Munno

I was responding to an OP. Therefore, you started it. Chaos theorem, dependent on initial starting conditions. Maybe if you didn't come off as such an elitist, and I as such a dick, we might not be here screaming abuse at each other. I disliked your attitude, I responded in kind to my dislike. You disliked my disliking, and so you responded with dislike. I then proceeded to respond with dislike of your dislike, thereby inciting you to reply with dislike of my dislike, before I stated more dislike built upon my original dislike of your dislike of my way of playing. All in all, I think we dislike each other. You need to earn my respect with your OP, before I give you any shred of mine. You wrote the OP: it is YOUR job and YOURS ALONE to ensure that nothing you say comes off badly, and where it does you should cover for it in post in a manner which amicably solves the problem between the two, despite the other person insulting you. Backwards-rationality doesn't work in a forum scenario, as it doesn't work in real life. First impressions matter, therefore the quality and general non-inciting-to-rage-ery of the OP should be taken into consideration. From this analysis, I can glean that you wrote an OP in a manner which sounded unbelievably elitist and whiny to the opposite side, and as such I replied in a manner contrary to elitism: elitism is undermined by being talked down upon, not the other way around. An elitist will laugh in the face of anyone who goes "Well, I think this and that", therefore I opened with something guaranteed to get the attention of an elitist (aside from the obvious calling you an elitist fucktard). I might have been a bit of a dick to you in my first post, but at least I didn't right the elitist OP. If you weren't an elitist, you'd have tried to backup your posts by saying that you thought the other ways of playing were equally viable, although you disagree with them on a moral basis (which is what you do, there is no objectivity here at all). Instead, you act even more elitist by talking down to me as though I am a child and unworthy of your mighty presence. You asked for a proper analysis, I've given you my analysis. Now give me yours from a relatively unbiased and much more unelitist standpoint. EDIT: I forgot to mentioned, I actually agreed with a lot of the OP. I did not agree with your manner of approaching the subject in a way which is generally and DELIBERATELY downtalking to the opposing side, to discourage them. This isn't allowed in a real debate, it shouldn't be stood for on a forum debate.

The OP isn't even civil. Its straight-up insulting to people who play differently to the OP.

My problem with you is that you are acting AS THOUGH YOU ARE BETTER THAN EVERYONE ELSE. THIS IS >>ELITISM<< and is NOT healthy for the community. Bashing my opinion is also a sign of how you will insult people just to get what you want, again toxic to a good community. Treating me as though I am some child to be talked down to only heightens the fact that you are not only elitist, but a total dick. You're toxic to the community, and only I seem to be able to look through your eloquence and notice it. You have repeatedly insulted people who play differently to you, saying you must be the superior master-race of DayZ players, bashing away the filth with your golden divine hammer of godliness, driving home the point of obvious problems with the community, and generally being a complete and total fucktard and elitist while doing so. Good day sir, and have a good bullet to the face if I meet you. P.S. How can you say a few lines on a TS server while pretending to be a girl? Saying that you can take down a clan with your almighty skill is also, elitism.

"Way to prove my point, Munnkey" See: Dick, douchebaggery, general fucking of the community, way to rape somebody else's opinion because they disagree, insulting opinions, so forth. Carry on digging your hole.

"Some of us like to play smarter." See: elitism.

I had the same problem at first, then I downgraded to 1.6.0, then I couldn't find any 1.6.0 servers... Haha, just keep looking, they exist. I think you can filter by version too.

Well arn't you a little elitist fucktard. "I for one will play the game at a higher level" I'm sorry? How is not shooting people on sight making you a better player? (Rage at OP over, on to serious) When I play with my friends, I'm going to shoot you. No questions asked. Its a bullet in the face and its all over for you. Why do I do this? I don't want you muscling in on I and my friend's operation, I don't want to have you shooting me in the back. I want you out of the way, quickly. I don't think there even should be a method for finding out whos a bandit etc: it should all be based on rumors. You meet somebody out in the wilderness who doesn't instantly shoot you in the face (and whom you didn't shoot at) and he says "Careful of these guys up there, they're shooting everybody up". You can choose to trust him, or you can ignore him. Up to you, the game shouldn't be telling you. PLAYERS SHOULD BE. Its the same problem I have with global channels, I think if there is going to be one it should be based around radio channels etc and having to find a radio (even text based radio). Of course, global channels are an entirely different story. How is it survival when you know who to kill the second you see them?