Play Now Login Create Account
illyriad
  New Posts New Posts RSS Feed - The Illyriad Times
  FAQ FAQ  Forum Search   Register Register  Login Login

The Illyriad Times

 Post Reply Post Reply Page  <1 34567 49>
Author
TheBillPN View Drop Down
Forum Warrior
Forum Warrior
Avatar

Joined: 03 Jun 2014
Location: England
Status: Offline
Points: 259
Post Options Post Options   Thanks (0) Thanks(0)   Quote TheBillPN Quote  Post ReplyReply Direct Link To This Post Posted: 15 Jul 2015 at 15:11
            

Edited by TheBillPN - 15 Jul 2015 at 15:35
Back to Top
ajqtrz View Drop Down
Postmaster
Postmaster
Avatar

Joined: 24 May 2014
Location: USA
Status: Offline
Points: 500
Post Options Post Options   Thanks (0) Thanks(0)   Quote ajqtrz Quote  Post ReplyReply Direct Link To This Post Posted: 15 Jul 2015 at 16:46
While in general the Illyriad Times appears to be a reasonably neutral presentation of the current conflicts, here are a few corrections/suggestions.

Editorializing in place of journalism

You said, of me,

"his epic posts in the Illy forums have sought to link the imposition of land claims as an affront on the very idea of Illyriad, all while frustrating his rhetorical opponents at times with his tautological approach to debate."

The definition of tautological is:

"In rhetoric, a tautology (from Greek ταὐτός, "the same" and λόγος, "word/idea") is a logical argument constructed in such a way, generally by repeating the same concept or assertion using different phrasing or terminology, that the proposition as stated is logically irrefutable, while obscuring the lack of evidence or .."

Thus, you summarize my debate style as "obscuring the lack of evidence."  The correction is that when you use a word to describe something, the authoritative definition of the word (from a competent and authoritative dictionary) IS the evidence.  Thus, my "tautological" style does, in fact, often present it's evidence, while my opponents seldom quote any authorities or lay out the logical premises upon which they base their arguments, but instead, pretty much respond to things in a impulsive manner.

Not to be too critical of them though, I too sometimes forget to stop, take a breath, and be more systematic in my approach.  At the end of the long forum thread titled "Are land claims good for Illy"  you will find the logical steps taken by both the land claimers and the anti land claiming sides to justify their position.  I put the steps for the pro land claim side up and waited for any corrections to them from the pro.  Then I refuted each and laid out the logic against land claims.  At which Rikoo closed the thread .....because he said, it was off topic.  One has to wonder how examining the premisses upon which an argument is based is off the topic, but he has control and so be it.

In addition, the following sentence is unclear.  It can be interpreted as "HIGH declared war on B!B" or "HIGH's declaration was upon B!B alone and that restricted declaration has "kept it out of conflict with the other land claimer alliances."  

"Neither HIGH nor B!B have made many headlines in the war thus far, perhaps because HIGH’s war declaration on B!B alone has kept it out of conflict with the other land claimer alliances."

In either case you seem to be under the mistaken assumption that HIGH declared war on B!B.  This is a factual error.  HIGH never declared war on anyone and did nothing to B!B to justify their declaration of war on HIGH.  That you did not fact check this shows poor journalistic judgement, in this case anyway. (I really do think from the tone and approach you are taking that you ARE trying to be as fair as you can, however, often a reporters biases make them start with 'information' they assume and go from there.)

You also say:

"AJ has led the fierce criticism of land claims — bar none — and B!B’s Shogun has answered him in debate more than once."

but fail to discuss the quality of the responses given.  Saying that somebody has "answered him in debate more than once" assumes that the answer was relevant and to the point, AND systematic and logical....all qualities of thought.  More to the point, the fact that Shogun has posted responses to my forum posts does not justify a declaration of war.  Perhaps the Illyriad Times ought to publish an editorial about where they stand on "smorgasbording" (read the thread). 

Finally,

"Given ajqtrz’s role as thought leader in land claim opposition, it remains to be seen what the implications of his alt’s city being targeted in the war will be."

Any good journalist lives by his or her sources.  That no writer from the Illyriad Times has asked me, the "thought leader" of the anti land claim movement what I thought about anything seems rather odd and a mistake.  I've been available AND I've been willing.  But of course, this may just be a way of keeping the influence of my words out of a journalistic endeavor that may not wish those words to have influence.  Or it may just be an over-site.

And a correction.  Unbeliever joined HIGH after leaving WOT.  His reasons for leaving WOT are his own.  I noticed that he had left (my main account was in WOT at the time) and issued an invite because I like the guy.  It would have been nice and a reasonable thing to ASK before printing a conjecture.

Overall, you are doing your best.  These things are only meant as suggestions on how to keep the editorial comments from masquerading as reporting (which I am convinced is what you desire to do).

