I didn’t read it, but I disagree

Social media is the biggest scourge on mankind’s enlightenment ever. It denies the importance of facts and openly focuses on feelings and opinions. It spreads something if people like it, regardless everything else, may that be flat-Earth, climate change denial, “Hillary raped kids in a pizzeria”, “Trump peed on prostitutes”, incel nonsense and so on.

I’ve avoided this cesspool for long, but the thing is, most people get “information” there, so if you want to be heard, you have to use it some way. But the thing is that it can only be used one way: the way of getting more likes. If you don’t get likes, you simply become invisible.

I have this problem since I’ve left EVE. I didn’t have a problem Reddit driving me traffic during EVE without even using it because most EVE Redditors hated the Goons more than they hated me, so they gladly upvoted anything and everything anti-Goon. With the rest of the games, it’s far from it. The subreddits are dominated by mediocre players (go figure!), who don’t want to be better, but want excuses for not being better. When I figured out how to get into the top 100 of PUBG, they just downvoted it. It cost them nothing and they felt better.

Now in World of Warships there is an absolutely ridiculous conspiracy theory: that “good players” (themselves) cannot reach their proper rank, because of the “star savers” (players who try to be the best of the losing team instead of winning) sabotate them. Such group would have very specific characteristics: low winrate, high XP/damage. Of course I couldn’t find them in the data, because they don’t exists.

I of course announced it on Reddit:

The top half on the image is from reddit.com, as thread creator I can see how many people seen my page. The bottom is from the blog engine. It seems that only 13% of those who clicked on the reddit link actually read the post. Since the reddit link is just a link with no content, what the hell the other 87% did?! Well, they saw the title “Statistics says purposeful Star Saving players do not exist”, then clicked on the comments to watch the comment section. Yes, they joined the discussion of something they didn’t read, clearly to be informed by other people who also didn’t read it. The top commenter surely didn’t read it, didn’t like it, wrote some nonsense and got upvotes. Now, after learning what other uninformed people say about something, they feel informed. Spoiler: they still believe that the mythical Star Savers exist.

This looks pretty hopeless. How can one convince people who form their decision without reading your piece? The problem here is that if I could somehow make people upvote my post and make it more visible, the “viewers” would still not read it!

Sure, I won’t stop blogging and I look forward the next ranked season where I’ll finally have ships in the top tiers with decent captains, but something tells me that if I’ll reach rank 1 with some obscenely good winrate and write a post about it, the same people will downvote it without reading.


PS: this was a long march, both for the ship and the captain. But it’s a great ship:


Author: Gevlon

My blog: https://greedygoblinblog.wordpress.com/

15 thoughts on “I didn’t read it, but I disagree”

  1. Quite frequently on Reddit you will see a news post with a misleading headline that isn’t backed up the article and the comments will be full of people responding to just the headline. It’s totally obvious most people there don’t bother to read the article.

    Also on news subreddits there’s a popular bot that creates tl;dr copies of articles just so they don’t have to read more than a few paragraphs. Says a lot really.



  2. In reddit people like (and read) more if there is at least some information onsite, and not just a link to other site. Maybe it would worth a try to at least add a tl;dr: in the post beside the link.


  3. You have to be controversial. Your EVE posts were considered highly controversial, because people saw some sort of conspiracy theory nut in you and your posts. Your haters provided traffic and views for your blog too, maybe even more than the regulars, because they thought it was “hilarious” and they wanted to share with their friends and laugh at you. In the same way, people that hate Trump re-tweet him all the time, providing even more visibility. If you ever wonder why he says such outrageous things on his social media, this is the reason; tame and reasonable posts are automatically filtered out by the audience. It’s also why most popular Youtubers are literally clowns doing stupid shit for their audience (i.e. see the Logan brothers).

    Also, social media are echo chambers. The moment you say something that doesn’t conform to the group think you are downvoted to oblivion. It’s a lost cause IMO if you want to maintain a ‘reasonable’ facade. There are people out there that believe that the Earth is flat despite the fact that we have live video feeds from the ISS and the SpaceX launches, what makes you think the average person will read a post about a statistical analysis when they don’t even understand what statistics are?


  4. Even without any data I would say that people playing to save stars have a negligable impact. Why would anyone choose to play to save a star and increase the chance of losing instead of just playing to win the game.
    Plus anyone trying to save a star will in most cases just be trying to stay alive and farm as much damage as they can while shooting at priority targets (dealing 10k damage to a DD is worth the same XP as dealing 50k damage to a BB, because xp is calculated on % of ship health, and resetting caps is worth something as well.) So they are probably contributing more to a win as a socalled potato player that rushes in and gets himself killed in the first 10 minutes.

    I don’t think I ever saved a star this season. Any game that I topped the score list was a game that we won. I did actually try to play to save a star (those were my 45 games played in a cruiser/BB where I could focus on farming damage from range. Needless to say this did not work out.)


