The Myth of the Elitist Competitives

[Ichida]

*Unsubscribes* Ugh, can't handle the absurdity any longer.

 

[Fatmanonice]

Yeesh, this is getting out of control... yet again...

And thus the entirety of human history is summarized in 9 words.

 

[E-Z-MONEY]

Hey Yuna!! I just noticed that while asking us to find five examples of a specific viewpoint you are citing ourselves. Give us five different people who have claimed that most tourney players are elitist. You can probably do it but I just want it to be even.

 

[Yuna]

At least we can all agree that all smashers hate 5150 equally.

Yes, we can. Ardently. I don't even know the guy. I have never met him. I have never talked to him (on the Internets). But I hate him nonetheless.

That's how hated he is.

Attitude problem=/= elitest.

I believe that an elitest is someone who condems a player for their prefered method of play. A competative elitest would be someone who doesn't like a certain person because the play casually. However, if the competative player is simply in a defensive in response to the casual telling him that his style is somehow wrong, then the competative player is completely in the right and is not elitest. He may have a bad attitude towards that specific person, but he is not an elitest.

Thank you for seeing the truth (something which so many fail at).

Just like if I punch a girl tomorrow, it doesn't mean that I hate all women everywhere.

Why did you just quote me without quotation tags and adding anything?

I'd be remiss if I didn't add that a couple of people came to the CCL thread in Tournament Discussion and flamed simply because we were proposing an alternate playstyle. I had even specifically stated in the OP that flames would not be tolerated. I'd put up quotes, but they're both on my block list.

I'll be back in a sec with the names, if you'd like.

EDIT: They were masterspeaks and everlasting yayuhzz. I've never heard of them (not suprising, because I don't go to tournaments yet), and I don't know if they are competitive players or not, but I'm guessing yes because they were in the TD forum.

I've never heard of them either.

If I had to guess, I'd say they're Casuals, Scrubs or general idiots (attitude problems). Everlasting Yayuhzz joined less than three months ago (just a little over two, actually). masterspeaks has been around for more than a year (and soon to be a year and a half), yet has only psoted 26 times.

I doubt these are people who are Competitive players, who spend a lot of time improving their games and going to tournaments (even if they might have posted once or twice in the Tournament Discussion forum).

Also, did they specifically flame people for being casual? Or express a feeling of superiority for being Competitive players? Or anything like that?

Yuna, you answered your own question just now.

The "Elitist Tourneyf*g" is to the Competitive Player, what the "Scrub" is to the Casual.

You're most probably using the wrong definition of "Scrub".

Scrub = One who not only categorically refuses to use any techniques, tactics, etc. that they deem "cheap" but who also whines every time someone does.

If there's a "Casual extremist" thread on Smashboards, the Casuals in the thread get called "Scrubs". So, in reverse, "Competitive extremist" threads are run by the "Tourneyf*gs"

What does this have to do with anything?

They're both the extreme insult to call either side of the play field. If you're a Casual, you may not be a "Scrub", but if you're pissing me off I'm going to call you a "Scrub". If you're Competitive, you may not be "Elitist", but if you're pissing me off I'm going to call you a "Tourneyf*g".

This is not what is happening. I hang out in this part of the forums. I don't even read all threads but only a select few. Yet, I constantly see people claiming there are many Elitist Competitives running around putting people down simply for being Casuals and stuff like that.

Really, this thread is basically going around in a circle because there are people flooding in here that automatically agree with you because of 1. your rank and post count (people often dismiss this but I've been a part of a decent number of forums and have seen time and time again that this plays an extremelly large role in how people feel about another person's opinions) and 2. probably most of the people actually posting in this thread are tournament go-ers (granted, it's not to say that they are trying to bury this conception merely to cover their own butts but it does make a balanced arguement extremelly hard). Really, maybe its just because of the "audience" of this particular board that it's like this. Obviously, if this were on some place like Game FAQs, it'd be completely different. Still, I don't think this is going to go anywhere...

Or 3. I'm right and/or they agree with me?

And yes, you can't possibly tell me that there are less than 30 competitive elitists out there in the world for any given game, it's impossible. Also, don't go around calling most casual players scrubs when you wouldn't want casual players like me going around saying most competitive players, such as yourself, are scrubby arrogant elitists. It's just being hypocritical, really, you're turning into Tnga.

