, not some bickering e-battle that detracts from the real issues (do you have to be rich to play, why the hell wont wizards support Type 1, etc).
What are needed are articles about how much fun Type 1 is, how VARIED the format is... things that are positive and would encourage people to play. Because of this incident, Type 1 and this board specifically are getting some exposure, lets try to be sure that we use that positively, rather than in infantile "Your article sucks, no it does, yes it does, no it doesnt" kind of stuff.
By White Knight (White_Knight) on Friday, June 01, 2001 - 09:25 am: I agree with SliverKing, so let's not start a flamewar.
If we all already agreed in that Matt's article- type 1 sucks- was badly written, I think we should not lower ourselves to the level of his reply to Azhrei's article.
He said that his article was in defense of type 1 (in some tremendously obscure way no one understood, or at least most, other than himself), then he claims that the writer guides those who read... Well, actually the reading is done by each of us, and we have a way of interpretating things.
If most have came to the conclusion that Matt's article is badly written, then it's because we agree that he failed his purpose, as a writter, to show the good points about type 1, such as he claims to have tried.
Thus, we need not to prove ourselves to someone who is clearing provoking us. Let him be where he is.
Rakso: The best way of answering provocation is ignoring it.
By meh on Friday, June 01, 2001 - 09:41 am: was it really necessary to post the entire article after you linked it?
By CF on Friday, June 01, 2001 - 09:56 am: I agree.
Most people, who doesn't happen to share his college curriculum, would take his article as "defending" type1. People in genereal usually jump to conclusions and aren't too bright 
Writing points and argumentation strictly from one's own mindset is a common error writers do; not thinking about how the article might be interpreted by the common reader. Sure, one can say "they came to the wrong conclusions because they didn't read between the lines, and misinterpreted this and that", but it is not a valid argument when what you have written is for a public forum.
--
Chris
By Azhrei (Azhrei) on Friday, June 01, 2001 - 11:12 am: Actually, the writer becomes largely irrelevant after the writing is done-- the work becomes an interpretive medium that the reader has total dominance over. Whether or not the reader understands things as the writer wishes him/her to is the gauge of the writer's skill. However, once a work is in the public eye, what the writer intended is unimportant compared to how it is interpreted by the reader-- a story is ONLY about what the reader thinks it to be about, no matter what kind of metaphor the writer includes.
I think that the best way to deal with this is a massive influx of T1 articles that do not ever mention Matt Smith again, even in passing. SliverKing is absolutely right: let's ignore the negative and drown it with positives.
He's only coming after me personally anyway, and what do I care?
By bebe on Friday, June 01, 2001 - 11:23 am: I agree with SilverKing. A vitriolic rebuttal is not an answer. I am annoyed at the characterization of bdominites ( is that correct?) as an inbred clan following our patriot but these kind of statements do not deserve a rebuttal. I also hate to be patronized and the tone of the article borders on insulting:
" We can invoke or evoke an audience. It’s controversial to say which works best, but by becoming the other side of the audience I had hoped to get my point across — call it reverse psychology. How does it work? Let me show you: "
But isn't there more productive ways to promote this mill? We should write articles that are informative and entertaining to stimulate the growth of Type 1. Show people that the principles of good deck building apply to all formats and the transition to Type 1 is really quite easy. It is too easy to refute a statement that lacks real thought:
" I was thinking the other day. You know it would be really awkward for my friend to start playing Magic again "
I find it more difficult for friends who have stopped playing for awhile to return to Type 2 than to Type 1. Type 1 archtypes have survived rather well over the years. Card pools have changed but Mono-Blue, Butter knives, Sligh, and Keeper are not new concepts.
So we know that there are gaping holes in the article. Better to write something original and provacative of our own though. It is each person's choice how he wishes to respond but I think discussing new ideas will prove more fruitful than rehashing the old arguments to once again defend Type 1. Intelligent readers will not be swayed to abandon Type 1. Tghat is not our current dilema.
Type 1 will suffer until we incorporate enough cards from new sets into this format on a regular basis. This is what makes money.Unfortunately magic is a business. Only a small handful of cards of late have been found useful in Type 1 ( FoF, Seals, Scutas, Vindicate). If we could write about new sets and design affordable decks for Type 1 using some new cards we would serve our purpose best. Then maybe stores and venues would promote it more.
By Rakso, Patriarch & Rules Ayatollah (Rakso) on Friday, June 01, 2001 - 01:08 pm: Well... I've sent a copy of my reply to Azhrei.
Trust me, guys... Me, fuel a flame war? You know better.
No, what I basically did was take the points Matt Smith (NOW) claims he made, and articulate them in a more satisfactory manner.
He just made personal notes against Azhrei?
I beg to disagree, and I think he was taunting Beyond Dominia in general in that smug rebuttal.
