# Why are speedcubers on SpeedSolving.com so mean?



## rybaby (Aug 15, 2013)

I'm not trying to attack anybody here or make accusations. I have noticed, nonetheless, that many cubists here on the forums are just plain mean.

Example: I cannot even count how many times I have seen "use the search function" on threads. For one, if you care to post on a repeated thread, why don't you at least explain a brief answer? Or at least post a link to a thread that might answer one's question?

Example: From my own experience -- I post a thread about the Waterman method. I get some nice responses with constructive criticism as well as tips. However, half of the responses were negative and didn't help. Such as saying: Waterman averaged 18 seconds, not 16. Or CFOP is faster. Or that's a bad link. You can read it all here: http://www.speedsolving.com/forum/showthread.php?42485-The-Waterman-Method/page2

I also notice a disturbing amount of sarcasm....

This has been bugging me a lot recently, so any insight would be helpful.

Thanks!


----------



## Owen (Aug 15, 2013)

Elitism, many users have low tolerance for inexperienced cubers. See my signature.


----------



## aceofspades98 (Aug 15, 2013)

When someone says to use the search function, they are right most of the time. I have seen some decent methods proposed and to many people say "or you could just use ____". New users see older ones say something like that and use it too, but out of context.


----------



## rybaby (Aug 15, 2013)

I like your signature. I just wish others would remember that they started somewhere, too.


----------



## sneaklyfox (Aug 15, 2013)

Actually, I don't really see meanness in the examples you mention. It really depends on tone I suppose, but inherently the comments you mentioned are not mean. (I didn't read the original posts.) "Use the search function" is just a helpful piece of advice that should make everyone's lives easier. A lot of things are already posted somewhere on the forums so it's better for people to at least attempt to search first before posting questions that have already been answered many times. And some are just factual corrections. CFOP is proven over the Waterman method. And a bad link is a bad link.

Btw, most people use the term "cuber" rather than "cubist". (No meanness intended.)

Edit: Oh yeah, and I don't know how to answer the poll because some people are mean but many are not.


----------



## rybaby (Aug 15, 2013)

sneaklyfox said:


> Actually, I don't really see meanness in the examples you mention. It really depends on tone I suppose, but inherently the comments you mentioned are not mean. (I didn't read the original posts.) "Use the search function" is just a helpful piece of advice that should make everyone's lives easier. A lot of things are already posted somewhere on the forums so it's better for people to at least attempt to search first before posting questions that have already been answered many times. And some are just factual corrections. CFOP is proven over the Waterman method. And a bad link is a bad link.
> 
> Btw, most people use the term "cuber" rather than "cubist". (No meanness intended.)
> 
> Edit: Oh yeah, and I don't know how to answer the poll because some people are mean but many are not.



I just get frustrated when people recommend the search function in a critical, exasperated way.

Also, CFOP may be proven over Waterman, but methods aren't fast; people are fast. I did pretty much lose it when Stefan kept posting irrelevant stuff just to shoot me down.

Maybe it's because I'm not very fast (relative) and other cubists just don't like helping a slow guy out :-(


----------



## Joey VOV (Aug 15, 2013)

I understand getting annoyed with beginners and things like that, but you'd think that instead of the being slightly mean or sarcastic, they would actually try to help them..
I don't know, I love helping and teaching, probably why I want to be a teacher...


----------



## Noahaha (Aug 15, 2013)

There's a difference between having a harsh tone, being rude and being mean, so I'll go through what all three of those mean in my opinion:

Harsh tone: In my opinion, a harsh/blunt/matter of fact tone is a good thing in discussions. Often people mistake a harsh tone for meanness. Stefan for example makes very blunt and factual posts when he disagrees with people. This is often mistaken for meanness.

Rude: Rudeness is the most common form of "meanness" on the forum, and that's where I would put the examples of posts directed at new people to the forums. I think that pointing people towards the OAQT is good, but often people do it in such a way as to try to make the OP feel stupid. This is rude.

Mean: Actual meanness is not something you see often, and I don't think it's a big problem on the forum. There is occasional bullying, but the mods do a good job of stamping that down.


As to your complaints about the responses to your thread...

The second page has literally nothing mean or negative on it.

The only thing that fits into one of my three categories is this, and that is just harsh, not mean. Stefan was merely pointing out some gaps in your logic.


----------



## uniacto (Aug 15, 2013)

heyo

so do you know how many times people have asked what's the best lube or the best 4x4 to get or the best big cubes to buy? Just check out the "which puzzle should I buy" thread or whatever it's called and you'll know why people tell newbies to use the search function.


----------



## aceofspades98 (Aug 15, 2013)

Joey VOV said:


> I understand getting annoyed with beginners and things like that, but you'd think that instead of the being slightly mean or sarcastic, they would actually try to help them..
> I don't know, I love helping and teaching, probably why I want to be a teacher...


Its not that we don't like to help, it is just that there post belongs somewhere else or has been answered before.


----------



## rybaby (Aug 15, 2013)

Noahaha said:


> There's a difference between having a harsh tone, being rude and being mean, so I'll go through what all three of those mean in my opinion:
> 
> Harsh tone: In my opinion, a harsh/blunt/matter of fact tone is a good thing in discussions. Often people mistake a harsh tone for meanness. Stefan for example makes very blunt and factual posts when he disagrees with people. This is often mistaken for meanness.
> 
> ...




Eh, I guess you're right. I have never been one to appreciate a harsh tone in any matter--I am naturally patient and helpful and don't see the need for harshness when friendliness will do.


----------



## JasonK (Aug 15, 2013)

rybaby said:


> Eh, I guess you're right. I have never been one to appreciate a harsh tone in any matter--I am naturally patient and helpful and don't see the need for harshness when friendliness will do.



I wouldn't even call it harsh to be honest. It's just getting your point across concisely, which is a good thing in a discussion.


----------



## rj (Aug 15, 2013)

Noahaha said:


> There's a difference between having a harsh tone, being rude and being mean, so I'll go through what all three of those mean in my opinion:
> 
> Harsh tone: In my opinion, a harsh/blunt/matter of fact tone is a good thing in discussions. Often people mistake a harsh tone for meanness. Stefan for example makes very blunt and factual posts when he disagrees with people. This is often mistaken for meanness.
> 
> ...



Noah, you were a bit harsh when I proposed that edges-first method, a long time ago. 
I am sometimes slightly harsh myself, if harsh means blunt, but I try to be nice about it. 
I had to get used to bluntness, and so do you. Set a good example and be cheerful about being blunt, because we need more of that.

Cheers! 

rj


----------



## rybaby (Aug 15, 2013)

JasonK said:


> I wouldn't even call it harsh to be honest. It's just getting your point across concisely, which is a good thing in a discussion.



I just don't see the need to be harsh when you can give constructive criticism in a friendly manner. Perhaps I am "too friendly" for the forums...


----------



## rj (Aug 15, 2013)

Just be blunt, in a nice, helpful, friendly way.


----------



## Noahaha (Aug 15, 2013)

rj said:


> Noah, you were a bit harsh when I proposed that edges-first method, a long time ago.
> I am sometimes slightly harsh myself, if harsh means blunt, but I try to be nice about it.
> I had to get used to bluntness, and so do you. Set a good example and be cheerful about being blunt, because we need more of that.
> 
> ...



I did say that being blunt was a good thing. Maybe I'm missing your point.



rybaby said:


> I just don't see the need to be harsh when you can give constructive criticism in a friendly manner. Perhaps I am "too friendly" for the forums...



It's not a matter of constructive criticism though... it's a matter of discussion/argument. An argument is easiest to comprehend when it's not weighted down by extra statements. Contradiction is in no way equal to meanness.


----------



## Edward (Aug 15, 2013)

This forum is so cushy and nice nowadways. Almost soccer-mom-friendly-nice it feels (;-; RIP my posts).

I haven't even been her that long (late '08 on my first account I believe), but I can definitely see that it's not nearly as "mean" as it used to be.


----------



## rj (Aug 15, 2013)

Noahaha said:


> I did say that being blunt was a good thing. Maybe I'm missing your point.
> 
> 
> 
> It's not a matter of constructive criticism though... it's a matter of discussion/argument. An argument is easiest to comprehend when it's not weighted down by extra statements. Contradiction is in no way equal to meanness.



Being blunt is good, but should not be taken too far.


----------



## Rnewms (Aug 15, 2013)

rybaby said:


> I just don't see the need to be harsh when you can give constructive criticism in a friendly manner.



Why take offense to something when you can take the constructive criticism that is offered to you? Understand that some people may be frustrated with wrong/misguided/lack of information and express it in their posts. Take in the REAL information that they offer and reply with something like, "I will make sure to do that next time. Thank you!"



rybaby said:


> Perhaps I am "too friendly" for the forums...



More likely too sensitive.


----------



## rybaby (Aug 15, 2013)

Noahaha said:


> It's not a matter of constructive criticism though... it's a matter of discussion/argument. An argument is easiest to comprehend when it's not weighted down by extra statements. Contradiction is in no way equal to meanness.



I disagree. In the post I referenced, in no way did I intend for my question to turn into an argument. I was mainly asking if/why many people use the algorithm, as well as tips and tricks for it. I did not intend for Stefan to point out small, irrelevant bits of information and blow them up into a big deal. I was helped by somerandomkidmike,* who actually gave me advice and help*!!



Rnewms said:


> More likely too sensitive.



Case and point: that just sounds negative and mean, and not said in a way that really helps one improve.