AJ





Back to Top
Illyriad Times View Drop Down
Forum Warrior
Forum Warrior
Avatar

Joined: 03 Jul 2015
Location: Centrum
Status: Offline
Points: 424
Post Options Post Options   Thanks (0) Thanks(0)   Quote Illyriad Times Quote  Post ReplyReply Direct Link To This Post Posted: 15 Jul 2015 at 19:48

DRIVE-BY SIEGES: AJ Lashes Out Directly At Shogun in Fresh Siege

Back to Top
jcx View Drop Down
Forum Warrior
Forum Warrior


Joined: 09 Oct 2013
Location: Tallimar
Status: Offline
Points: 268
Post Options Post Options   Thanks (0) Thanks(0)   Quote jcx Quote  Post ReplyReply Direct Link To This Post Posted: 16 Jul 2015 at 11:02
Originally posted by Agalloch Agalloch wrote:

I would like to protest the omitting of my name from the war hero poll  neither Agalloch or Elfs Bane(my alt) was given as an option ... 
What gives ? 
Where you guys afraid I may win?

Lmao. Indeed so true. LOL
Disclaimer: The above is jcx|orcboy's personal opinion and is not the opinion or policy of Harmless? [H?] or of the little green men that have been following him all day.

jcx in H? | orcboy in H?
Back to Top
Illyriad Times View Drop Down
Forum Warrior
Forum Warrior
Avatar

Joined: 03 Jul 2015
Location: Centrum
Status: Offline
Points: 424
Post Options Post Options   Thanks (0) Thanks(0)   Quote Illyriad Times Quote  Post ReplyReply Direct Link To This Post Posted: 16 Jul 2015 at 14:25

AJ Lands Third Siege; B!B Breaks HIGH Sieges in Land Claim

Back to Top
Illyriad Times View Drop Down
Forum Warrior
Forum Warrior
Avatar

Joined: 03 Jul 2015
Location: Centrum
Status: Offline
Points: 424
Post Options Post Options   Thanks (0) Thanks(0)   Quote Illyriad Times Quote  Post ReplyReply Direct Link To This Post Posted: 16 Jul 2015 at 20:52

EDITORIAL: The Necessity of Respect

Back to Top
Illyriad Times View Drop Down
Forum Warrior
Forum Warrior
Avatar

Joined: 03 Jul 2015
Location: Centrum
Status: Offline
Points: 424
Post Options Post Options   Thanks (0) Thanks(0)   Quote Illyriad Times Quote  Post ReplyReply Direct Link To This Post Posted: 17 Jul 2015 at 10:02

HIGH’s Unbeliever Doubles Down on B!B Siege

Back to Top
Illyriad Times View Drop Down
Forum Warrior
Forum Warrior
Avatar

Joined: 03 Jul 2015
Location: Centrum
Status: Offline
Points: 424
Post Options Post Options   Thanks (0) Thanks(0)   Quote Illyriad Times Quote  Post ReplyReply Direct Link To This Post Posted: 17 Jul 2015 at 13:21
NEW FEATURE: Alliance Posts & Pages

The Times is going to pilot a new section called "Alliance Posts." It will be a category of posts separate from the news where alliance representatives can post news updates about their alliances. This can include promotions, milestones, new policies, war/diplomatic declarations, and anything else deemed "newsworthy."

Alliances will also be able to publish an Alliance profile page as well, which will include a feed of all their recent Alliance Post news.

Currently, the Times is averaging over 700 views a day.

We are looking for a minimum of 5 alliances to pilot this program, so if we receive less than 5 alliances interested, we will not move forward with it.

Alliances are permitted up to 2 contributor accounts. We will need valid e-mail addresses to send contributor account invitations.




Back to Top
twilights View Drop Down
Postmaster
Postmaster
Avatar

Joined: 21 May 2012
Status: Offline
Points: 915
Post Options Post Options   Thanks (1) Thanks(1)   Quote twilights Quote  Post ReplyReply Direct Link To This Post Posted: 17 Jul 2015 at 14:36
this should be the forums...where's rikoo and the devs...don't they realize this is the way the forums should be run? shakes her head
Back to Top
ajqtrz View Drop Down
Postmaster
Postmaster
Avatar

Joined: 24 May 2014
Location: USA
Status: Offline
Points: 500
Post Options Post Options   Thanks (0) Thanks(0)   Quote ajqtrz Quote  Post ReplyReply Direct Link To This Post Posted: 17 Jul 2015 at 16:34
I do think Rill has a point, but I also think that the Times is at least trying to be less slanted than they could be.  I've posted here some mild criticisms regarding some things they could do to improve, and found that they are reasonably responsive.  That they were published, I believe, in response to the more slanted anti-claim Post, means that they certainly will appear slanted to some.  To me they appear only mildly so and as one who might easily be a "chief target" in the anti-pro claims debate, I find their effort admirable.  Are they slanted?  Probably.  But if you read them with that in mind the slant is easily corrected in most cases.  So do read them and do enter your comments.

As for the comment section being edited to be slanted, I'm not certain but only because I haven't seen the scope of comments made.  Perhaps anti-claimers just don't read the Times and thus, the comments ARE heavily slanted.  Hard to tell without any information about the number of posts.l

Finally, at least they asked me to submit an editorial and are willing to publish it.  Without restrictions on content or length, I might add.  That is a nice step  toward balance.

AJ
Back to Top
 Post Reply Post Reply Page  <1 34567 49>
  Share Topic   

Forum Jump Forum Permissions View Drop Down

Forum Software by Web Wiz Forums® version 11.07
Copyright ©2001-2016 Web Wiz Ltd.