I feel, nevertheless, that someone has to make a constructive reply, because that image of Type I better not be the end of this series of replies!
And yes, I wrote up something that shows a bit more depth and diversity in Type I, a far cry from the vague metaphors of some warrior and his old and new weapons.
By Azhrei (Azhrei) on Friday, June 01, 2001 - 01:17 pm: I think history has proven that if someone wants to attack our community, they go after Rakso. If someone wants to attack out T1 theory, they go after me. Ihsan, the "invasion," and whatever else... it boils down to that most of the time. So yeah, I guess now this one is yours.
By Rakso, Patriarch & Rules Ayatollah (Rakso) on Friday, June 01, 2001 - 01:31 pm: It's a good work division.
You enjoy tweaking the strategies down to the finest points.
I enjoy leaving gaps that people can fill any which way they want because I do enjoy the community aspect a bit more and because my metagame lacks power of any kind.
(When was the last time anyone went after you? I think it was Ihsan, because you were first to stand up to his talk of black vs Keeper, and I didn't see it till you e-mailed. I remember that Legend wanted to kill Matt first of all, too!)
But when we get together in private e-mail... what was it he said? Mwaha…Mwha…Mwhahahaaa
By Smith on Tuesday, June 05, 2001 - 01:04 pm: For the Fans, By the Fans...
First time I've posted on the boards...Not the post I'd normally like to leave, but jeez, you good ole boys are really hoppin mad.
I'm actually finding it disturbing that you are still having a problem with my article. Some people obviously haven't read my rebuttal; if you had then you'd see my EMAIL ADDRESS at the bottom.
I had no intentions of making this a he said/she said arguement, I simply knew that by writing an article in that style it was going to draw responses. Responses, and plenty of them. Did you hear that? Or are you only listening again?
I am getting responses on Type One from people who don't play the format.
Are you hearing me yet? Nope, you're probably not. Still just "listening".
I am not "invading" Beyond Dominia. I am not degrading it's members. (I actually have a few good friends who are members) Personal attacks? Feh. You think too much of yourself.
You know how many T1 articles have been on Star City since I wrote that article? A whole lot more than there were. You know how many more people have probably said, "I wonder what BDominia is?" Maybe a few, maybe more, but don't turn potential T1 players away with your bickering. (The same type of retarts who make people embaressed to tell their friends they play Magic)
WAKE UP! The alarm just went off but you're still in bed. Open your eyes and see that YOU need to tell people how good T1 is, YOU need to stop telling me; I know. You wanna send the flames my way to spur an idea for an article, you want to rebut my rebut, you even want to tell people what I "might" have been trying to say...fine, but tell THEM, don't address it to me.
I've grown accustomed to finding out new deck ideas from BDominia. I've not been here as long as most of you, but these message boards really have helped me refine the edges on new decks.
Don't bog them down with my name--send those to Star City, the Ferrett will love you for it. ;-)
Overall,if you think my article was written poorly, then that's your opinion. You may not agree that MBC is the greatest format ever invented by WOTC-and thank you very much for Waterfront Bouncer-but then that'd be your opinion too--Of course my Grandpap always used to say that opinions are like a**holes and everyones got em.
I've got to close this thing up, it's getting late, so if you have a problem you'd still like to address with me you can e-mail me at:
m***i@h***o.com or my personal AIM handle is smirk2727
Viva BDominia,
--Smith
By Sylvester (Sylvester) on Tuesday, June 05, 2001 - 05:31 pm: problem is,i've ehard ppl actually got very...uncivil replies from you.I don't know if they made it so you'd answer like that or whatever, but i find it sad 8(
By TracerBullet on Tuesday, June 05, 2001 - 06:17 pm: "Personal attacks? Feh. You think too much of yourself. "
Honestly, i'm not one to flame, but who here thinks too much of himself?
By Thundermutt on Tuesday, June 05, 2001 - 06:35 pm: Wake up indeed. Well put. I have been sitting here in my Ivory Tower watching this little war of words unfold. And I know I have little creditability here, I don't post often, but this one really irks me. From what I've seen, the most highly revered elders of this board, have turned an article, they may not have truely understood, into a witch hunt. First and foremost, why are you guys so cynical? Does everyone have to agree with you about everything? In the original article I never saw a single rip on BD, nor did I take it as a slam to T1 players, (BTW, thats all we play here). Not everything is read word for word, and in some formats of writing, subtlty and inuendo are forms of expressive writing. As far as the rebuttal from Azrei, this is not a flame, merely constructive critism, it was very good......for high school writing 101. Was it clear? Yes. Was it articulating the feelings of the writer? Yes again. But, it had the feel of stereo instructions. Prehaps you only use you creative fuel on your Magic decks. Which, by the way, are pretty good. I guess to sum this up, I don't think everybody, "got it". I did, maybe you should read it again as if you wrote it. Is it clever? Maybe not, but its not as bad as it looks either. We all must be careful not to miss the forest from the trees, and everything is not face value. I hope this does not add fuel to the fire, but maybe brings a little insight.