----------



## sneaklyfox (Aug 15, 2013)

rybaby said:


> I just get frustrated when people recommend the search function in a critical, exasperated way.
> 
> Also, CFOP may be proven over Waterman, but methods aren't fast; people are fast. I did pretty much lose it when Stefan kept posting irrelevant stuff just to shoot me down.
> 
> Maybe it's because I'm not very fast (relative) and other cubists just don't like helping a slow guy out :-(



It's probably the bluntness. I have no idea how fast you are and it's irrelevant to the help you receive (except usually slower people can't give much advice to faster people). I like helping people out... like new people on the forums or slow cubers (because I can't very well help faster cubers anyway), for instance. I don't think I'm very blunt, though after trying to help a lot of people, even I get a little tired of seeing the same questions asked over and over again. But usually I would say something like, "Next time, try using the search function because there's a good chance your question has already been answered before." And I am pretty forgiving to new members until after I've given advice to them about searching or using existing threads and they completely ignore the advice at which point I probably stop bothering to help since they don't listen anyway. But most people aren't like that, fortunately.

Anyway, this is just an online forum. I try not to read too much tone into type-written words unless there's something obviously rude or mean by the words themselves.


----------



## rj (Aug 15, 2013)

rj said:


> Being blunt is good, but should not be taken too far.





rybaby said:


> Case and point: that just sounds negative and mean, and not said in a way that really helps one improve.



I think "mean" people should just try to be positive.


----------



## rybaby (Aug 15, 2013)

sneaklyfox said:


> It's probably the bluntness. I have no idea how fast you are and it's irrelevant to the help you receive (except usually slower people can't give much advice to faster people). I like helping people out... like new people on the forums or slow cubers (because I can't very well help faster cubers anyway), for instance. I don't think I'm very blunt, though after trying to help a lot of people, even I get a little tired of seeing the same questions asked over and over again. But usually I would say something like, "Next time, try using the search function because there's a good chance your question has already been answered before." And I am pretty forgiving to new members until after I've given advice to them about searching or using existing threads and they completely ignore the advice at which point I probably stop bothering to help since they don't listen anyway. But most people aren't like that, fortunately.
> 
> Anyway, this is just an online forum. I try not to read too much tone into type-written words unless there's something obviously rude or mean by the words themselves.




Thank you. You sound like a nice guy. I agree, I just can't stand the harsh bluntness of many posts. Your search function example was good--it's the type of thing I'd like to see more: a suggestion rather than a demand.


----------



## Rnewms (Aug 15, 2013)

rybaby said:


> Case and point: that just sounds negative and mean, and not said in a way that really helps one improve.



It was intended to help you understand that you are taking some of these posts too softly. I honestly don't understand why you thought what I said was mean because there is really nothing wrong with being a bit sensitive as long as it isn't causing too much trouble.


----------



## sneaklyfox (Aug 15, 2013)

rybaby said:


> Thank you. You sound like a nice guy. I agree, I just can't stand the harsh bluntness of many posts. Your search function example was good--it's the type of thing I'd like to see more: a suggestion rather than a demand.



Well thanks! I mean about being nice. I guess you didn't see my sig because guys are not usually mothers.  And perhaps that's one reason why I'm less blunt than the next guy... because I'm not a guy.


----------



## TeddyKGB (Aug 15, 2013)

rybaby said:


> I also notice a disturbing amount of sarcasm....



Sarcasm is one of the things that make life worth living....


----------



## uniacto (Aug 15, 2013)

TeddyKGB said:


> Sarcasm is one of the things that make life worth living....



no way I didn't know that thanks for the enlightment


----------



## sneaklyfox (Aug 15, 2013)

TeddyKGB said:


> Sarcasm is one of the things that make life worth living....



There's a place for sarcasm... but sometimes it goes a bit too far beyond.


----------



## rj (Aug 15, 2013)

sneaklyfox said:


> There's a place for sarcasm... but sometimes it goes a bit too far beyond.



Indeed.


----------



## rybaby (Aug 15, 2013)

sneaklyfox said:


> Well thanks! I mean about being nice. I guess you didn't see my sig because guys are not usually mothers.  And perhaps that's one reason why I'm less blunt than the next guy... because I'm not a guy.



Whoops my bad. I feel like the first wave of people were meaner (or more blunt, however you want to put it) than y'all. 
I'll reword my previous post: *Y'all* seem like nice *people*. Guys or girls, we're all cubists.


----------



## Noahaha (Aug 15, 2013)

rybaby is being a baby about this, but he has some good points. We can all try to add a little bit more kindness, especially when it comes to noobs and babies.



rybaby said:


> I disagree. In the post I referenced, in no way did I intend for my question to turn into an argument. I was mainly asking if/why many people use the algorithm, as well as tips and tricks for it. I did not intend for Stefan to point out small, irrelevant bits of information and blow them up into a big deal. I was helped by somerandomkidmike,* who actually gave me advice and help*!!



Your thread does not appear to be about any question at all. In fact, the first time I looked at it about 30 minutes ago, I DIDN'T EVEN NOTICE THE QUESTION. All I saw was the series of statements RIGHT AT THE BEGINNING. Seems to make sense for someone to point out the validity (or lack of validity) of those statements. You can definitely argue that Stefan was being harsh, but he certainly had good reason to make the argument that he did.


----------



## rj (Aug 15, 2013)

rybaby said:


> Whoops my bad. I feel like the first wave of people were meaner (or more blunt, however you want to put it) than y'all.
> I'll reword my previous post: *Y'all* seem like nice *people*. Guys or girls, we're all cubists.



Again, I try to be nice. How do I do?


----------



## rybaby (Aug 15, 2013)

rj said:


> Again, I try to be nice. How do I do?



awesome



Noahaha said:


> rybaby is being a baby about this.



Well on account of rudeness/harshness/etc......


----------



## rj (Aug 15, 2013)

rybaby said:


> awesome



Good to hear. I'm trying to become a mod so I can address this issue more directly.


----------



## AustinReed (Aug 15, 2013)

rybaby said:


> cub*ers*



FTFY. 

I honestly don't see a problem with the forums. Most of these "mean" people have been here for a long time, so they've seen everything, including those 549 "New" methods. Being blunt is probably the best way to get a point across. It doesn't have as much of an impact if you're all gushy about it.


Also, please refrain from those 1 word posts. They're kind of unnecessary.


----------



## rj (Aug 15, 2013)

AustinReed said:


> FTFY.
> 
> I honestly don't see a problem with the forums. Most of these "mean" people have been here for a long time, so they've seen everything, including those 549 "New" methods. Being blunt is probably the best way to get a point across. It doesn't have as much of an impact if you're all gushy about it.
> 
> ...



1 word might be all you need.


----------



## sneaklyfox (Aug 15, 2013)

rybaby said:


> Whoops my bad. I feel like the first wave of people were meaner (or more blunt, however you want to put it) than y'all.
> I'll reword my previous post: *Y'all* seem like nice *people*. Guys or girls, we're all cubists.



S'ok. Most people here are guys. I usually assume everyone else is a guy too, unless something says otherwise. I don't know about other people, but "cubist" makes me think of "cubism".


----------



## AustinReed (Aug 15, 2013)

rj said:


> 1 word might be all you need.



When in a forum that strives to be as constructive as possible, it pretty much never is.


----------



## rybaby (Aug 15, 2013)

sneaklyfox said:


> S'ok. Most people here are guys. I usually assume everyone else is a guy too, unless something says otherwise. I don't know about other people, but "cubist" makes me think of "cubism".



Cubism being...cubes? Sorry I'm young but old school (Corners-first and I still say cubist).


----------



## aceofspades98 (Aug 15, 2013)

AustinReed said:


> it pretty much never is.


Pretty much or always?


----------



## sneaklyfox (Aug 15, 2013)

rybaby said:


> Cubism being...cubes? Sorry I'm young but old school (Corners-first and I still say cubist).



use the search function 

Seriously, cubism has to do with art like Picasso-style. If you type "cubist" in wikipedia it redirects to the page on cubism.


----------



## rj (Aug 15, 2013)

sneaklyfox said:


> use the search function
> 
> Seriously, cubism has to do with art like Picasso-style. If you type "cubist" in wikipedia it redirects to the page on cubism.



"Nude descending stairs" is a portrait of Faz.

Just kidding.


----------



## rybaby (Aug 15, 2013)

rj said:


> "Nude descending stairs" is a portrait of Faz.
> 
> Just kidding.



haha here are some picasso enthusiasts: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=SaDbC3Ts_UI


----------



## YddEd (Aug 15, 2013)

aceofspades98 said:


> Pretty much or always?


Always.



TeddyKGB said:


> Sarcasm is one of the things that make life worth living....


And makes life fun?


----------



## immortalchaos29 (Aug 15, 2013)

rybaby said:


> I did not intend for Stefan to point out small, irrelevant bits of information and blow them up into a big deal.



This is just what he does. You'll get used to it though. When I am about to publish a reply, I often think to myself, "Self, how could Stefan take this and make me look dumb," then I may edit some things. True story. I don't pretend to understand his intentions but this could be partly why he does it.

As for sarcasm, it can be used for humor, or to belittle someone. I think the difference is usually clear even on an online forum.

Also sometimes there may be a long standing joke on the forums that a newcomer might not understand, and therefore misinterpret. For example, "Or you could just use Petrus."


----------



## Renslay (Aug 15, 2013)

immortalchaos29 said:


> Also sometimes there may be a long standing joke on the forums that a newcomer might not understand, and therefore misinterpret. For example, "Or you could just use Petrus."



Just for the record: http://www.speedsolving.com/wiki/index.php/List_of_cubing_memes


----------



## Stefan (Aug 15, 2013)

rybaby said:


> Example: From my own experience -- I post a thread about the Waterman method. I get some nice responses with constructive criticism as well as tips. However, half of the responses were negative and didn't help. Such as saying: Waterman averaged 18 seconds, not 16. Or CFOP is faster. Or that's a bad link. You can read it all here: http://www.speedsolving.com/forum/showthread.php?42485-The-Waterman-Method/page2



Give out misinformation, unfairly disrespect Minh Thai, use bad arguments, expect noone to rebuff. Wat.

Might be "irrelevant" to *you*, but if you're misinforming others, I have a problem with that.

And the link was annoying because I had already provided it on the exact same page (except I hadn't misspelled it, of course).