1) I've never said there are less than 30 competitive elitists in the world. But if there are so many specifically in the Smash community and possibly here on Smashboards they warrant people whining about them at least once a day (really, this is statistically provable), then people should be able to name 5. Because apparently, there are tons of them (or at least they post a lot).
2) Point me to any post where I call "most Casual Players scrubs". What I said was that most Scrubs are Casuals. I've also said that most homo- and bisexual male Smashers main Peach. It does not mean that all Peach players are gay. I can say that most Asians have black hair (naturally). It does not mean that all black-haired people are Asians either. This and that is not the same.

 

[themutt22]

Taken from M-W.com dictionary, pretty reputable

Definition for elitism

1: leadership or rule by an elite
2: the selectivity of the elite; especially : snobbery <elitism in choosing new members>
3: consciousness of being or belonging to an elite

Don't have time to write anything more, so competitives, casuals, space animals, more fuel for the arguments

 

[Hoboman725]

I think this thread is really useful, and that it'll go somewhere very fast!

 

[khaijiao]

Just like if I punch a girl tomorrow, it doesn't mean that I hate all women everywhere.

It might not mean that you hate all women, but what will all women think of you? Stop and think about that for a second... Alright, now what's the point of this thread Yuna? You're just contributing to a subject that you seem so upset about existing by "Challenging" people to come up with "5 names." You sound like an *******.

I think this thread is really useful, and that it'll go somewhere very fast!

lawl.. I agree whole-heartedly Gilgamesh.

 

[asdfasdfaw]

"Seriously, who" is a figure of speech.

Okay.

Have you ever seen one of them talk online? And if there are so many of them at tournaments and on the boards, you'd think someone claiming "Tons of Somalians exist!" would've seen at least 5 of them.

Somalians at smash tournaments... you managed to take an analogy (they are parallel ideas that may be different situationally in order to illustrate a point, since it's apparent you don't know what an analogy is) and mash it in with the original idea. Bravo.

That one calls for a...

*facepalm*

Then how come so many people complain about "too many elitist" posting in the Brawl forums? Yes, they do.

So... Let me get this right. I say, "Maybe they're too elitest to post in here." Then you say that there's a lot of people that say they do. Then to finalize the response you say, "Yes they do." If you're so confident that they exist in here, then why are you questioning their existence?

Because why else would I post? Why would I post something like "Everything is dandy"? Of course a lot of my posts are rebuttals.

But I never say "You are wrong for being Casual", I pointificate and explain why I think they're wrong using facts and anecdotes. I never say "You are wrong just because". And what do you know, most of the time, unless I conceede defeat, I'm right (as corroborated by others).

It's called researching your facts before posting something like "Final Smashes aren't broken at all! They should be allowed in tournaments!" or "XXXX character's moves is too good/too broken/too sucky" or whatever.

The definition of "pontificate" is to speak in a pompous manner. Either you're admitting you're cocky, or you're trying to use words that you don't know the definition of.

What if they are incorrect? There are things such as "Subjective view" and things such as "Verifiable facts".

While the perception that there are a lot of Elitist Competitives out there who hate Casuals for being Casual is subjective, it's a verifiable fact that such a perception is wrong. The Elitist Competitives are small in numbers... and they don't even come to these boards (and especially not these parts of the Bords) most of the time (so how so many Casual players could possibly have encountered so many of them is a mystery to me).

But you said they do come and post in here. Make up your mind.

By the way:

Don't quote needlessly.
Tad hypocritical but you need to know.

You are completely missing the point of what I'm doing.

I dictate the rest of this post as irrelevant and simple fecitious babbling fit for the spam forum. I recommend looking up English writing and practicing since if this is the very idea of which you are getting from Yuna's post, then you have failed miserably.

Go clean up your English before you talk about someone else's.

*jaw drops*

... that, my friend, was an astounding first post... I take it you're used to arguements like this?

I'm in my mid-twenties, and I'm a consultant. I've seen my fair share. Generally anyone who's my age has seen just as much. And it probably won't stop here either. I'm fairly convinced the Internet is where intellect goes to die, but that's just my opinion.

 

[Merfy]

Elitist is usually defined as unrealistic prespective of being better about something then someone else (In other words, what you do sucks because I say so mentality). If someone using a clear meaning and reasoning it's usually not considered Elitism.

Black people's muscle cells are more suited to any sort of physical exertion than the muscle cells of any other race. If you see a black guy yelling that, I'm sure you'd think he's being rather elitist, regardless of how true it is.