By Azhrei (Azhrei) on Tuesday, June 05, 2001 - 07:15 pm: Ironically enough, most of my creative energy right now is going toward a body of work that will be my application for graduate school studying creative writing. All else aside, I *do* know what I am talking about when I speak of writing in general, and I *didn't* get the impression that Smith's article purportedly hopes to give-- and even after having it explained to me, I have difficulty 'getting' it. I take no issue with metaphor or atypical stylings -- hell, he could have done it in the form of an epic poem and I would have loved it, but *only* if it was a good poem.
By Rakso, Patriarch & Rules Ayatollah (Rakso) on Tuesday, June 05, 2001 - 07:36 pm: "You know how many T1 articles have been on Star City since I wrote that article? A whole lot more than there were."
--> As I predicted on BD's e-group, guess who's taking credit? Lol.
By Rakso, Patriarch & Rules Ayatollah (Rakso) on Tuesday, June 05, 2001 - 07:42 pm: "problem is,i've ehard ppl actually got very...uncivil replies from you.I don't know if they made it so you'd answer like that or whatever, but i find it sad 8("
--> Most definitely. And people have shown me copies of these replies. The response I see above, compared to these replies, smacks of hypocrisy if I ever saw it. Still as arrogant as ever, I'm afraid.
By Rakso, Patriarch & Rules Ayatollah (Rakso) on Tuesday, June 05, 2001 - 07:45 pm: Oh... you guys might be interested in the rest of my thoughts:
http://www.starcitygames.com/php/news/expandnews.php?Article=1496
Simply put: Having a Force of Will in hand is not the crowning glory of Type I strategy!!!
Mr. Smith’s central example was a Force of Will stopping a Channeled Fireball. To quote Mr. Smith:
"Sack the Lotus for three green, cast Channel and pay nineteen life?"
"Okay."
"Tap Ruby for red and fireball you for twenty?"
"I’ll pay one life and Force of Will the Fireball. You’re at one."
This is hardly an example of a serious change in Type I (Alliances is hardly a new set) nor of any real skill. This lone example was, in fact, a very poor one.
First of all, Mr. Smith’s "ideal player" should have lost when he countered the Fireball. Why?
By Sylvester (Sylvester) on Tuesday, June 05, 2001 - 07:45 pm: thundermutt:definitely, not everybody got it.
I didn't for one...
Did the article take a slam at either BD or T1 players? NO. But what it did do was show T1 as a game where Channell-Ball was something that could define the environment, followed by the countering power of FoW.
Also, if you consider that good writing, i'd say that any HS teacher would have made him failed, bc he wasn't able to convey his opinion. Quite the contrary in fact; never forget that what is right and wrong is in the judge's eyes; in this case the readers(the majority of them), or, in the HS writing case, the teacher.
By intrepid911 on Tuesday, June 05, 2001 - 07:50 pm: speaking of personal attacks, Mr. Smith spelt retards and embarrass wrong in the same sentence. Yes, i realize this is completely unproductive and will probably be deleted but i couldn't resist. ***vision of balloon of arrogance gradually being deflated
By Vegeta2711 on Tuesday, June 05, 2001 - 09:09 pm: Man this is just funny you guys on B-dominia talk about all the horrible things in Matt's article. Yet all you do is sit in your little isolated community, and never bring T1 to light in the general magic community. Yet when someone starts spouting BS about T1 you decide to come out of the woodwork and annihilate whoever writes the article. But, if you had some common sense you guys would just throw out some articles to keep the magic community informed so you wouldn't constantly have to defend yourselves against these articles. The magic players of the world would of of already gotten rid of the myth's of T1.
One thing though man you guys are vengeful when someone talks bad about T1.
Quote- Rasko Tan
"I WANT FIRST CRACK AT THE "TYPE I SUCKS" REBUTTAL ON STAR CITY!"
ROFL c'mon stop writing rebuttals and start writing some meaningful stuff about T1 for the magic websites, and maybe you would have that many more players for T1.
Vegeta2711
"Shit happens, deal with it."
By Azhrei (Azhrei) on Tuesday, June 05, 2001 - 10:08 pm: I think he was talking about you other guys. ;)
By meh on Tuesday, June 05, 2001 - 10:08 pm: it all sounds like kids fighting, anyway.
By Sylvester (Sylvester) on Tuesday, June 05, 2001 - 10:32 pm: meh:aren't we all li'l boys and girls at heart? 8)
(well, not jsut at ehart for some, but anyway)
Vegeta:Read *city. Plz understand that a rebuttal can be an extremely good opening for an article that'll try to hammer some T1 strat into ppl's head 8)
And plz, don't say that he amde a good thing bc he posted BS(or what seemed liek that, anyway) on *city, and that made us reply with T1 content. His article was very unclear, imho, and that's abd. that's like saying Hitler made a good thing by starting WWII, bc it made the world create the SoN and UN.