  5. Posts mostly don’t change them. Your actions, projects had more impact, I think.
    Like: blue raiding, Alterac Valley tactic change. I look forward to see something like that. (not in WOW of course)


  6. I admit of being guilty of this at times, mostly when browsing news-related sub-reddits. One reason is the above mentioned tl;dr-bot giving an abreviated version of unnecessary long articles.
    The second reason is that I’m usually browsing on mobile and firefox on android does not play particularly well with sites loaded to the brim with ads and auto-playing videos (which sadly most news websites are), even when using AdBlock. So I’d rather take a look at the comments first to decide if this piece of news is worth potentially crashing my browsing app and causing me unneeded annoyance.
    The last (and also worst) reason is that for me part of the allure of visiting news-related sub-reddits is to read the often highly polarized comments and discussions. I am aware that visiting a place that centers around news, just to observe people react to said news is less reasonable than simply to read said news, judge their impact myself and ignore what other people think of it.

    While these reasons mostly apply to news-related sub-reddits, it also applies in a lesser extent to gaming-related sub-reddits I frequent. I’m usually reluctant to follow external links to sites I’m not familiar with unless the author provides some description of what to expect (other than the title) in their post, or the comments indicate a worthwhile read.


  7. …tech in the hands of stupid…

    same goes for youtube. what is the attention span nowadays? some seconds. people stop or click away from vid within minutes. so if you don’t get them then and there you lose and gather deeply inspiring and constructive feedback via comments if at all.

    same goes for anything. if your preface or abstract is too complicated the average mind will go away. for those clever Uni bitches reading, this means that the prof will need more energy to process you bullshit draft or research or what ever paper you give them.

    same goes for old tech. look into printing press, just because it is in a book doesn’t mean anything. If you are fortunate enough to have access just binge read anything from the 17. or 18. century I highly recommend any archived newspaper. don’t bother with philosophers and artists. sure they shape but daily narrative shapes more.

    our protocols are even stupid. the scientific method still refines and battles with bias and sabotage. still too simple to fraud even if it really was unintentional.

    so to see the average joe misinformed and misguided shouldn’t be a shock. we are nude apes with nuclear power after all …


  8. “Social media is the biggest scourge on mankind’s enlightenment ever. ”

    No. That lack of enlightenment was already there. This just highlights it. What we had before was just the illusion of “enlightenment” assumed by people that somehow… mistakenly I might add… thought we were an enlightened species.


  9. @Smokeman: no. Back even 10 years people were reading people who were wiser than them. The books were written by experts, judged by experts. Now it’s judged and de facto censored by the lowest common denominator.

    There could be an impact factor-social media, just like in science, where you have a score, based on how people WITH HIGH SCORES liked you (obviously, it’s an iterative process to calculate). So if my post is liked by Kim Kardashian, that gives more visibility than being liked by 100000 nobodies. Sure, that has obvious problems (as Kim is far from being an expert in anything), but would be a start.


  10. @anon:
    “people stop or click away from vid within minutes”

    To be honest most youtube video is really boring. Also most youtube video does not need a video format and could be consumed much faster in text + picture or text + few sec videos format. I really hate those videos where you just see someone speaking for 5-10+ minutes without showing anything which could not be written.


  11. the books were written by experts, judged by experts.

    books where mostly written by idiots. the cost of mass producing a book did go down thanks to Gutenberg printing press. so more idiots could publish like every idiot now has a twatter account and a facadebook page … no experts needed. sure some publishers tried to predict and filter out presumed garbage, but #GameGate existed back then too. If you go through the lists of published garbage of the last 500 years, you will see that the majority where just as stupid as our todays socialmedia idiots.

    just like in science, where you have a score, based on how people WITH HIGH SCORES liked you
    That is not really how it works. “like by high score” has nothing to do with it, there is nothing to be liked. “score” come from referencing papers. That’s why Unis inflate these reference numbers with meta studies that don’t really deserve to be called “study”.


  12. @Gevlon

    “Back even 10 years people were reading people who were wiser than them. The books were written by experts, judged by experts.”

    10 years ago we didn’t have the phenomena known as “cognitive dissonance” asserting itself in social media. Today, we do. People love to claim to be of “one mind” about a particular topic, and to protect themselves they have self-implemented certain filters that automatically removes dissenting viewpoints and information. It’s a byproduct of the snowflake and safe-space era we now live in. 10 years ago people accepted Bartle’s Taxonomy as gospel, but today’s game design philosophy’s has all but rewritten his once famous canon. You, yourself, have proven that there is more than one way to play any game, and I would venture to say that you are not the only one to feel this way. But I do have to warn you – people who point to the past and try to offer it as a reflection of “better times” are only fooling themselves, and might be a little too conservative for their own good when it comes time for a debate about something they feel strongly about.


Leave a Reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in:

WordPress.com Logo

You are commenting using your WordPress.com account. Log Out /  Change )

Google+ photo

You are commenting using your Google+ account. Log Out /  Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out /  Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out /  Change )


Connecting to %s