 

[Jack Kieser]

Taken from M-W.com dictionary, pretty reputable

Definition for elitism

1: leadership or rule by an elite
2: the selectivity of the elite; especially : snobbery <elitism in choosing new members>
3: consciousness of being or belonging to an elite

Don't have time to write anything more, so competitives, casuals, space animals, more fuel for the arguments

GUYS, DON'T START ARGUING SEMANTICS! THE INTERNETS WILL EXPLODE WITH THE FIERY WRATH OF A THOUSAND SUNS TO WHICH NO FLAME SHIELD CAN STOP!!!

[/sarcasm]

 

[DraginHikari]

Black people's muscle cells are more suited to any sort of physical exertion than the muscle cells of any other race. If you see a black guy yelling that, I'm sure you'd think he's being rather elitist, regardless of how true it is.

No more then likely your going to be called Racist more then elitist. That example would be rather strange because a majority of people would probably not even know how to response to something like that. It's one thing to talk about playstyles in video games, it's another thing to talk about biology XD

 

[Fatmanonice]

Or 3. I'm right and/or they agree with me?

So you're right in the statement that Elitist Competitives are on the same plane as Big Foot or the Lock Ness Monster... In an earlier example, someone mentioned a person named Kyle and you automatically dismissed them because YOU didn't know who the person was... Like I said, this is going nowhere.

 

[Yuna]

There are so many things to say about this.

1. I wasn't talking about competitive elitists I was talking about elitists who were competetive.

2. You aren't a competitive elitist, you are a human elitist that happens to be competitive.

3. You look down on people you view as beneath you. Elitist

4. You use the term stupid about people who disagree with your opinion and not just facts.

5. Please define scrub again. As well as elitist.

1) Then why are you even in this thread? The topic at hand is Competitive Elitists.
2) I'm not an elitist. I do not think people are worth more than others for what they are. I, however, hate stupidity and try to beat it out of people. I'm stupidophobic, that's all.
3) I do not look down on anyone. Even the stupid ones can learn and change. I am not all-knowing. I've been wrong in the past and am probably still wrong on certain things. However, when I find out I'm wrong, I try to change or retify what I did wrong. Since I am not perfect, I cannot expect or require anyone else to be. However, if they refuse to see reason after 2 pages of calm discussion (or maybe they even threw the first stone) then I'll stop being civil.
4) No I don't. I've never called someone stupid simply for disagreeing with me. Point me towards a single post where I have.

I know one, his name is something like Sadahiro Inui (not sure on first name spelling but Inui is right). He has very elitist posts on palutena's army thread on the Pit forum. Note I'm not a whiny casual player (casual yes) but I'm just pointing it out.

I don't remember his full name, but I know him. His name is based on a character from Prince of Tennis. Did his elitism stem from him being a Competitive Player?

Like, did he call Casual players bad people? Did he consider Casual players beneath him because they were Casual? Did he insult Casual players for being Casuals? Did he use "Casual" as a slur? Etc., etc., etc. (I just want to know the facts)?

The guy Tinkerer mentioned, along with Sliq, makes 7, including Yuna. If you do not count Sliq, you cannot count Yuna, as in essence, they share the same character traits. Even so, you still have 5 NAMES, and thus, your argument is quite refuted.

Sliq and I myself are not Competitive Elitists, especially not as defined by the original post.

And the challenge was to name 5 Competitive Elitists (also note that not a single person was able to, on their own, name 5, which was also part of the challenge... the challenge was rooted in that if there are so many of them, at least one person should've encountered at least 5 of them).

However, the topic at hand is not that there aren't 5 Competitive Elitists in the world. It's that there are far fewer of them, especially in proportion to the non-Elitists, than people seem to think and make it out to be. So the argument is not refuted. The challenge has been met (by circumventing one of the rules).

 

[MookieRah]

Uhh, Mookierah made a thread just a few days ago to the effect of "it's our duty as Smashboards to PWN ALL TEH NOOBS AT GAEMSTOP TOURNAMENTS" with "OUR MINDGAMES, THEM SCRUBS AINT GOT MINDGAMES, SO MINDGAME IT UP WITH YOUR MINDGAMES, AND THEN THEY'LL CRY"

I never once claimed that "it's our duty as Smashboards" to anything. If you actually read my posts in that thread I made it clear that this advice was given for all that would listen, casual and competitive alike.

Secondly, most casual players do play smash as a series of patterns. They play against their friends and develop a pattern that works against them. This isn't unintelligent behavior, nor am I saying that playing this way was dumb in any way. This is just lower level play than how seasoned vets play. The entire point of my advice in that thread was for people to take their game to the next level mentally. This is something that a casual player could do as well, and it didn't rely on fast fingers or tech skill. I also pointed out that you can defeat people before you even have a match with them by psyching them out. This is basic psychology, this isn't somehow an insulting notion.