By meh on Tuesday, June 05, 2001 - 10:35 pm: dunno. too much acid.
By Rakso, Patriarch & Rules Ayatollah (Rakso) on Tuesday, June 05, 2001 - 11:51 pm: "But, if you had some common sense you guys would just throw out some articles to keep the magic community informed so you wouldn't constantly have to defend yourselves against these articles."
--> I don't know... a lot of people who are interested in Type I do lurk here and check out what articles are written.
--> However, taking your assumptions, you have to note that Matt Smith now claims that he reads BD content. Now, if we did write half the content of Star City, I still don't see how that would change the actions of people who write "Type I sucks" then claim to be raising awareness.
--> And... Bebe and Cormarrr from around here were writing stuff for Star City since way back. Matt D'Avanzo, I believe, also had old things on the Dojo. More recently, Azhrei's been dominating Star City's Type I segment, and my intermittent submissions are supposed to be more regular since I'm now the second Type I columnist.
--> I also wonder how you want our "isolated little community" to bring light to everyone else. If you ask The Ferrett, he'll refer you to BD for more. I also made a few pitches, and BD is explicitly listed as the Type I site in Meridian Magic. The Casual Player's Alliance also recognizes BD as a good source for Type I fans. I think this is pretty good, unless you want us to make obnoxious nuisances of ourselves?
"Quote- Rasko Tan
"I WANT FIRST CRACK AT THE "TYPE I SUCKS" REBUTTAL ON STAR CITY!""
--> Well, I think you can forgive me. I didn't react to an article with a very inflammatory title, an obnoxious tone and zero content. But I DID react very strongly to something taking verbal potshots at BD regulars.
--> You'd better read all the relevant articles before you start your own inflammatory series. I think I have some reason to be vengeful, especially after seeing the e-mail this guy sent some people.
By Vegeta2711 on Wednesday, June 06, 2001 - 12:35 am: Azhrei- You are probably the only one who does write articles on T1 on a consistent basis, that people that don't like come to this site every day will actually see. Plus there well written.
Sylvester- I never said the article was a good thing. It's just that a lot of players fall for all that crap, because no good articles on T1 are really out there. Also when I see the word "Rebuttal" I start to associate it with flame, since that's what a lot of things like that (not in this case in particular) start to break down into after the first few sentences.
Rasko- What can I say, there is a time for rebuttals and vengance. But, all it's really going into is more rebuttals aimed back and forth. I could see one rebuttal or something, but otherwise I thought Azheri's rebuttal was good enough to satsfiy people. Hey I enjoy T1 as well, but what can I say, I figure people will stop by Star City, Mindripper, or even MOTL more often than people stop by here. Look at your posts, you could probably nail the community down to 400-500 people that actually post on here, well at least more than once.
What inflammatory series? I maybe write one article a year that gets published on a magic website. I post occasionly on the B-D site. The only place you might find me is on MOTL since there I am a pretty active member. Just that I have the right to point out flaws in your peoples arguments for all the vengance directed at one article. I like the Solution, just not the means of getting to it.
Any problems with my opinions, feel free to e-mail me.
Vegeta2711
By Jandor, King of the Saddlebags on Wednesday, June 06, 2001 - 12:59 am: You people are still not hearing...
This is ridiculous; it really is. He asks you to stop talking about how he wrote and concentrate on why and you people are talking about how he spelled "retard" wrong. You got a stingy emial? I would send one too if you published an article on Star City without getting my thoughts on the subject first. You didn't even have the courtesy to call him Mr. Smith, you went right ahead and addressed him as Matt. Do you know him? If you're gradutating in English you should know the formalities, no?
So you don't like his writing, Some people thought Wakefield sucked cuz all he ever wrote about was personal stuff. Like he said Opinions are like a**holes.
I see articles on Star City about T1 all the time for the last few days. You want to know how many I saw before his, truthfully? None that I could remember. If I did they were all so dry and boring that I didn't bother reading them. Who cares about what new deck you just came up with? I liked reading his story, and I even liked to relate to my own experiences.
By TomM on Wednesday, June 06, 2001 - 04:16 am: That article of his, and more so that rebuttal, was complete trash. He makes his writing a style a point of contention. He is a self-absorbed, pompous, prick who needs to have his ego deflated. His writing and style are complete drivel. His mastery of the english language is clearly lacking. And he has the audacity to attack someone else's writing style? I cannot stand such behavior from little children.
Tom
By Tir (Tir) on Wednesday, June 06, 2001 - 10:41 am: Smith>> 'I am not "invading" Beyond Dominia.'