You misspelled your username as well, btw, there's a "c" missing at the start.


----------



## aceofspades98 (Aug 15, 2013)

YddEd said:


> Always.



Nah.........


----------



## YddEd (Aug 15, 2013)

aceofspades98 said:


> Nah.........


90% of the time?


----------



## Stefan (Aug 15, 2013)

Yes, 90% of the time it never is.


----------



## TMOY (Aug 15, 2013)

sneaklyfox said:


> CFOP is proven over the Waterman method..


Since when ? Please provide a valid proof.

And I mean *valid*. The fact that faster times have been achieved with CFOP proves absolutely nothing when one method is used and optimized by thousand of people and the other one by only a handful of cubers. Most people said the same about Roux a couple of years ago, look at what Roux users can do now.

It's always the same circular logic. One method is considered better because people go faster with it, people go faster with it because the best speedcubers choose it, and they choose it because the method is considered better. And the goal of people trying to push up alternative methods is precisely to break that kind of circular logic, which unfortunately is really hard because most people just don't see the flaw in it.


----------



## aceofspades98 (Aug 15, 2013)

TMOY said:


> Since when ? Please provide a valid proof.
> 
> And I mean *valid*. The fact that faster times have been achieved with CFOP proves absolutely nothing when one method is used and optimized by thousand of people and the other one by only a handful of cubers. Most people said the same about Roux a couple of years ago, look at what Roux users can do now.
> 
> It's always the same circular logic. One method is considered better because people go faster with it, people go faster with it because the best speedcubers choose it, and they choose it because the method is considered better. And the goal of people trying to push alternative methods is precisely to break that kind of circular logic, which unfortunately is really hard because most people just don't see the flaw in it.



Method use is already becoming more and more diverse. That circle is coming close to non existent. That is all.


----------



## TMOY (Aug 15, 2013)

So what ? Is it supposed to prove sneaklyfox' claim ?


----------



## Dene (Aug 15, 2013)

Welcome to the internet. These forums are nothing in comparison to some places; the mods make sure of that. I used to try to be mean, but nowadays there's no point.

Mr. Pochmann wins this thread anyway.


----------



## Ton (Aug 15, 2013)

rybaby said:


> I also notice a disturbing amount of sarcasm....
> 
> This has been bugging me a lot recently, so any insight would be helpful.
> 
> Thanks!



It is not the cubers, to me it is a pattern I see on all social media, people are on social media individuals instead of a member of a group sharing a common goal. 
Meeting the same cubers in person with "nasty" posts, would show you that they are helpful and understanding. 

In my opinion a forum does not work well if it has chatting kind of threads, informative contributions seems to work very well

btw The Waterman method is a corners first as with many corners first, you need to be very fast in the execution on slice moves (M,S, E) . in general R U L moves are much faster to execute. 
But than again studying Waterman or any other method will improve your skills so just stick to your own plan and keep posting


----------



## TMOY (Aug 15, 2013)

Ton said:


> btw The Waterman method is a corners first as with many corners first, you need to be very fast in the execution on slice moves (M,S, E) . in general R U L moves are much faster to execute.



Just one word: practice. Once again, look at the fast Roux users and tell me if their M slices are slow.



> But than again studying Waterman or any other method will improve your skills so just stick to your own plan and keep posting



I 100% agree with that.


----------



## StachuK1992 (Aug 15, 2013)

My guess;

It's mean because conversation used to be more constructive.
The average age and IQ have certainly dropped around here, and older members recent newer members for it.

Seeing all of the stupid spam is very very frustrating.


----------



## aceofspades98 (Aug 15, 2013)

StachuK1992 said:


> My guess;
> 
> It's mean because conversation used to be more constructive.
> The average age and IQ have certainly dropped around here, and older members recent newer members for it.
> ...



What do you say the average age nowadays is?


----------



## GaDiBo (Aug 15, 2013)

rybaby said:


> I'm not trying to attack anybody here or make accusations. I have noticed, nonetheless, that many cubists here on the forums are just plain mean.
> 
> Example: I cannot even count how many times I have seen "use the search function" on threads. For one, if you care to post on a repeated thread, why don't you at least explain a brief answer? Or at least post a link to a thread that might answer one's question?
> 
> ...



Yes I agree with you in some point, my ECDU method is exactly same as your Waterman method, most people are very nice and friendly but some people does not. You can read all here: http://www.speedsolving.com/forum/s...y-new-speedmethod-Tiến-s-method-(ECDU-method)



Stefan said:


> 1. Your method is very different.
> 2. It's not his method. It's Waterman's method.



I'm sorry, my English not good, "my ECDU method is exactly same as your Waterman method" mean that my thread have a bit same status of his thread. So my method is not same as Waterman method.


----------



## Stefan (Aug 15, 2013)

GaDiBo said:


> my ECDU method is exactly same as your Waterman method



1. Your method is very different.
2. It's not his method. It's Waterman's method.


----------



## ~Adam~ (Aug 15, 2013)

I have seen people be mean on these forums (I'm probably included in that). In the vast majority of cases it is because the person is being lazy and trying to get other people to do what they could do easily with a little research.

I believe there is stuff you have to read before posting initially giving you info like using the search function and reading stickies.
If people are too lazy or ignorant to do that I think it is justified for members to be 'mean' back.

I also don't think that the OPs points are examples of people being mean. I think the OP is just overly sensitive.
If you don't like the tone you read a comment in trying rereading it in a different tone.

Edit - after reading the whole thread I have come to the conclusion that a few people in the thread would like everyone else to change how they post on the forums instead of having to change the way they perceive the posts.
This falls into the 'lazy' category IMO.

Case in point, after having cubists corrected to cubers very politely the nonsense word was still being used.
If the response had been 'mean' instead would cubist have been used again in the thread? I doubt it.


----------



## elrog (Aug 15, 2013)

Some People are mean sometimes, but it isn't enough to label the group as a whole as being mean. There are many nice people on the forums. I voted no.


----------



## Stefan (Aug 15, 2013)

elrog said:


> Some People are mean sometimes, but it isn't enough to label the group as a whole as being mean. There are many nice people on the forums.



That's true. Chris Hardwick's niceness alone foils any attempt to establish this as a mean place.


----------



## A Leman (Aug 15, 2013)

I like that Stefan is always detailed and accurate. It's always nicer to get information from someone who reads beforehand and cites facts than people that spread misinformation that I have to learn over later. That alone makes him very valuable on the forum and gives his posts authenticity. Stating things that you don't know about in a very matter of fact tone without facts can lead to misunderstandings that need to be corrected.


----------



## CubezUBR (Aug 15, 2013)

people (^) tend to "disrespect" slower people , thats why im trying so hard to be fast so i can fit in with the "cool" guys (also ^)
+people ask stupid questions that could be found out in the search function or 1 answer question thing thread. or they have so little understanding of a thread they turn from someone who needs to ask a question to someone who is unaccepted in the discussion. people need to be aware not everyone has as much knowledge or is as fast, and treat them how they need to be treated
needless to say i have given up asking questions...


----------



## ~Adam~ (Aug 15, 2013)

CubezUBR said:


> people (^) tend to "disrespect" slower people , thats why im trying so hard to be fast so i can fit in with the "cool" guys



That is not true. People who continually post stupid things get disrespected.


----------



## Yellowsnow98 (Aug 15, 2013)

cube-o-holic said:


> That is not true. People who continually post stupid things get disrespected.



This.
I'm pretty slow but I don't get abuse from anyone. (Even thinking about giving me a hard time will get you butchered in your sleep )
Anyone who posts _exceedingly_ stupid topics/questions/ideas deserve what they get.
Enough said.


----------



## Stefan (Aug 15, 2013)

Yellowsnow98 said:


> Enough said.



I would point out how utterly useless, arrogant and annoying this phrase is if I weren't so afraid of getting butchered in my sleep.


----------



## Kirjava (Aug 15, 2013)

Many people these days do not do research. They will create a topic on something that is covered on the wiki, regs, or elsewhere on the forum without even trying to find information on it. This happens often.

They ask questions with no real answers. They don't ask the right questions based on what they need. They expect there's something we're not telling them that will allow them to break 30 seconds. Or what the exact average you need to get before learning some set of algorithms. They don't realise there is more than one path for getting faster. The help forum is filled with threads about getting past some arbitrary barrier as if there's a different answer for each. Questions are asked about things based on faulty assumptions.

Then they make topics complaining that their repost was merged into another thread or they didn't get the answer they wanted.

Why are you complaining that we told you to use the search function instead of giving you the answer? If the answer can be found using the search function - your mistake was not using it. Do you even have any kind of desire to learn things yourself without having a personal trainer? It's not mean - we're trying to help you help yourself.

People are oversensitive and take honest truths as some kind of personal attack. They act badly to criticism that is based upon prior knowledge. You may think I'm just trying to shoot your idea down, but I'm telling you that I don't think it will work based upon truths. There would be no reason to have a go at something that genuinely has the potential to be good. If your ideas are always being shot down, maybe they are just bad ideas.

I strive to produce new and unique content for this forum and contribute to our hivemind. It's frustrating to see people just continually ask questions that are already documented when I used to love going onto the forum to see what new stuff people had come up with. I have no idea why I'm still here at this point.

We don't disrespect people for being slow. That is an absolute lie.


----------



## masterofthebass (Aug 15, 2013)

CubezUBR said:


> if a 50 second solver asked a question about roux for example, people would make assumptions that he is a slow, bad, noob...
> however if a 12 second solver made the exactly the same question, he would be given a different answer, or so i have observed. its not always a bad thing, however, he might want it in simpler terms, oh well, i guess this is a pointless argument



Speed has nothing to do with knowledge. Look at someone along the lines of Mike Hughey, or Brest, or a whole host of other people who, independent of their speed, have taken the time to learn about cubing and can discuss it with anyone of any speed. 


