03 Jun 08
Originally posted by SwissGambitThere won't really be "ratings inflation". Instead the ratings will be more accurate because a high rated player who sandbags will be treated as a high rated player rather than treated (wrongly) as a low rated one.
[b]Looks like someone has a poor memory.
That would be you. You have also thrown in your usual measure of [willful?] obtuseness.
One post above humph's post, I said:I think [rating-floor driven inflation] is by far the lesser evil. Players won't be able to maintain an inflated rating for long if their play is not up to it....[text shortened]... 're just making yourself look more foolish by willfully refusing to read things in context.[/b]
03 Jun 08
Originally posted by no1marauderI think there will be some negligible amount of inflation, but I do agree that it is not 'real' in the sense that it is not worth worrying about. I fully agree with your 2nd sentence; it's the position I've advocated throughout this thread.
There won't really be "ratings inflation". Instead the ratings will be more accurate because a high rated player who sandbags will be treated as a high rated player rather than treated (wrongly) as a low rated one.
- Joined
- 07 Jun 05
- Moves
- 5301
05 Jun 08
Originally posted by SwissGambitTrolling? Responding to you in a thread we both comment on? How on earth is that trolling?
Now you're just trolling. How pathetic.
You have long ceased to make comments relevant to the thread, and started with personal insults. Who is pathetic?
05 Jun 08
Originally posted by gezzaYes, technically you 'responded' to me, but you've given up all pretense of actually addressing the points I make.
Trolling? Responding to you in a thread we both comment on? How on earth is that trolling?
You have long ceased to make comments relevant to the thread, and started with personal insults. Who is pathetic?
Instead, you come off as a nursery-school copycat: If I point out that your writing was poor at one point, you just echo the criticism [without justification].