This was a reference to a so-called invasion in
BDominia's past, which was, by coincidence, the
last time I've been drawn into an argument like
this.
For this, I'd not like to go for a personal
attack, like some others posted above, but post
this little idea: Writing is meant to convey
information; to make your point know. I'd say
that your style or grammatical use doesn't matter,
as long as you do what writing is supposed to do,
enlighten people. If a great number of people just
can't understand the writing, is this their
problem, or the writer's?
Please, people, don't act like little neo-
Thoreaus, so intoxicated by your stories, quotes,
and dictionary that you see your works as
perfection, and believe that other's complaints
are close to heresy. Smith, some people didn't
get the point of your stories. I didn't get the
point. Whose fault do you think this is? While
you can be rightfully angered at people who make
personal attacks, please don't at people who just
want you to succede at writing. Anyone writing
about T1 is good, but only if people know what
he's saying. Please take this as constructive
criticism, and try to be a bit more clear in the
future.
Tir
:b...
By Rakso, Patriarch & Rules Ayatollah (Rakso) on Wednesday, June 06, 2001 - 11:09 am: "So you don't like his writing, Some people thought Wakefield sucked cuz all he ever wrote about was personal stuff. Like he said Opinions are like a**holes."
--> Yeah, but Wakefield had content and talked about strategy, and wrote in such a way that his points were crystal clear.
Vegeta: I hear you. I myself clarified to Ferrett that I did not want to talk about vengeance, but wanted to point out why I felt Mr. Smith's article was deficient in the strategy department despite his claims of wanting to raise awareness about Type I or something. However, I do feel that I needed to react to those snipes at BD, though not necessarily in a spirit of vengeance.
Let's say I can hate his guts professionally or something, then.
I wanted to make sure you read the articles, to make sure you understand what we were criticizing before fairly criticizing our criticisms in turn.
"This is ridiculous; it really is. He asks you to stop talking about how he wrote and concentrate on why and you people are talking about how he spelled "retard" wrong."
--> If you noticed, we DID just that, except for that little joke. This is selective quoting...
"You got a stingy emial? I would send one too if you published an article on Star City without getting my thoughts on the subject first. You didn't even have the courtesy to call him Mr. Smith, you went right ahead and addressed him as Matt."
--> You know... if we follow this, then NO ONE could publish on Star City, and we'd all have this ridiculous habit of doing, "Mr. Azhrei" and "Mr. Rakso"...
"His writing and style are complete drivel. His mastery of the english language is clearly lacking. And he has the audacity to attack someone else's writing style?"
--> Whoa, there! Hope you don't start criticizing me next!
"Smith, some people didn't
get the point of your stories. I didn't get the
point. Whose fault do you think this is? While
you can be rightfully angered at people who make
personal attacks, please don't at people who just
want you to succede at writing."
--> A point both myself and Az raised, but again, although we joke about it, let's not take anything personally. Let's at least criticize a guy's ideas, his writing, or his incredible arrogance, but not him personally.
By Grimmshaw on Wednesday, June 06, 2001 - 11:19 am: Mr. Smith never got to Washington...
Mr. Smith, you should have taken that right turn at Albuquerque because you are obviously lost. I read your article, if you call it that, and I am still scratching my head. You claimed that your article Type One Sucks was an attempt to us reverse psychology in an attempt to revive the format. I think you formatted your hard drive instead. Your attempt at sending a jolt into the heart of T1 has left a gritty taste in most T1 player’s mouth and the T1 community fibrillating. How dare you come out of nowhere and proclaim that there is a lackluster of strategy in the Type 1 format. Your pragmatic methods of trying to revitalize a format that still exists is like a cardiologist wanting to use the paddles to make your spleen beat faster. It simply is not needed. I cannot even classify your attempt as reverse psychology, but as inverse psychology; the idea that no matter what point you tried to make you could easily claim the best possible reasons while maintaining your points so you can later claim it to be a representation of whatever position suits you at that moment. The current moment being that you are now asking “Was Type One Sucks a vitriolic and widely-unfounded anti-Type-One article? No; it was just the opposite. I laid myself on the line, took criticism in the hopes that I could spring new life into a format I love”. If that article is an example of how you profess love and joy for something I pity you.
By my understanding of the article, I am venturing a guess that you have not played in the T1 format for a while and possibly left magic for other of life’s pursuits. If you haven’t played T1 for some time where did you find the audacity to claim the format is bad? Did you inquire as to what was arch-types were in the current T1 format, let alone see how old arch-types might have evolved. Where is the research that someone does when they are putting together facts that are going to be reported in an article? In my opinion, your article sounded more like the ranting of sour grapes for some sight-unseen travesty that had occurred in your life. Hey, I’ve had a lotus and a mox stolen and I’ve been unfairly left out of a T1 final despite my record. You curse for about an hour, you stew for a day then you move on. As for whatever happened, was it worth ranting about and having your reputation tarnished like some old forgotten out-of-date silverware?