The major problem most people have when they come to any forum dedicated to a specific subject is they don't take enough time to familiarize themselves with the information that's already available. If someone is asking a question that actually has substance to it, no one in their right mind is going to care what speed that person is. Just do your research before asking something and no one is going to give you a hassle.


----------



## Noahaha (Aug 15, 2013)

Kirjava said:


> Many people these days do not do research. They will create a topic on something that is covered on the wiki, regs, or elsewhere on the forum without even trying to find information on it. This happens often.
> 
> They ask questions with no real answers. They don't ask the right questions based on what they need. They expect there's something we're not telling them that will allow them to break 30 seconds. Or what the exact average you need to get before learning some set of algorithms. They don't realise there is more than one path for getting faster. The help forum is filled with threads about getting past some arbitrary barrier as if there's a different answer for each. Questions are asked about things based on faulty assumptions.
> 
> ...



I agree with all of this, especially the bold part. A great example of that is rybaby's Waterman thread.


----------



## sneaklyfox (Aug 15, 2013)

TMOY said:


> And I mean *valid*. The fact that faster times have been achieved with CFOP proves absolutely nothing when one method is used and optimized by thousand of people and the other one by only a handful of cubers. Most people said the same about Roux a couple of years ago, look at what Roux users can do now.


What I meant with my comment about CFOP and Waterman was that CFOP has been proven to be fast because of the times people have already achieved using the method while Waterman has not been proven to be fast (yet?) Sure, maybe one day you or someone else can prove it to be fast as well. I don't know what's the fastest average achieved with Waterman in competition right now but I don't think it's close so I say it is not a proven method.



Ton said:


> In my opinion a forum does not work well if it has chatting kind of threads, informative contributions seems to work very well


Well, I agree informative contributions work well and are mostly what forums are for. But maybe there's a place for some chatting... there's a greater sense of community if members like hanging together too. Marcel's thread in the off topic forum is an example. It's very chatty... we chat about cubes and anything else. But that's why it's in the off topic forum where it should be. I guess it would not work if we were overrun with chat threads all over the place though but it's contained.



cube-o-holic said:


> Case in point, after having cubists corrected to cubers very politely the nonsense word was still being used.
> If the response had been 'mean' instead would cubist have been used again in the thread? I doubt it.


I don't know how the OP would have reacted if I were "mean" about "cuber" vs "cubist" but some people get worse when they are spoken to in a blunt/rude/mean manner. Anyway, I'd rather start with the softer approach first before going to stronger measures. Is it supposed to be different on an online forum than in real life? Don't you ask people politely with "please" first? Don't you say, "Please be quiet," instead of "Shut up"? I think it's sad and true that the internet has gotten more hostile and nasty. People hide behind a cover of anonymity and say some really cruel things that they may not be saying to your face in person. Mainly I think it's because nobody knows who you really are and you have no relationship with most people you meet online to care what they think if you are rude or impolite. People are nicer in person, but hopefully not because they're hiding the fact they think you're stupid or something else. A little politeness goes a long way. I shouldn't have to shove my way around the internet to get a point across.


----------



## Yellowsnow98 (Aug 15, 2013)

Stefan said:


> I would point out how utterly useless, arrogant and annoying this phrase is if I weren't so afraid of getting butchered in my sleep.



Utterly useless, arrogant and annoying.
You know me better than I know myself.


----------



## rj (Aug 15, 2013)

Yellowsnow98 said:


> Utterly useless, arrogant and annoying.
> You know me better than I know myself.


I think Stefan is the nicest person on the forum. (just like Noah said in his worlds interview video, hem, hem.)


----------



## sneaklyfox (Aug 15, 2013)

Maybe the age of this community has something to do with the way one has to get a point across. Not trying to make a blanket statement about all the young people here because I've met some very nice and respectable younger persons. Anyway, I just get this image of a school classroom where the teacher is trying to teach and half the class is just chatting amongst themselves or texting (as I heard people do these days). They'll do this until the teacher gets really upset and starts sending people to the office. A nice "please be quiet and listen" probably wouldn't have cut it at all. I think in the older days (even before my time) people would know they should have been quiet in the first place and not talk when the teacher is giving a lesson. I hope most *older* people are more respectful. Except I think Stefan is about my age and I didn't appreciate the comment about OP mispelling his username by leaving out a "c". A sort of joke that you could make but that you don't because it's not nice. Considering OPs feeling of the forum already, it would be the kind of joke to make the other blunt and to the point types laugh along while further isolating the OP.


----------



## rj (Aug 15, 2013)

sneaklyfox said:


> Maybe the age of this community has something to do with the way one has to get a point across. Not trying to make a blanket statement about all the young people here because I've met some very nice and respectable younger persons. Anyway, I just get this image of a school classroom where the teacher is trying to teach and half the class is just chatting amongst themselves or texting (as I heard people do these days). They'll do this until the teacher gets really upset and starts sending people to the office. A nice "please be quiet and listen" probably wouldn't have cut it at all. I think in the older days (even before my time) people would know they should have been quiet in the first place and not talk when the teacher is giving a lesson. I hope most *older* people are more respectful. Except I think Stefan is about my age and I didn't appreciate the comment about OP mispelling his username by leaving out a "c". A sort of joke that you could make but that you don't because it's not nice. Considering OPs feeling of the forum already, it would be the kind of joke to make the other blunt and to the point types laugh along while further isolating the OP.



Stefan is older than you. I have never gotten any flak from him whatsoever. Is that unusual?


----------



## rybaby (Aug 15, 2013)

Stefan said:


> Give. ut misinformation, unfairly disrespect Minh Thai, use bad arguments
> 
> You misspelled your username as well, btw, there's a "c" missing at the start.



I feel like I respect Minh Thai a lot more than most who try to invalidate his WR and such. I was purely being hypothetical.
"Bad arguments": again, I did not intend for anyone to argue. I was merely pointing out what I had read on several web pages. 
My username doesn't have a "c" in it -- R-Y-B-A-B-Y


----------



## Yellowsnow98 (Aug 15, 2013)

rj said:


> I think Stefan is the nicest person on the forum. (just like Noah said in his worlds interview video, hem, hem.)


Stefan is a really nice guy. Like me, he only abuses people who deserve it.


----------



## rj (Aug 15, 2013)

Yellowsnow98 said:


> Stefan is a really nice guy. Like me, he only abuses people who deserve it.



rybaby doesn't deserve it.


----------



## Kirjava (Aug 15, 2013)

rybaby said:


> I feel like I respect Minh Thai a lot more than most who try to invalidate his WR and such. I was purely being hypothetical.
> "Bad arguments": again, I did not intend for anyone to argue. I was merely pointing out what I had read on several web pages.
> My username doesn't have a "c" in it -- R-Y-B-A-B-Y



You cannot take criticism. You are are perfect example of why you think people are mean. *You* are the problem.


----------



## sneaklyfox (Aug 15, 2013)

rj said:


> Stefan is older than you. I have never gotten any flak from him whatsoever. Is that unusual?


How old is Stefan? I'm pretty sure he's about the same age. I don't think I've gotten anything from him either.



Yellowsnow98 said:


> Stefan is a really nice guy. Like me, he only abuses people who deserve it.


Nobody ever deserves abuse.


----------



## Yellowsnow98 (Aug 15, 2013)

Kirjava said:


> You cannot take criticism. You are are perfect example of why you think people are mean. *You* are the problem.



Yep.
With you all the way.



sneaklyfox said:


> Nobody *ever* deserves abuse.



Most of the time I'd agree, but the occasional person is basically _looking_ for abuse.
And when that happens I will oblige.


----------



## rj (Aug 15, 2013)

Kirjava said:


> You cannot take criticism. You are are perfect example of why you think people are mean. *You* are the problem.



Not entirely. He does have to get used to Criticism, but Stefan did just make a rude comment. That was Stefan's fault, that he made a rude comment.


----------



## rybaby (Aug 15, 2013)

rj said:


> Not entirely. He does have to get used to Criticism, but Stefan did just make a rude comment. That was Stefan's fault, that he made a rude comment.



Thank you.

As for kirjava: telling others that they are the problem sorta proves my point on rudeness/harshness etc. Thus makes me afraid to attend a competition for fear faster guys would just try to intimidate and insult me.....

Ps could somebody please verify that my username doesn't have a c in it? Rybaby


----------



## rj (Aug 15, 2013)

rybaby said:


> Thank you.
> 
> As for kirjava: telling others that they are the problem sorta proves my point on rudeness/harshness etc. Thus makes me afraid to attend a competition for fear faster guys would just try to intimidate and insult me.....
> 
> Ps could somebody please verify that my username doesn't have a c in it? Rybaby



No c!! Competitions aren't like that.


----------



## ~Adam~ (Aug 15, 2013)

sneaklyfox said:


> People are nicer in person, but hopefully not because they're hiding the fact they think you're stupid or something else. A little politeness goes a long way. I shouldn't have to shove my way around the internet to get a point across.



I am blunt IRL but also polite at the same time. I haven't found an effective way to do that online. Do I need to add an inflection to the end of every comment to soften the blow?


----------



## sneaklyfox (Aug 15, 2013)

rybaby said:


> Thank you.
> 
> As for kirjava: telling others that they are the problem sorta proves my point on rudeness/harshness etc. Thus makes me afraid to attend a competition for fear faster guys would just try to intimidate and insult me.....
> 
> Ps could somebody please verify that my username doesn't have a c in it? Rybaby



Speed has nothing to do with it. It's been said many times already.

About the "c" in username... huh?? Can't tell what point you're making.


----------



## rj (Aug 15, 2013)

cube-o-holic said:


> I am blunt IRL but also polite at the same time. I haven't found an effective way to do that online. Do I need to add an inflection to the end of every comment to soften the blow?



Put something in your sig.

And sneakly, Stefan told him that he missed a c at the beginning of his username.