I did make a comment about scrubs, but scrubs aren't casual players. I even apologized later for all the people who interpreted it as such, and for those who found what I had to say offensive. I admitted that I got a little carried away and that I carried a tone that was easily misconstrued. I'm human people.

 

[kilroy]

of course there are competitive elitists here. there are elitists in every group EVERYWHERE EVER. do you think smashboards is special and is some kind of vanguard of righteousness? such an assertion is absurd.

it seems as if you're behaving in a defensive and reactionary manner, as if you're defending your in-group from perceived slander.

i've been here for a little over 6 years. i ASSURE you, they exist. i seen em. i used to fight with them upon occasion before i realized there was an unending trail of them. i didn't keep a list.

i'd recommend against willful ignorance in denying that such people exist. if you choose not to believe me i don't know what to tell you. maybe ask yourself why you're pushing yourself to believe something which is, in all likelihood, too exclusionary to be true.

if you actually care about how competitive smashers are viewed and want to truly do something to help their PR, start by avoiding behavior associated with elitism and actively engaging in behavior that is the exact opposite. namely, don't be a d!ck. be kind to people. don't call people stupid. don't denounce people as scrubs, instead politely explain why you think your approach is better for the development of the game. but of course, this takes work. it takes effort and patience and self-control. most worthwhile things do. this seems far more reasonable to me than trying to argue that it's all a lie thrust upon the competitive community unjustly.

 

[ViceGrip]

I've been on smashboards for about a year longer than my join date suggests and all along i've noticed an annoying tension between casual and competitive players. Overall i believe its the casual players that tend to lash out at the competitive ones. the only tournament i've attended was the super champ combo in San Bernardino late september 2007 where many recognized smash pros attended and from my experience there i did not find any negative 'elitist' attitudes being presented from any of the really good players. For the most part they all seemed real friendly and just having fun w/ the game that we all love. Wobbles, Simna, and Forward in particular impressed me. So i'm a former casual gamer practicing to be truly competitive and the SWF community is the best place to get tips on how because the competitive players for the most part are active on here and try to help, not crush and belittle the casuals.From what i've read in forums its the casuals that tend to seek to belittile the skill of those who have been proven to play the game well in a tournament scene. If there has been retaliation from competitive players, from what i've read on here, its because they're sick of putting up with ignorant putdowns and faulty agrument.

 

[Merfy]

No more then likely your going to be called Racist more then elitist. That example would be rather strange because a majority of people would probably not even know how to response to something like that. It's one thing to talk about playstyles in video games, it's another thing to talk about biology XD

PROTIP: racists are elitists.

But you missed my point. In my example, flawless logic was used in a way that is considered, rightfully so, to be elitist. Therefore, the definition you use for elitist is incorrect.
The proper definition of elitist has now been posted, and as you can see, says nothing about making baseless points. The elitist just thinks he is better. The thoughts behind that are unimportant.
@Yuna. The very act of making this thread was quite elitist. You thought yourself so much better than us casual elitists that you in fact posed a challenge that you thought none could challenge, simply for the fact of bashing them for doing what you asked them to.
This is equivalent to calling your dog over then punching it in the face, then calling it over again and punching it in the face. Animal cruelty is elitist.

Imaginative analogies are fun, aren't they?

 

[staindgrey]

A square is a rectangle. But a rectangle is not always a square.

An elitist player is competitive. A competitive player is not always an elitist.

This entire conversation is based on vague assumptions and generalizations, so if you're wanting to fix the problem, what is the thread worth, if anything besides starting more arguments? Saturday Night I went to my 5th tournament, but this time, I made it to the harder matches where I finally faced a real competitive player. He used Sheik and he could KO me within seconds with mad combos that I didn't know existed. I was feeling high and mighty beating people with ease until I faced him- he was on a whole different level than me.

BUT just because he thoroughly owned my @$$ doesn't mean he was an elitist. He was a very nice guy. It was 5 stock, best two out of three, and I chose Mario first. He beat me 5-0. The next round he kept Sheik, but I could tell he wasn't using all of his ATs until I was beating him 3-2. Then he put a whooping on me to finish the match 5-3. Afterwards, he shook my hand, said I had a pretty good Sheik (bull, I wasn't even close) and was laughing saying he'd never faced another Sheik like mine. He was a very nice guy, and I was glad he went on to win the tournament.