The manner in which you presented your argument was in poor taste kind of like Roseanne singing the National Anthem, but this time doing it wearing a two piece thong bikini; definitely a sight none of us wanted to imagine, but now will be etched in our minds forever, much the same as your article whenever someone sees your by-line.
Channel-Fireball is kind of like Bob Dole in that they were both in the limelight for a while, but everyone knew they were not going to amount to anything and once their 15 minutes was up, they’d fade into the background. Now we look back and know how right we were in that Dole never became president and Channel-Fireball will not win a tournament. As a fellow T1 player so eloquently put it, it should have been a Karavek’s Torch anyway.
Where is it written that to make a T1 deck you need the power nine? In many of my decks I used power nine cards only when needed, which does not mean all nine all the time. I used to play a very annoying deck called Toggle that use R/B and only hade the Mox Jet, Ruby and Lotus. I know of speed green decks that use no power cards that fair well in T1. I am not disillusioned enough to discount the advantage the power nine gives a deck, however a number of decks don’t use all or any of the power nine, and still have proven competitive.
Type 1 is just as much an evolving entity as any other format in that the newer sets will always have an impact on how the format is played. Oscar Tan was precise in his allusion of how Type One can evolve when a “one card change can redefine a deck”. He furthers his point in that modifying and “tweaking” a deck is along the same lines as that of a parent-child relationship where the player alters their deck to make it better much the same as a parent does with their child.
Tsk-tsk Mr. Smith. If you are an advocate of Magic and its formats, including Type One, then you should have known better.
Oh and by the way Mr. Smith, not everything in life that sucks is necessarily bad.
By Azhrei (Azhrei) on Wednesday, June 06, 2001 - 11:21 am: Rakso, just deep six this thread. It's pointless.
By Jandor, King of the Saddlebags on Wednesday, June 06, 2001 - 12:46 pm: However, I do feel that I needed to react to those snipes at BD, though not necessarily in a spirit of vengeance.
--> I don't see how he took any shots at BD...
Let's say I can hate his guts professionally or something, then.
--> I'm wondering if you're opinion really matters to him. I mean, big friggin deal about some guy who happens to not like one of his articles.
You know... if we follow this, then NO ONE could publish on Star City, and we'd all have this ridiculous habit of doing, "Mr. Azhrei" and "Mr. Rakso"...
--> NO. If you followed this guideline then NO ONE would write whining rebuttals at Star City. If you are writing an article you address your references by full name or last name, never as casual acquaintance--but I guess the English language might seem ridiculous...
Grimmshaw, your reply had me roflmao, you OBVIOUSLY didn't read the article. Smith supported T1, he never said it was bad. You're all talking about this "Channel-fireball" combo like it's the basis of his article. I got the idea that maybe that's what he's saying...it's not all about channel-fireball. He obviosly stated in his rebutal that it's not all about teh P9, but you still are only skimming his article to the parts you want to listen too.
Simply put, writing an article on a website is meant to convey information, sure, but some articles are meant to produce results. If you'd stop whining about what was in the article and see that he's getting results, then maybe you'd stop bringing up ridiculous points about what you THINK he meant and how he was SUPPOSED to write the article. Did you write the article? Have you written your own? If not then shut up. If so, then write more.
By Grimmshaw on Wednesday, June 06, 2001 - 01:55 pm: Jandor, I did read the article or at least the one provided, and it seemed his ideas where oth there kind of like a depiction of being in the sky with diamonds from Lucy's point of view. His satirical endeavor reminds me of the latter fight scenes in the movie Fight Club, where the main character is beating himself to a pulp while we the viewing public get to sit back and watch. His story spoke of being broke, fighting, "women adored him", weapons being drawn... hell, if you just added the beer it could be a country song.
He rants about fighting with new weapons and old weapons. Doesn’t he know the pen IS mightier than the sword and he should use if accordingly. Unfortunately in his attempt to hijack my interest with the article, the plane was out of fuel, resting on the tarmac and his gun was loaded with a rolled up flag that says, “BANG!”.
The last line still throws me for a loop that any barnstormer would be proud of. He wrote:
“For this reason, I play Type One. I abhor it like many of you, but it’s a curse I have to deal with every day. Some of us aren’t so lucky. Just remember me when you sit down to play your "Type Two" or your "Extended". Remember the sacrifices some of us have made. Don’t look back, you; Tourists.”
If he abhors T1 then sell your cards. If it’s a curse, then find an exorcist or a Gypsy woman. What sacrifices? I saw story of carrying flames, wrecking a living room and lots of blood. What does that have to do with where Magic is going today? This article is about as pertinent to the game of Magic as a screwdriver; the tool, not the drink… the drink can be plenty pertinent, but I digress.