----------



## Yellowsnow98 (Aug 15, 2013)

rybaby said:


> Thank you.
> 
> As for kirjava: telling others that they are the problem sorta proves my point on rudeness/harshness etc. *Thus makes me afraid to attend a competition for fear faster guys would just try to intimidate and insult me..... *



Oh COME ON. Seriously, that would never ACTUALLY happen.

I went to a comp averaging 36 seconds and nobody said anything. All I got was encouraging words. And useful tips.
It never matters how fast you are. What matters is that you enjoy the competition.

You are completely overreacting now.


----------



## sneaklyfox (Aug 15, 2013)

cube-o-holic said:


> I am blunt IRL but also polite at the same time. I haven't found an effective way to do that online. Do I need to add an inflection to the end of every comment to soften the blow?



I don't mind blunt but polite. As in my example, "Please be quiet" is not the same as "Shut up". The latter has a tone of rudeness about it. Unfortunately, being clearly polite online requires more words most of the time. And I wasn't really in disagreement about what you said earlier about being a little more blunt about using the word "cuber" or "cubist". I was just voicing an opinion about the use of politeness.



rj said:


> Put something in your sig.
> 
> And sneakly, Stefan told him that he missed a c at the beginning of his username.



I know that. Bad joke. Just didn't understand why rybaby requested about having someone verify that the "c" wasn't there. Obviously, it isn't. Was it that rybaby didn't get the joke or because he wanted someone to assert that he was not a crybaby?


----------



## Renslay (Aug 15, 2013)

Note that it is easier to use sarcasm or be a bit harsh in a forum (sitting front of the computer), than in real life, eye-to-eye.

...Except for Stefan. He is exactly the same.


----------



## Ross The Boss (Aug 15, 2013)

noone is being mean. rude sometimes but usually not without justification. you wanna see mean? try going on some other internet forums (particularly wrestling ones. those guys are *******s.). 

@rj wanna get faster? try praying to ur god, christian. lol. <-- _that_ is what being mean looks like. 

(im not actually being mean, rj, just using youre sig as an example.)


----------



## rybaby (Aug 15, 2013)

sneaklyfox said:


> I know that. Bad joke. Just didn't understand why rybaby requested about having someone verify that the "c" wasn't there. Obviously, it isn't. Was it that rybaby didn't get the joke or because he wanted someone to assert that he was not a crybaby?



I honestly didn't get it. Rybaby has nothing to do with crybaby; it's been a nickname all my life. I'm fixing to lose it if Stefan makes another joke like that.


----------



## rj (Aug 15, 2013)

Renslay said:


> Note that it is easier to use sarcasm or be a bit harsh in a forum (sitting front of the computer), than in real life, eye-to-eye.
> 
> ...Except for Stefan. He is exactly the same.



No, it's harder_ not _to.




rybaby said:


> I honestly didn't get it. Rybaby has nothing to do with crybaby; it's been a nickname all my life. I'm fixing to lose it if Stefan makes another joke like that.



Don't. He won't.


----------



## Yellowsnow98 (Aug 15, 2013)

rj said:


> No, it's harder_ not _to.
> 
> 
> 
> ...



Weren't you saying earlier that Stefan has never given you any sarcasm or abuse.
That's because you don't deserve any.

Not trying to hate on rybaby, but he did need the criticism. Maybe not as harsh as Stefan said but not too much less


----------



## rj (Aug 15, 2013)

Yellowsnow98 said:


> Weren't you saying earlier that Stefan has never given you any sarcasm or abuse.
> That's because you don't deserve any.



Well, ben (RIP from the forums) said I did. But, then again, ben was weird.



Yellowsnow98 said:


> Not trying to hate on rybaby, but he did need the criticism. Maybe not as harsh as Stefan said but not too much less



Agreed.


----------



## sneaklyfox (Aug 15, 2013)

rybaby said:


> I honestly didn't get it. Rybaby has nothing to do with crybaby; it's been a nickname all my life. I'm fixing to lose it if Stefan makes another joke like that.



Ok, I see now. Of course rybaby doesn't have anything to do with crybaby. Maybe just learn to ignore the rude jokes from Stefan or whoever does similar things. I've come to accept that some people online are just going to be mean. But compared to other places I've been, what is seen here on the forum is nothing compared to that. I've been teased most of my elementary school life so I've come to learn to ignore the rudeness/meanness of others or when it's just bluntness, to give the other person the benefit of the doubt. It doesn't bother me anymore in a personal way. Usually I attribute the need to insult and demean others as a sign of a lack of maturity. But really, mostly people are nice here.


----------



## rj (Aug 15, 2013)

sneaklyfox said:


> Ok, I see now. Of course rybaby doesn't have anything to do with crybaby. Maybe just learn to ignore the rude jokes from Stefan or whoever does similar things. I've come to accept that some people online are just going to be mean. But compared to other places I've been, what is seen here on the forum is nothing compared to that. I've been teased most of my elementary school life so I've come to learn to ignore the rudeness/meanness of others or when it's just bluntness, to give the other person the benefit of the doubt. It doesn't bother me anymore in a personal way. Usually I attribute the need to insult and demean others as a sign of a lack of maturity. But really, mostly people are nice here.



And you are the nicest.


----------



## XTowncuber (Aug 15, 2013)

rybaby said:


> Thus makes me afraid to attend a competition for fear faster guys would just try to intimidate and insult me.....


I have been to many comps and I usually talk/sit with the fastest people who are there. This never happens. It's always an encouraging atmosphere, even between the big rivals at big comps. This is such a strange idea, it actually feels ridiculous to me.  

On topic: When I first found Speedsolving I felt, as you do, like everything posted here was negative. When you get to know the people here, you realize they are not usually being mean. If someone is being mean they are usually called out for it. What you take to be rudeness is often a more experienced member correcting a less experienced one. After a while of reading this forum (I haven't been on for long at all, but I have lurked for years) you get tired of new members asking the same questions that could easily be answered with 1 simple search. People want to be spoon-fed information. More experienced members usually just tell them to figure it out themselves. It's not mean, just teaching them a lesson.


----------



## Yellowsnow98 (Aug 15, 2013)

rj said:


> Well, ben (RIP from the forums) said I did. But, then again, ben was weird.
> 
> 
> 
> Agreed.



I've never seen you do anything to deserve sarcasm or abuse. You're quite a nice person. As are most people on the forums.



rj said:


> And you are the nicest.



Without a doubt.


----------



## rj (Aug 15, 2013)

XTowncuber said:


> I have been to many comps and I usually talk/sit with the fastest people who are there. This never happens. It's always an encouraging atmosphere, even between the big rivals at big comps. This is such a strange idea, it actually feels ridiculous to me.
> 
> On topic: When I first found Speedsolving I felt, as you do, like everything posted here was negative. When you get to know the people here, you realize they are not usually being mean. If someone is being mean they are usually called out for it. What you take to be rudeness is often a more experienced member correcting a less experienced one. After a while of reading this forum (I haven't been on for long at all, but I have lurked for years) you get tired of new members asking the same questions that could easily be answered with 1 simple search. People want to be spoon-fed information. More experienced members usually just tell them to figure it out themselves. It's not mean, just teaching them a lesson.


Same thing happened here.


----------



## sneaklyfox (Aug 15, 2013)

rj said:


> And you are the nicest.


*blush*



XTowncuber said:


> I have been to many comps and I usually talk/sit with the fastest people who are there. This never happens. It's always an encouraging atmosphere, even between the big rivals at big comps. This is such a strange idea, it actually feels ridiculous to me.
> 
> On topic: When I first found Speedsolving I felt, as you do, like everything posted here was negative. When you get to know the people here, you realize they are not usually being mean. If someone is being mean they are usually called out for it. What you take to be rudeness is often a more experienced member correcting a less experienced one. After a while of reading this forum (I haven't been on for long at all, but I have lurked for years) you get tired of new members asking the same questions that could easily be answered with 1 simple search. People want to be spoon-fed information. More experienced members usually just tell them to figure it out themselves. It's not mean, just teaching them a lesson.


Yup, totally agree with these observations.

(I'm terrible... thanks to this thread, I haven't gotten anything I wanted to do today done.)


----------



## Ton (Aug 15, 2013)

I think the forum will need a new link for the >> Forum Navigation << "Mean answers" in this section you can ask any question cube related and answers should be useless. 
So a thread of useless discussions, opinions and assumptions can be posted in this section.


----------



## rj (Aug 15, 2013)

sneaklyfox said:


> *blush*
> 
> 
> Yup, totally agree with these observations.
> ...



You're a lot like my mom. There's 6 kids in our family. You are going to love having 5 kids. Seriously.


----------



## Yellowsnow98 (Aug 15, 2013)

Well, this thread calmed down pretty quickly.

Though it was one of the most volatile threads since I joined.


----------



## rybaby (Aug 15, 2013)

Yellowsnow98 said:


> Well, this thread calmed down pretty quickly.
> 
> Though it was one of the most volatile threads since I joined.



So maybe someone could fire it up again? 
I still think many of yall are underestimating the power of words. Using "blunt" as an excuse to be mean/harsh/rude.....


----------



## sneaklyfox (Aug 15, 2013)

rj said:


> You're a lot like my mom. There's 6 kids in our family. You are going to love having 5 kids. Seriously.


See pm.



Yellowsnow98 said:


> Well, this thread calmed down pretty quickly.
> 
> Though it was one of the most volatile threads since I joined.


Yup, somewhat volatile. I've read worse. Everybody chill... it's lunchtime soon (for me anyway).


----------



## Yellowsnow98 (Aug 15, 2013)

sneaklyfox said:


> See pm.
> 
> 
> Yup, somewhat volatile. I've read worse. Everybody chill... it's lunchtime soon (for me anyway).



I read one called "last layer skip?" 
I think it was since deleted but it was pretty bad.

I don't like getting involved in volatile threads though.
I have trouble getting people to support what I say because I'm here 5 months and nobody knows me that well. lol.