But, right on the other side of the room, there was the guy that would eventually get second place. He talked smack, he complained about the 1st and 2nd round rules, how they were "noobish" with items and mobile stages, and when he played my friend, he toyed with him the whole time just to drag matches out and make him look like a tool. He epitomized my generic picture of an "elitist", and I was extremely happy when he lost in the final round.

So, two different competitive players, both very skilled. I don't know if they are "professionals" with videos on the web or not, but they played just like all the videos I've seen. But, there was a huge difference between them, and the latter was the "elitist" that this thread is based on. It's not something we can do, it's just a matter of fact that he's an @$$hole and that's just the way he is. Let it go, and if you want him to eat his words so badly, find a way to beat him.

 

[Fatmanonice]

"Like, did he call Casual players bad people? Did he consider Casual players beneath him because they were Casual? Did he insult Casual players for being Casuals? Did he use "Casual" as a slur? Etc., etc., etc. (I just want to know the facts)?"

For Christ's sake, stop badgering the guy... You said yourself you didn't need a whole autobiography on those being accused, just accounts of their existance.

 

[Thingy Person]

I got off on the wrong foot because Jigglymaster made a couple of controversial posts on another forum. For the rest, it's people I encounter on Kaillera. Most clearly professional players I encounter are very nice, though.
Even

On a related note (at least, I think so), there are times when I can't help but be annoyed when fighting tourney players. I can stomach the blatantly theoretical fighting, as in Utilt spamming/grab whoring (Fighting based on intuition is my idea of style) but when they start L Cancelling MY GOD GTFO SUNNUVAB!7#
I hope cases like these don't make people come off as "scrubs" because I'm for the idea to use everything to win in tourneys. But using exploits aDvAnCeD tEcHnIqUeS in a friendly match against players you know just came here to have fun sucks for both people. Except if you like wailing on defenseless ragdolls. But then...you know. (it was after something like this that I made my last post, so excuse me)

Really, there are elitists everywhere. The reason there are more Casual than Competitive elitists is because elitists don't have the stamina/tenacity to do anything serious. Their natural habitat is also unfit for travel.

 

[Thingy Person]

I got off on the wrong foot because Jigglymaster made a couple of controversial posts on another forum. For the rest, it's people I encounter on Kaillera. Most clearly professional players I encounter are very nice, though.

On a related note (at least, I think so), I want to clarify something (if it's needed. If not, sorry) There are times when I can't help but be annoyed when fighting tourney players. I can stomach the blatantly theoretical fighting, as in Utilt spamming/grab whoring (Fighting based on intuition is my idea of style) but when they start L Cancelling MY GOD GTFO SUNNUVAB!7#
I hope cases like these don't make people come off as "scrubs" because I'm for the idea to use everything to win in tourneys. But using exploits aDvAnCeD tEcHnIqUeS in a friendly match against players you know just came here to have fun sucks for both people. Except if you like wailing on defenseless ragdolls. But then...you know. (it was after something like this that I made my last post, so excuse me)

Really, there are elitists everywhere. The reason there are more Casual than Competitive elitists is because elitists don't have the stamina/tenacity to do anything serious. Their natural habitat is also unfit for travel.

 

[Merfy]

And the challenge was to name 5 Competitive Elitists (also note that not a single person was able to, on their own, name 5, which was also part of the challenge... the challenge was rooted in that if there are so many of them, at least one person should've encountered at least 5 of them).

However, the topic at hand is not that there aren't 5 Competitive Elitists in the world. It's that there are far fewer of them, especially in proportion to the non-Elitists, than people seem to think and make it out to be. So the argument is not refuted. The challenge has been met (by circumventing one of the rules).

Now you're just reinterpreting your own argument so that you are still right. Quit grasping at straws.

 

[WVI]

When I play against people I know in real life, they think I'm an idiot because I want to play with items on low and play with a number of stock other than 4.

 

[Uchiharakiri]

1) I've never said there are less than 30 competitive elitists in the world. But if there are so many specifically in the Smash community and possibly here on Smashboards they warrant people whining about them at least once a day (really, this is statistically provable), then people should be able to name 5. Because apparently, there are tons of them (or at least they post a lot).
2) Point me to any post where I call "most Casual Players scrubs". What I said was that most Scrubs are Casuals. I've also said that most homo- and bisexual male Smashers main Peach. It does not mean that all Peach players are gay. I can say that most Asians have black hair (naturally). It does not mean that all black-haired people are Asians either. This and that is not the same.