Another thing he wrote in his Type One Sucks, Part 2 is:
“A reader should never assume they know more than the writer does; you’re in the writer’s hands, you’ll go where he leads you.”
That only works in Fiction. A writer should never care what a reader thinks about what he writes as long as the write know his facts are reliable. A reader should never assume they know more than he writer is about as prophetic as listening to a drive-through window attendant repeating your order back to you with the cliché of a choppy speaker… ‘wo--d -ou -ike fr-- wi-- --at?’ So, on the off chance this article makes in on top of the dividend reports at WotC you expect me to believe the Vice Presiguy of WotC’s Product Manage-make-the-masses-happy Department is going to read the article, jump from his mahogany desk, run to his automobile [cause its too nice to be called a car] and look to him to see what is going on because the reader should be a lemming to Smith’s cliff?
If you believe that I have some ocean front property…. Yep I said Nebraska…
Better yet, he is beginning to remind me of someone… who can talk a lot about nothing… Hey Mr. Smith, if you become the next Seinfeld, can I be your agent?
By Deletehead on Wednesday, June 06, 2001 - 04:22 pm: Why type one is cool: OPTIONS, you can use virtually any card you want be it Ancestrall Recall or Sorrow's path. It's a haven for people
who have fallen in love with an old school deck
idea and want to play it forever or an innovator(Or quack) who wants to make up weird ass decks
that could never work in type two like myself...
Why type two is cool: CHALLENGE/COMPETITION the shifting format keeps things fresh for people
who get sick of seeing decks with the same 16-20
restricted cards (which isn't always true in type
one, on the other hand it can get stagnant especially when the established players dog out newbies which is why I like the generally tolerant
attitude here). And is considerably more affordable (if your any good at trading).
I like all the formats and can't comprehend why people completely rule out certain formats. If
I just stuck to one I'd have quit playing a long
time ago (Or gotten banned for posting 6-8 decks
per day).
By Littlesaltz (Saltz) on Wednesday, June 06, 2001 - 04:51 pm: Hmm...I was going to post yesterday, but it was getting late. Because of that, I"m going to post what I was going to post, and then some.
Yehaw!
Vegeta -
I disagree with you; people may not write articles all the time, but they certainly inform them. Though I don't really enjoy it, I go on the Wizards boards, namely the T1/T1.5/Ext, and try to critique/answer questions. Believe me, the rules questions (I have seriously seen "What is a library?") give me pain. I know Rakso and others do the same. I also go on the MTG News boards (which are better). Meridian and others do the same. Though there could be more outreach, but > is an overstatement.
On the article...
I read it twice. The first time was a skim. I thought it was simply an abstract, almost silly article, simply designed to draw rebuttals. But after looking at the last paragraph, I came to the conclusion that Matt was not glorifying OR insulting T1, he was insulting other formats.
The second time, I came to the same conclusion, with a small difference: He wanted to defend T1 against other formats, so he made the article kinda wierd.
Apparently, I was wrong on both counts.
>
The statement about "invasion" was not directed at you; "the invasion" was used to exemplify cases of people attacking BDominia. I don't agree with Azhrei that you (Matt) were attacking BD, I just wanted to tell you that he was not saying that you were invading "us."
/END last nights post
Rakso -
Perhaps the article was not meant to be strategy...
To all -
Please stop belaboring nuances of grammer, spelling, formalities, etc. A person should not take heat for their inablity to spell retard or embarrass (sp? ) correctly, especially if that is one of the few mechanical errors in their writing.
Don't you hate pants?
Saltz
By Rakso, Patriarch & Rules Ayatollah (Rakso) on Wednesday, June 06, 2001 - 09:54 pm: "Grimmshaw, your reply had me roflmao, you OBVIOUSLY didn't read the article. Smith supported T1, he never said it was bad."
--> He sure fooled me!
By Rakso, Patriarch & Rules Ayatollah (Rakso) on Wednesday, June 06, 2001 - 10:00 pm: "Rakso - Perhaps the article was not meant to be strategy..."
--> Perhaps. But you note that I pointed out that the article had no strategy and depth AFTER he practically told BD that regulars didn't understand his masterpiece? I simply made it crystal clear that his vague story and mention of Force of Will did not characterize those "new skills" he was talking about (which you think he was saying after reading his rebuttal, not after rereading the article).
"To all - Please stop belaboring nuances of grammer, spelling, formalities, etc. A person should not take heat for their inablity to spell retard or embarrass (sp? ) correctly, especially if that is one of the few mechanical errors in their writing. "
--> It was just a passing mention. A joke. Don't blow it up.
By Rakso, Patriarch & Rules Ayatollah (Rakso) on Wednesday, June 06, 2001 - 10:06 pm: "For this reason, I play Type One. I abhor it like many of you, but it’s a curse I have to deal with every day."