Mmm lunch. (It's 16:38 where I am but I like to get up in the afternoon)


----------



## Hyprul 9-ty2 (Aug 15, 2013)

Stefan should make a video tutorial titled "How to grow a spine".


----------



## sneaklyfox (Aug 15, 2013)

Yellowsnow98 said:


> I read one called "last layer skip?"
> I think it was since deleted but it was pretty bad.
> 
> I don't like getting involved in volatile threads though.
> ...



I don't remember which threads I've read that I felt have been more volatile than this one. I only get involved if I think I have something to say without getting flamed myself lol.

Yeah, I figured it wasn't your lunchtime, being in Ireland. I have to eat lunch because I didn't eat breakfast.


----------



## Yellowsnow98 (Aug 15, 2013)

sneaklyfox said:


> Yeah, I figured it wasn't your lunchtime, being in Ireland. I have to eat lunch because I didn't eat breakfast.



Lunchtime or not I've only been up since 1pm so breakfast is at lunchtime and lunch is at around 4 or 5. I pretty much live by your timezone in my country. Lol.


----------



## sneaklyfox (Aug 15, 2013)

Yellowsnow98 said:


> Lunchtime or not I've only been up since 1pm so breakfast is at lunchtime and lunch is at around 4 or 5. I pretty much live by your timezone in my country. Lol.



Wow, haha. Ok, I see. So it IS lunchtime for you, personally. Ok, enjoy your meal.

(Sorry for being so off-topic now! I think I'm going to leave this thread.)


----------



## Kirjava (Aug 15, 2013)

rybaby said:


> As for kirjava: telling others that they are the problem sorta proves my point on rudeness/harshness etc. Thus makes me afraid to attend a competition for fear faster guys would just try to intimidate and insult me.....



But you *are* the problem. Please see This thread

If things like this didn't happen, people wouldn't be mean about them. 

These are things that *should not happen in the first place*, therefore the people acting with this behaviour are the cause of the problem.

*How is telling other people their faults rude?*

If you read the post I made, it has a comment predicting your current oversensitivity.

There is no evidence ever of faster people insulting people for being slower. *You're making things up that are not even true to try and enhance your point.*


----------



## ~Adam~ (Aug 15, 2013)

Yellowsnow98 said:


> I read one called "last layer skip?"
> I think it was since deleted but it was pretty bad.



If you need a whole thread to tell you what a last layer skip is how can you possibly use a keyboard let alone a computer? <----- mean, but I still can't believe that it wasn't a joke.


----------



## Stefan (Aug 15, 2013)

Yellowsnow98 said:


> Well, this thread calmed down pretty quickly.



Yeah. I take a nap and that happens? What the hell?!



Renslay said:


> Note that it is easier to use sarcasm or be a bit harsh in a forum (sitting front of the computer), than in real life, eye-to-eye.
> ...Except for Stefan. He is exactly the same.



Interesting. That might be a first, usually people say that I'm very different in real life, and I think so, too. In real life I'm rather soft-spoken (literally, as my voice is low and quiet) and introverted, and I'm thinking too slowly to come up with stuff like I can here. Also, in real life I have access to far fewer conversations than here, drastically reducing the chances to even find a reason to get annoyed. But maybe you caught me on a particularly bad/good day.



sneaklyfox said:


> Except I think Stefan is about my age and I didn't appreciate the comment about OP mispelling his username by leaving out a "c". A sort of joke that you could make but that you don't because it's not nice.



Alright, let me apologize for that joke. With the topic of this thread (_"boohoo, people are so mean"_), that pun was just too perfect and I couldn't resist. Was one of the light-hearted ones I mentioned in the thread entirely dedicated to me and my meanness, though. Sorry, rybaby, if it went to far, I sometimes overestimate people's ability to take criticism. Look at how Yellowsnow98 responded to my _"utterly..."_ remark (which was actually mostly serious, as I do hate that phrase, particularly the "nuff" version), he playfully took the entire blow out of my comment and gained lots of respect. One more thing I'd like to point out: I think I was pretty much the only "mean" one here (and only with that one joke). Otherwise, I most likely would've been less. I did several times go *against* mobs harassing newcomers here, so I'm not all lost. Oh and I'm 36.



rybaby said:


> I feel like I respect Minh Thai a lot more than *most who try to invalidate his WR and such*.



I don't recall anyone else ever doing that.


----------



## uberCuber (Aug 15, 2013)

Stefan said:


> I don't recall anyone else ever doing that.



The only thing I can think of to which he might be referring is when people say that those really stiff cubes gave people with higher-movecount methods a disadvantage, but I wouldn't call that trying to "invalidate" the record.


----------



## Renslay (Aug 15, 2013)

Stefan said:


> Interesting. That might be a first, usually people say that I'm very different in real life, and I think so, too. In real life I'm rather soft-spoken (literally, as my voice is low and quiet) and introverted, and I'm thinking too slowly to come up with stuff like I can here. Also, in real life I have access to far fewer conversations than here, drastically reducing the chances to even find a reason to get annoyed. But maybe you caught me on a particularly bad/good day.



Then I apologize. We spoke in person many years ago.


----------



## Yellowsnow98 (Aug 15, 2013)

cube-o-holic said:


> If you need a whole thread to tell you what a last layer skip is how can you possibly use a keyboard let alone a computer? <----- mean, but I still can't believe that it wasn't a joke.



It's a perfect example of why sometimes you _need_ to be a little mean. His reaction was great though


----------



## Lchu613 (Aug 15, 2013)

cube-o-holic said:


> If you need a whole thread to tell you what a last layer skip is how can you possibly use a keyboard let alone a computer? <----- mean, but I still can't believe that it wasn't a joke.



That thread, I believe, was SnipeCube's "Snipe Method", and was titled "how I get an LL skip every time"
He didn't get an LL skip every time, it was a variant of the beginner's method with an extremely misleading title.


----------



## ~Adam~ (Aug 15, 2013)

Lchu613 said:


> That thread, I believe, was SnipeCube's "Snipe Method", and was titled "how I get an LL skip every time"
> He didn't get an LL skip every time, it was a variant of the beginner's method with an extremely misleading title.



There was a thread within the last two weeks when someone asked 'What is a last layer skip?'.


----------



## Yellowsnow98 (Aug 15, 2013)

cube-o-holic said:


> There was a thread within the last two weeks when someone asked 'What is a last layer skip?'.



Yep you're right.


----------



## rybaby (Aug 15, 2013)

Stefan said:


> Yeah. I take a nap and this happens? What the hell?!
> 
> 
> Alright, let me apologize for that joke. With the topic of this thread (_"boohoo, people are so mean"_), that pun was just too perfect and I couldn't resist. Was one of the light-hearted ones I mentioned in the thread entirely dedicated to me and my meanness, though. Sorry, rybaby, if it went to far, I sometimes overestimate people's ability to take criticism. Look at how Yellowsnow98 responded to my _"utterly..."_ remark (which was actually mostly serious, as I do hate that phrase, particularly the "nuff" version), he playfully took the entire blow out of my comment and gained lots of respect. One more thing I'd like to point out: I think I was pretty much the only "mean" one here (and only with that one joke). Otherwise, I most likely would've been less. I did several times go *against* mobs harassing newcomers here, so I'm not all lost. Oh and I'm 36.
> ...



Thank you Stefan. I finally understand everyone now . As for the Minh Thai comment, maybe invalidate isn't the right word.....I just sense an assumption by many that the wr wasn't really a good indicator of the fastest times in that 21 year period. Oh and btw, you are one of the oldest cubists (ers) I know of besides Ron van Bruchem.

Cheers


----------



## aceofspades98 (Aug 15, 2013)

I come back and there are 14 pages?!? When I went to bed there were: 3. 


Stefan is awesome. That is all.


----------



## Yellowsnow98 (Aug 15, 2013)

aceofspades98 said:


> I come back and there are 14 pages?!? When I went to bed there were: 3.
> 
> 
> Stefan is awesome. That is all.



Stefan is awesome. Nuff said.


----------



## MaikeruKonare (Aug 15, 2013)

You shouldn't get annoyed with beginners because when you were a beginner someone helped you at some point. I'm using you as a term meaning anyone.


----------



## Stefan (Aug 15, 2013)

Yellowsnow98 said:


> Stefan is awesome. Nuff said.



I see what you did there!

(and just this once, it made me laugh)


----------



## IamWEB (Aug 15, 2013)

MaikeruKonare said:


> You shouldn't get annoyed with beginners because when you were a beginner someone helped you at some point. I'm using you as a term meaning anyone.



One issue is that when the many forum and/or cubing "veterans" were beginners, there were far less resources out there. Many of the veterans around here are the creators of the resources we have now. It can be annoying to see beginners enter into this hobby with so many resources available, and still we're always seeing posts/threads like "help i know 4LLL and avg. 35 sec how i get faster", "is Panshi best cube", "wats ur fav lube for ur fav cube", and more.

There are many posts either showing a lack of using the search function, Google, or common sense. Too many people are asking to be spoon fed the information that they could easily find through searching and applying the knowledge they find.

And then there are some users who are simply sarcastic, blunt, or negative because they want to be. If someone's truly being mean, you can report them and let the mods deal with it. If you don't like someone's attitude or troll-like behavoir, you can ignore them. Don't feed the trolls, and they will starve of boredom.


----------



## Cubetastic (Aug 15, 2013)

i believe cubism is the art style used to represent objects with geometric shapes o.o


----------



## TheNextFeliks (Aug 16, 2013)

Lol. I saw the first part of the title and I thought it said why are people always on the forums. 

Some people are mean: lolben, username can be a pain sometimes, and others. But most are pretty nice.


----------



## aceofspades98 (Aug 16, 2013)

TheNextFeliks said:


> Lol. I saw the first part of the title and I thought it said why are people always on the forums.
> 
> Some people are mean: lolben, username can be a pain sometimes, and others. But most are pretty nice.


I don't really think any of them are mean. Even ben, he just says things. Username is just blunt, which can be good.