1. Yes, there are tons of them, just as there are tons of scrubs, to say otherwise to this statement would mean you're trying to lash out at scrubs; even if it means defending elitism. "Competitive playing doesn't have as many elitists as casuals have scrubs". It doesn't matter how many one side has, what matters is that both sides have them and it's stupid to even begin to say you are sure of how many numbers one side has.

2. The same argument can be made with how you worded things. I could also say most elitists are competitive.

3. I also hate stupidity, I just remain under control when talking about it.

 

[Thingy Person]

1. Yes, there are tons of them, just as there are tons of scrubs, to say otherwise to this statement would mean you're trying to lash out at scrubs; even if it means defending elitism. "Competitive playing doesn't have as many elitists as casuals have scrubs". It doesn't matter how many one side has, what matters is that both sides have them and it's stupid to even begin to say you are sure of how many numbers one side has.

SERIOUS ****ING BUSINESS. It doesn't MATTER how many each "side" has. This is not a war to prove which side is right. This is just logic. If there are more casual scrubs than comp. scrubs, then why would that affect you? You're not a casual (or even competitive) if you treat a video game this seriously.

 

[E-Z-MONEY]

1) Then why are you even in this thread? The topic at hand is Competitive Elitists.

Give me five posts where someone has claimed that show someone saying that most tourney players are competitive elitists an not competitive scrubs or just human elitists and this will be a valid topic.

2) I'm not an elitist. I do not think people are worth more than others for what they are. I, however, hate stupidity and try to beat it out of people. I'm stupidophobic, that's all.

Thinking someone who disagrees with you or makes a poitn you don't like is stupid is being elitist.

3) I do not look down on anyone. Even the stupid ones can learn and change. I am not all-knowing. I've been wrong in the past and am probably still wrong on certain things. However, when I find out I'm wrong, I try to change or retify what I did wrong. Since I am not perfect, I cannot expect or require anyone else to be. However, if they refuse to see reason after 2 pages of calm discussion (or maybe they even threw the first stone) then I'll stop being civil.

Looking at someone and thinking they are worse then you is looking down on them. Unless stupid is suddenly not an insult.

4) No I don't. I've never called someone stupid simply for disagreeing with me. Point me towards a single post where I have.

Because you proved yourself to be an idiot on your first reply.

Unless you can back this claim up, I win.

Also answer the fifth point.

I don't remember his full name, but I know him. His name is based on a character from Prince of Tennis. Did his elitism stem from him being a Competitive Player?

Prove scrubs scrubiness comes from being casual.

 

[Merfy]

SERIOUS ****ING BUSINESS. It doesn't MATTER how many each "side" has. This is not a war to prove which side is right. This is just logic. If there are more casual scrubs than comp. scrubs, then why would that affect you? You're not a casual (or even competitive) if you treat a video game this seriously.

supposing theres more casual elitists...
that just mean more people dont like what less people have done.

as to your doesnt affect me attitude, thats just a terrible excuse for not wanting to argue.

Genocides in Darfur don't affect me. the KKK in the past didn't affect me. World War 2 didn't affect me. So that means I shouldn't denounce racism?

 

[Deadlypudding]

I generally agree with the OP on this subject. It is rare to see a high-ranking competitive come around a dis casuals for being casuals. The OP is relatively correct in this observation. However, you have contradicted yourself and seemingly changed opinion throughout the topic. I feel that much of your opposition has stemmed from these lapses of logic and thought. For one, you have and haven't been clear about just what you are wanting to prove as far as number of "competitive elitists" goes. Example:

According to the Myth... Some claim they're "few but very loud".

Not even the "very loud" part is true since I haven't seen any of them around on Smashboards, especially not in these parts. I mean, if they're so loud, we should be seeing tons of posts from them.

But they're few and far inbetween. And they don't really post that much, especially not in these parts of the boards.

These statements from your very first post are bound to cause confusion with some. First you are bound to confuse some when you say the bit about never seeing the "few but very loud" on the smashboards. I know that you must mean that you believe there are some elitists (as you clearly state later on), but your wording implies that you don't believe any exist. Later in the same post you mention the "few" again, however this time you acknowledge their existence and that they post (not much though). In one post you went from never having seen them to, it being rare. This inconsistence hurts your posts credibility and has undoubtably caused many of the replies' confusion.

I'm sure there will be people who will challenge my claim of this myth being false. Before you reply, though, take my challenge:
Name 5 Competitive Players (must be verifiable, I mean, Sephiroth Smasher 29449, does that really sound like a Competitive Smasher to you?) who are Tourneyidiots (do not use the term "f*g" in my presence!) or Elitists.