--> Grimmshaw: Sure got me fooled, too. Guess he really loved Type I.
By Rakso, Patriarch & Rules Ayatollah (Rakso) on Wednesday, June 06, 2001 - 10:26 pm: By the way... isn't it a bit lame to reply to this thread using an alias?
Smith: 161.57.220.67
Jandor: 161.57.220.67
By Rakso, Patriarch & Rules Ayatollah (Rakso) on Wednesday, June 06, 2001 - 10:32 pm: "Let's say I can hate his guts professionally or something, then.
--> I'm wondering if you're opinion really matters to him. I mean, big friggin deal about some guy who happens to not like one of his articles."
--> It obviously does, very, very much.
By Azhrei (Azhrei) on Wednesday, June 06, 2001 - 10:42 pm: So I take it that the Philippines lack the expression "deep six?"
By TracerBullet on Wednesday, June 06, 2001 - 10:45 pm: Honestly, am I the only person who's noticed that the people who are going to read Starcity's articles are the ones who are going to be interested in Type One anyways? The people we need to recruit are the younger, newer players who WILL NOT be online. You're probably not going to convince the people who are already so familiar with the game as to be on Starcity, so why fight over it? We need more support than just an online commmunity. Don't get me wrong, I love type one. I think, however, we have a dead format. Barring any form of support from WoTC, I honestly don't think that we will ever be the main stream, or close there to. I don't know how to remedy this problem, these are just my observations.
By Sylvester (Sylvester) on Wednesday, June 06, 2001 - 10:53 pm: TB:Can oen really think that when we see that the online magic ommunity, outside of BD, has hosted a grand total of 1 T1 tourney? Yet, it'd be logical to think that those who play on imagic, emagic, whatever read online magic site, right?
By Grimmshaw on Wednesday, June 06, 2001 - 11:20 pm: Azhrei-
Its not that they don't know the phrase in its meaning... they are just a bit shorter than westerners... Try using the phrase "deep five-foot four"
Sorry Rakso. could not resist...
By Sylvester (Sylvester) on Wednesday, June 06, 2001 - 11:24 pm: not funny guys...
grrrr
;-)
By Rakso, Patriarch & Rules Ayatollah (Rakso) on Wednesday, June 06, 2001 - 11:56 pm: "So I take it that the Philippines lack the expression "deep six?""
--> We know what it means, but what do you mean by mentioning it? Sorry, cunning linguist, missed the undertone this time!
By Rakso, Patriarch & Rules Ayatollah (Rakso) on Wednesday, June 06, 2001 - 11:58 pm: "they are just a bit shorter than westerners..."
--> A good point.
--> A famous Filipino diplomat, of course, said that he felt like a dime among nickels when asked how it felt to be the shortest guy in the room. ;)
By tedv on Thursday, June 07, 2001 - 02:26 pm: Have BD had enough of the "We are God's Gift to Type 1" egoism yet, so we can go back doing decks, not bitching on Starcity about the crappy articles they sometimes print?
By Azhrei (Azhrei) on Thursday, June 07, 2001 - 03:44 pm: Don't make me do something drastic here too. It's only a matter of time before I start posting erotic fiction to get rid of these pointless threads.
By Littlesaltz (Saltz) on Thursday, June 07, 2001 - 04:04 pm: AHHHH! No Azhrei, no!
>
We should definately publicize the Tournys and minis more...
Saltz
By Littlesaltz (Saltz) on Thursday, June 07, 2001 - 04:04 pm: AHHHH! No Azhrei, no!
::TB:Can oen really think that when we see that the online magic ommunity, outside of BD, has hosted a grand total of 1 T1 tourney?::
We should definately publicize the Tournys and minis more...
Saltz
By Smith on Thursday, June 07, 2001 - 04:55 pm: Okay, that's it...you win.
After seeing you people pick apart my writing and posting personal facts about my life on the internet I have conceded to you.
I will no longer write about T1 or reply to emails regarding bdominia member issues. I've been checking your posts today and I've seen that you people will argue fiercely. I thought at first it was becuase you were defending your format tooth and bone, but I see now that you bitch about most everything.
So you win. I was wrong. My writing sucks, your writing is good. I'm stupid, you're smart. There's evidently nothing wrong with the state of Magic. I bow to your superior knowledge.
This is the second, and last time, I post here. This site, and the T1 format, is all yours.
--Smith
By Grimmshaw the Tangmaster on Thursday, June 07, 2001 - 05:12 pm: Hey Smith, Quit being a Martyr and have some Tang... I just made it.
By Rakso, Patriarch & Rules Ayatollah (Rakso) on Friday, June 08, 2001 - 08:22 am: Errr... Personal facts about my life???
Say what?