----------



## BaconCuber (Aug 16, 2013)

I've never really experienced much meanness at all. I try to post completely unique posts, which I don't do very often.


----------



## Patrick M (Aug 16, 2013)

I think people on the forums are just a little annoyed by people that want to have their answers served on a silver platter instead of searching, and mostly that's it. I mean it does save time to just look for your answer first before posting, yet even I need to just answer the question and then tell them of the awesome search feature. And to use it... Lots of people are courteous on this site, and for that, I am thankful.


----------



## sneaklyfox (Aug 16, 2013)

Stefan said:


> Alright, let me apologize for that joke. With the topic of this thread (_"boohoo, people are so mean"_), that pun was just too perfect and I couldn't resist. Was one of the light-hearted ones I mentioned in the thread entirely dedicated to me and my meanness, though. Sorry, rybaby, if it went to far, I sometimes overestimate people's ability to take criticism. Look at how Yellowsnow98 responded to my _"utterly..."_ remark (which was actually mostly serious, as I do hate that phrase, particularly the "nuff" version), he playfully took the entire blow out of my comment and gained lots of respect. One more thing I'd like to point out: I think I was pretty much the only "mean" one here (and only with that one joke). Otherwise, I most likely would've been less. I did several times go *against* mobs harassing newcomers here, so I'm not all lost. Oh and I'm 36.



Yeah, people take the same words in different ways. It's like that in communication. Even more chance of misunderstanding when all you have are words without tone or body language.

Ok 36 then. I'm 32. Close enough, considering most everyone else is <20.


----------



## TheNextFeliks (Aug 16, 2013)

This is silly thread. We should delete it and forget about it.


----------



## Czery (Aug 16, 2013)

I think people just have to get used to the INTERNET. 

Compared to most other forums, SS is actually civil, welcoming and progressive.


----------



## sneaklyfox (Aug 16, 2013)

Czery said:


> I think people just have to get used to the INTERNET.
> 
> Compared to most other forums, SS is actually civil, welcoming and progressive.



But a lot of the rest of the internet is quite appalling... well, depending on the topic too. But yes, SS is actually quite nice.


----------



## elrog (Aug 16, 2013)

StachuK1992 said:


> My guess;
> 
> It's mean because conversation used to be more constructive.
> The average age and IQ have certainly dropped around here, and older members recent newer members for it.
> ...



Please do not stereotype the younger generations. It isn't just the teens that are unconstructive.



sneaklyfox said:


> Nobody ever deserves abuse.



I agree 100%.



sneaklyfox said:


> Speed has nothing to do with it. It's been said many times already.



I wouldn't say it has nothing at all to do with it. Nobody wants to try a method that has no sub 20 or even sub 15 solvers. Some may even move this down to sub 10. When any method first starts out, theres not going to be people getting that fast with it, and nobody will care about it until the creator themselves can prove it can be good. This is almost unfair because you do not necessarily have to be fast to make (or whatever you want to call it) a new method.



rj said:


> And you are the nicest.



I'd say your being pretty nice too posting that. Keep up the good work. :tu



Kirjava said:


> These are things that *should not happen in the first place*, therefore the people acting with this behaviour are the cause of the problem.



Arguing is not constructive. Btw, it takes two people (or more) to argue. I really don't want this to sound hypocritical, but there's no other way to put it. You saying he is the problem is adding you to the problem.



MaikeruKonare said:


> You shouldn't get annoyed with beginners because when you were a beginner someone helped you at some point. I'm using you as a term meaning anyone.



Exactly! Rather than tell someone to use the search function, tell them how so they don't post a something you deem das dumb again. While your at it, you may aswell show them how to delete their post. The first day I joined, I didn't know these things.



TheNextFeliks said:


> This is silly thread. We should delete it and forget about it.



Well, it wouldn't hurt for some people here to learn something from this.


----------



## Stefan (Aug 16, 2013)

elrog said:


> When any method first starts out [...] *nobody will care about it until the creator themselves can prove it can be good*.



Nah. If the method is reasonable at all, Thom's gonna do it.


----------



## sneaklyfox (Aug 16, 2013)

elrog said:


> I wouldn't say it has nothing at all to do with it. Nobody wants to try a method that has no sub 20 or even sub 15 solvers. Some may even move this down to sub 10. When any method first starts out, theres not going to be people getting that fast with it, and nobody will care about it until the creator themselves can prove it can be good. This is almost unfair because you do not necessarily have to be fast to make (or whatever you want to call it) a new method.



I was referring to rybaby's comment about not being treated nicely at a competition because of speed.


----------



## Noahaha (Aug 16, 2013)

elrog said:


> Arguing is not constructive.



THIS IS SO UNBELIEVABLY FALSE.

That's like saying apples are not green. Plenty of arguments are constructive and plenty of arguments are not. On this forum, they are constructive most of the time. There are few things more valuable to someone trying to learn about a topic than seeing knowledgeable people argue different sides of it.


----------



## aceofspades98 (Aug 16, 2013)

Noahaha said:


> THIS IS SO UNBELIEVABLY FALSE.
> 
> That's like saying apples are not green. Plenty of arguments are constructive and plenty of arguments are not. On this forum, they are constructive most of the time. There are few things more valuable to someone trying to learn about a topic than seeing knowledgeable people argue different sides of it.


Well said.


----------



## rj (Aug 16, 2013)

sneaklyfox said:


> But a lot of the rest of the internet is quite appalling... well, depending on the topic too. But yes, SS is actually quite nice.



Compared to some I've seen, yes, totally. Definitely the tightest-knit.


----------



## Dene (Aug 16, 2013)

Noahaha said:


> That's like saying apples are not green.



Red apples aren't green



rj said:


> rybaby said:
> 
> 
> > I honestly didn't get it. Rybaby has nothing to do with crybaby; it's been a nickname all my life. I'm fixing to lose it if Stefan makes another joke like that.
> ...



I hope he does; that was hilarious 



Stefan said:


> Interesting. That might be a first, usually people say that I'm very different in real life, and I think so, too. In real life I'm rather soft-spoken (literally, as my voice is low and quiet) and introverted, and I'm thinking too slowly to come up with stuff like I can here. Also, in real life I have access to far fewer conversations than here, drastically reducing the chances to even find a reason to get annoyed. But maybe you caught me on a particularly bad/good day.



I know exactly how you feel. Although I'm not so much soft-spoken (I'm actually generally rather loud), I'm not so much quick-witted like some people are, and I don't get enough exposure to useful types of conversation which would allow me to have a go at someone. It's also much less common at, for example, a competition, for some noob to come up and say "how do I get sub30?" so how am I supposed to say "just practise more nubcake" to their face? And because of all this people get a misperception that I'm actually "nice" in person. I always try to say I'm the same in person as I am here; I'm not mean to most people on the forums, and in person there are few chances to be mean to someone... 



Stefan said:


> Alright, let me apologize for that joke.



Boooo.


----------



## Noahaha (Aug 16, 2013)

Dene said:


> Red apples aren't green



That's my point.

Saying that arguing is not constructive is like saying that apples are not green.


----------



## rj (Aug 16, 2013)

Dene said:


> Red apples aren't green
> 
> 
> 
> ...



Dene, Noah means that some arguments _are_ constructive, whereas some aren't.


----------



## AvGalen (Aug 16, 2013)

Stefan said:


> Nah. If the method is reasonable at all, Thom's gonna do it.


Did Stefan ever prove that Old Pochmann or M2/R2 are good? No, just that it has potential
Did I ever prove that AvG edgepairing was good? No, just that it has potential.

What helps is if you make a good tutorial instead of just a list of steps, explain the benefits AND disadvantages, eat your own dog food, and have a fast person prove that it really can be fast.

The (c)rybaby joke was funny, but misplaced and I am thankful that Stefan apologized for it.
In my opinion this forum is pretty great and when people are blunt there is often a reason for it. Bad topics should be stopped quickly and bad posters should learn quickly. There are only a few moderators on this forum and so many members and posts that it is a wonder it all works so well for about 10 years now.

This forum has just a few rules so everyone should know them. One of this rules actually states:
*2d. No bumping threads*: Please use the search function before making a new thread. If you find an older thread that is similar to the one you wanted to create, please use that thread instead of creating a new topic. 

However there is also this one:
*2c. Worthless Replying*
Don't reply to a post unless you have something of value to add to it. *Replying with "+1" or "go search for it" is not allowed*, as it does no good for the topic creator or the community.


----------



## Petro Leum (Aug 16, 2013)

Noahaha said:


> There's a difference between having a harsh tone, being rude and being mean, so I'll go through what all three of those mean in my opinion:
> 
> Harsh tone: In my opinion, a harsh/blunt/matter of fact tone is a good thing in discussions. Often people mistake a harsh tone for meanness. Stefan for example makes very blunt and factual posts when he disagrees with people. This is often mistaken for meanness.
> 
> ...



I wanna highlight this as an excellent post!

Many people get butthurt on the slightest hint of someone being honest with the stuff he writes, and often discussion grow to huge shitstorm where its just unnecessary and started as a good controversial discussion. people should keep Noahs points in mind when they brwose the web.


----------



## Stefan (Aug 16, 2013)

Dene said:


> Boooo.



I wish I could apologize for the apology without that offending the originally offended again, requiring to apologize for the apology for the apology, which in turn would make you unhappy again and so on and so on. There's gotta be a trick... like Schrödinger's apology.


----------



## Ninja Storm (Aug 16, 2013)

AvGalen said:


> Did Stefan ever prove that Old Pochmann or M2/R2 are good? No, just that it has potential
> Did I ever prove that AvG edgepairing was good? No, just that it has potential.
> 
> What helps is if you make a good tutorial instead of just a list of steps, explain the benefits AND disadvantages, eat your own dog food, and have a fast person prove that it really can be fast.
> ...



In addition to these rules, there is text stating "make sure you have searched the forum to ensure the topic does not already exist! You can search by using the box in the upper right of the screen.