While this is a very standard, tried, and tested challenge, your criteria is spotty at best. Of course you later change this stance (which may or may not have hurt you in the long run), but it's criteria were too rigid and only open to your interpretation. Especially the criteria for a verifiable smasher. This particular one could be used by you to exclude everyone who isn't the top 5 Smahers on the SWF. This point was brought up later with the local player "Kyle". You seem to disregard him since you don't know him, however that seems to be the point of this thread right? You're challenging people to name "competitive elitists" right? So why is it that when someone does, just because they aren't a part of this community (or may very well be) that automatically makes them invalid? Fatmanonice is quite right that you're not allowing anyone to try and finish this challenge since only a select few are actually valid in your mind.

As I said I'm not against your opinion and I do believe the same way, its just I hate to see the holes in your argument. They have lessened your credibility and hurt your point. I suggest you go back and carefully redefine your argument to read better for clarity and credibility. The topic would more than likely flow better if confusion and circular were fixed from your posts.

 

[Yuna]

Give me five posts where someone has claimed that show someone saying that most tourney players are competitive elitists an not competitive scrubs or just human elitists and this will be a valid topic.

Tomorrow, when I have the time (as I hate to leave soon).

Thinking someone who disagrees with you or makes a poitn you don't like is stupid is being elitist.

I never said this. In fact, in a later post, I explain this quite eloquently. People are not stupid for disagreeing with me or saying something I don't like. They're stupid if they show traits of stupidity.

Looking at someone and thinking they are worse then you is looking down on them. Unless stupid is suddenly not an insult.

They are not worse than me for being stupid. They are just stupid. I've been stupid in my days. I am still struck by random bouts of stupidity to this day. It's a common human trait.

Unless you can back this claim up, I win.

I'll quote your post when I have the time. Also, it was not necessarily a reply to me. It was probably a reply to MookieRah.

Also answer the fifth point.

Prove scrubs scrubiness comes from being casual.

I've never said that Scrubiness comes from being Casual. I just said that the very nature of being a Scrub makes it pretty hard for a Scrub to be a Competitive Gamer.

To be a true Competitive Gamer is to Play to Win. You use every trick in book to win because you want to win. You want to place well in tournaments, you want a shot at that money, etc., etc.

Scrubs refuse to use things they deep "cheap" (and most of them also whine when others do). This makes it pretty hard for them to be Competitive unless they're just starting out (in which case they might grow out of it in time).

Scrubiness is not the result of being Casual. You can never become truly Competitive unless you stop being a Scrub because no one can win a lot by refusing to use "cheap" tactics.

This and that are not the same things.

 

[Yuna]

Actually, that's exactly what an elitist is. Your attitude is such that you think you are better than other people.

The topic at hand is not whether there are a lot of Competitive players who are elitists in general but whether or not there are a lot of Comptitive Elitists. That is that and this is this.

And the competitive elitists I hate are not necessarily the ones that are defined under your terms. A competitive elitist is someone who is both an elitist and competitive. Your definition is too narrow. Consider this. I assert that I am the only smart person in existence. Then I define smart as being me. Now, using my logic, none of you are smart.

My definition is not narrow because the topic at hand is about these people specifically. Elitists exist everywhere. People think they're better than others for a lot of reasons.

However, the topic at hand is the claim that there are many Competitive Elitists who look down on Casuals and think they're better than them simply for being Competitive. And yes, this has been stated repeatedly by a lot of Casuals (I will quote at least five of them tomorrow when I have the time to sift through the forum).

This is, of course, not true. I used a definition inconsistent with the widely used term, as did you. Not being a 'casual elitist' like me, you have no clue what I consider to be a tourneyf*g. Therefore, it is necessary to use the most simple of terms, defining a competitive elitist as someone who is both competitive and elitist. On those definitions, the names given do in fact count. Because you do not see yourself as elitist, when you say people's OPINIONS are stupid, you do not understand the definiton of elitist. If you openly bash things you find as stupid, (which incidentally, seem to be things you do not agree with) you are elitist. I am going to assume you are competitive. Therefore, you are a competitive elitist.

What you personally define as a "tourneyidiot" has no bearing when we're talking about the clinical meaning of such a person. Someone could think "homosexuality" equates to "child molestation". Does not make it so.

I've never called people stupid for their opinions. I have, however, called people stupid for their reasons for thinking like they do. I also usually only directly call people stupid once I've tried to reason with them with them either ignoring me or failing to at least acknowledge my points or just blatantly flaming me back. I treat all people equally when I first encounter them unless the post I reply to is entirely stupid (like "Homosexuality is sinful and wrong! Ew!"), without emotion. If they reply to me in a stupid way (repeatedly), then I might start considering them stupid.