Is this a quick question that could be answered in a few words? Try posting in the One Answer Question Thread."

So, IN ORDER TO MAKE THESE TYPES OF THREADS, people have to click a button stating that they have read the notice. They're blatantly disregarding the rules of the forum.


----------



## Schmidt (Aug 16, 2013)

About being mean: It is all about how you read the written message. I was notified by a mod for making this comment (which was deleted when the post was being merged into the right thread)




> You could checkout the thread called "Pyraminx". You might learn something.



Some would probably call it mean, others would read is as I wrote it.


----------



## elrog (Aug 17, 2013)

Noahaha said:


> THIS IS SO UNBELIEVABLY FALSE.
> 
> That's like saying apples are not green. Plenty of arguments are constructive and plenty of arguments are not. On this forum, they are constructive most of the time. There are few things more valuable to someone trying to learn about a topic than seeing knowledgeable people argue different sides of it.



Out of all of the arguments that go on the forum, by far, most are not constructive. Arguments cause more problems than they fix. If you want to help someone, just help them rather than fighting them about it. Seeing a knowledgeable person arguing with an unknowledgeable person isn't really that constructive, and that's the way it happens most of the time.

Would you like me to change my statement to "most arguments are not constructive?"


----------



## Noahaha (Aug 17, 2013)

elrog said:


> Out of all of the arguments that go on the forum, by far, most are not constructive. Arguments cause more problems than they fix. If you want to help someone, just help them rather than fighting them about it. Seeing a knowledgeable person arguing with an unknowledgeable person isn't really that constructive, and that's the way it happens most of the time.
> 
> Would you like me to change my statement to "most arguments are not constructive?"



I think that one big problem (which has already been mentioned in this thread a bunch of times) is that an argument is often perceived as an attack, either by one of the arguers or someone else. You say that most arguments are between people who are knowledgeable and people who are not, but assuming you're right about that (and I don't know if you are), what's wrong with that? Seriously... what's wrong with that? If someone who doesn't know what they're talking about makes a false claim (like your false claim of yours that started this argument (hahaha how meta is this?)), why shouldn't someone tell them that they are wrong and explain exactly why? The argument only starts once the person who was first contradicted decides to continue along their line of thought.

I just don't see a problem.

1. Two people don't agree about something.
2. They argue.
3. Everyone wins (as long as no one takes it as a personal attack, which it almost never is).
4. ????
5. Profit


----------



## rybaby (Aug 17, 2013)

I bet I should have changed the name of this thread and the poll to "Do you see meanness etc. on the SS forums?" This may have cleared up the topic, as I certainly do not think that everybody is mean here. 

BTW Stefan, I love your new avatar pic.


----------



## Joey VOV (Aug 17, 2013)

hmm.. now that I actually think About it, they are not as "mean" as I thought. I had to redefine a few things. I think blunt is a better word, I saw it a few times on this thread. And I guess I should not complain either because I can be rather blunt myself in the comments on my videos since I am more a vlogger than a youtube cuber. so when someone asks me about cubing, i just inform them because they have never seen it before, but then if someone tries to refute a claim I have made already, I am going to refute it, most likely bluntly, to get my point across best.


----------



## shelley (Aug 17, 2013)

Joey VOV said:


> I understand getting annoyed with beginners and things like that, but you'd think that instead of the being slightly mean or sarcastic, they would actually try to help them..
> I don't know, I love helping and teaching, probably why I want to be a teacher...



Because helping people takes time and effort. Imagine if 50 people came here asking "how do I solve a Rubik's cube?" Would you type out your detailed beginner solution every time you saw such a thread? Or do you ignore them because they clearly don't care about the subject enough to put forth the tiniest bit of effort to learn the most basic thing about the community?

Now if a beginner came and said "I found this tutorial on solving the Rubik's cube, but there's this last layer case I don't understand", I'd be much more willing to help. You can see this person has already put in his own effort into trying to learn, and it's very likely he won't be the kind of person who loses interest once he figures out that solving a Rubik's cube isn't a trick you can learn in five minutes, thus rendering all your effort useless.


----------



## Noahaha (Aug 17, 2013)

rybaby said:


> BTW Stefan, I love your new avatar pic.



Me too! <3


----------



## rj (Aug 17, 2013)

Noahaha said:


> Me too! <3


isn't that a reference from your worlds vid? 
I posted about that earlier is this thread.


----------



## Noahaha (Aug 17, 2013)

rj said:


> isn't that a reference from your worlds vid?



It is.


----------



## rj (Aug 17, 2013)

Noahaha said:


> It is.



I agree that he is nice, but I think sneaklyfox is nicer.


----------



## elrog (Aug 17, 2013)

Noahaha said:


> 1. Two people don't agree about something.
> 2. They argue.
> 3. Everyone wins (as long as no one takes it as a personal attack, which it almost never is).
> 4. ????
> 5. Profit



I don't see any profit in that. Rather than wasting that time arguing, just help them out nicely. It would make everything so much simpler, and make the forum a better place, so why do you refuse? You also are saying that the argument is started by the contradicted person keeps on thinking what they do. It is not thinking, but posting. Also, you have to at least realize that the way you make the message sound does impact and can help avoid or cause them to react badly or well. To say it doesn't would just be a flat out lie.

I also wouldn't say it was my "false" statement that started this "argument". If you really think that this is an argument, and that you debating better than I will change my thoughts, have fun .

@ shelley: Being the person I am, I would type out a complete and descriptive post of the/a beginners method for all 50 people. If you are too lazy to answer each individually to help them understand better, copy and paste? I am not asking that you do as I do, just that you don't start arguments... please. Unless you want to see more threads like this of course..


----------



## Noahaha (Aug 17, 2013)

elrog said:


> I don't see any profit in that. Rather than wasting that time arguing, just help them out nicely. It would make everything so much simpler, and the forum a better place, so why do you refuse? You also are saying that the argument is started by the contradicted person keeps on thinking what they do. It is not thinking, but posting. Also, you have to at least realize that the way you make the message sound does impact and can help avoid or cause them to react badly or well. To say it doesn't would just be a flat out lie.
> 
> I also wouldn't say it was my "false" statement that started this "argument". If you really think that this is an argument, and that you debating better than I will change my thoughts, have fun .



I think we're talking about two different situations here.

You seem to be talking about when someone doesn't know something, and someone is mean about it to them. This is bad, but not really an argument. I thought you meant when someone who doesn't know what they're talking about continuously argues something that is not true or generally accepted as false. An argument can never end in "helping them out nicely" because the two people don't agree on something.

Just to be clear, when I originally said argument, I was talking about discussions like this, not just any interaction where someone contradicts someone else. This is an example of a constructive argument.


Also, I completely stand by my step by step model for arguments. The reason why everyone wins is because everyone gets to fully understand the other person's point of view, and can see the issue more clearly. I think the kinds of "arguments" you're thinking of are really just when someone is not so nice to someone who is new.


----------



## elrog (Aug 17, 2013)

Noahaha said:


> Also, I completely stand by my step by step model for arguments. The reason why everyone wins is because everyone gets to fully understand the other person's point of view, and can see the issue more clearly. I think the kinds of "arguments" you're thinking of are really just when someone is not so nice to someone who is new.


I approve of this.

Ok.. If you want to consider this discussion as an argument, by all means, go ahead. I still don't consider discussion arguing though. If we both understood the others use of words better, then we probably wouldn't have kept on posting needlessly, but that's life. Have a fun time cubing .


----------



## Noahaha (Aug 17, 2013)

elrog said:


> I approve of this.
> 
> Ok.. If you want to consider this discussion as an argument, by all means, go ahead. I still don't consider discussion arguing though. If we both understood the others use of words better, then we probably wouldn't have kept on posting needlessly, but that's life. Have a fun time cubing .



Ended up coming down to semantics... just like everything


----------



## Robert-Y (Aug 17, 2013)

elrog said:


> When any method first starts out, theres not going to be people getting that fast with it, and nobody will care about it until the creator themselves can prove it can be good.



I can think of a very good counter example for 4x4x4


----------



## aceofspades98 (Aug 17, 2013)

Robert-Y said:


> I can think of a very good counter example for 4x4x4


very very true Mr.Yau.


----------



## ZamHalen (Aug 17, 2013)

Cubers on here aren't actually mean. I can actually guarantee that almost everyone on here would really enjoy watching you and others succeed (the forum members surprisingly like seeing the annoying newbie make something of themselves). They do however, want you to use the knowledge already available in order to do this, as many members (especially long time members) have seen these questions, and sometimes even methods, in the past multiple times. Belt method anyone?


----------



## TMOY (Aug 17, 2013)

Robert-Y said:


> I can think of a very good counter example for 4x4x4



Which one ? I don' think the Yau method qualifies as a very good counterexample because it is not really a new method, only a variant of reduction.


----------



## aceofspades98 (Aug 17, 2013)

TMOY said:


> Which one ? I don' think the Yau method qualifies as a very good counterexample because it is not really a new method, only a variant of reduction.



There is also K4 if you insist. Not nearly as popular.


----------



## Stefan (Aug 17, 2013)

TMOY said:


> Which one ? I don' think the Yau method qualifies as a very good counterexample because it is not really a new method, only a variant of reduction.



Also, didn't Rob himself prove it to be fast (on Ryan's simulator)?


----------



## Robert-Y (Aug 17, 2013)

Nope, it's kinda difficult to do it on Ryan's simulator.

TMOY: Yeah but anyway... it's arguably a "new" concept which I didn't prove to be fast with. If you wanted to, you could expand elrog's argument to sub steps like RLS. I think RLS has been shown to be useful towards lowering your times further (at least in Mats' case ), but again, the proposer (Lucas Winter) didn't show that it could be fast afaik.


----------



## elrog (Aug 18, 2013)

There may be a few exceptions, but there's exceptions to nearly everything.


----------