But I have never said "You're stupid!" (or anything of the sort) the first time I replied to someone's post.

Oh, the sweet irony.

What irony? The fact that he mispelled something? How horrible.

Here you go. 10 charizards

"Most Scrubs are, however, Casuals, yet a few are Competitives." does not equate "Most Casuals are Scrubs". Reading comprehension is very important.

It is a verifiable fact that most Scrubs are Casuals because of the very nature of a Scrub. A Competitive Player will do everything in their power to win because they play to win. They'll use anything that isn't banned to win. As such, they cannot be a Scrub because Scrubs not only refuse to do anything "cheap", they whine when others do.

However, still, a select few of the Lower Tiers of Competitive Players (as in "The ones one or the ones who are just slightly competitive") are Scrubs. But the majority of Scrubs are Casuals. This does in no way mean that the Majority of Casuals are Scrubs or that Casual = Scrub.

And I've already explained this in this thread.

Based on my conversation with Sliq all I know is that he is a **** tht feels the need to state that he can beat any casual in every post. Sounds elitist to me.[/quote
Quote or it didn't happen.

Quote me a post where Sliq has put Casuals down for being Casual. Stating that "[he] can beat any Casual" is just stating that "I think I'm really, really good". Stating that "I can beat any Casual because they suck since they're Casual!" would be elitist.

However, Sliq can come off as an ******* from time to time. But I've never seen him putting down Casuals just because.

It might not mean that you hate all women, but what will all women think of you? Stop and think about that for a second... Alright, now what's the point of this thread Yuna? You're just contributing to a subject that you seem so upset about existing by "Challenging" people to come up with "5 names." You sound like an *******.

That maybe I had a good reason to punch that specific girl?

I'm sorry, but where in the thread have I ever even alluded to Casual players being inferior to Competitive players? I've simply stated that certain people exaggerate the number of Competitive elitists in existence.

The only reason why anyone would take offense to that would be if they perceived I was insulting them because they themselves exaggerate this.

Somalians at smash tournaments... you managed to take an analogy (they are parallel ideas that may be different situationally in order to illustrate a point, since it's apparent you don't know what an analogy is) and mash it in with the original idea. Bravo.

Where did I mention Somalians at Smash tournaments? Reading comprehension, please.

So... Let me get this right. I say, "Maybe they're too elitest to post in here." Then you say that there's a lot of people that say they do. Then to finalize the response you say, "Yes they do." If you're so confident that they exist in here, then why are you questioning their existence?

Um... what? Again, reading comprehension.

The definition of "pontificate" is to speak in a pompous manner. Either you're admitting you're cocky, or you're trying to use words that you don't know the definition of.

I apologize. I was not aware of that "pontification" also entailed pompousness. English is only my 3rd language. Replace "Pontificate" with "Eloquence/Express eloquently", etc.

But you said they do come and post in here. Make up your mind.

Reading comprehension. I never said there weren't any or that they never post in here. I said there are far fewer than people seem to think there are.

So you're right in the statement that Elitist Competitives are on the same plane as Big Foot or the Lock Ness Monster... In an earlier example, someone mentioned a person named Kyle and you automatically dismissed them because YOU didn't know who the person was... Like I said, this is going nowhere.

No I didn't. I didn't dismiss anyone. I asked for further information about people who I'd never heard of (because I don't know everything) or in this case, to some vague person I couldn't possibly know because all we know about him is that his name is Kyle.

I just wanted to make sure that this Kyle was really a Competitive Player and that he was also really a Competitive Elitist.

of course there are competitive elitists here. there are elitists in every group EVERYWHERE EVER. do you think smashboards is special and is some kind of vanguard of righteousness? such an assertion is absurd.

Again, never once did I claim they didn't exist. I claimed their numbers are far smaller than perceived by some.

"Like, did he call Casual players bad people? Did he consider Casual players beneath him because they were Casual? Did he insult Casual players for being Casuals? Did he use "Casual" as a slur? Etc., etc., etc. (I just want to know the facts)?"

For Christ's sake, stop badgering the guy... You said yourself you didn't need a whole autobiography on those being accused, just accounts of their existance.

Umm... what?

The point of this thread is to dispell the myth that there are many people who are Competitive and who look down on Casuals simply because they're Casual (and not Competitive). Many seem to think that it's enough if they're just Competitive Players and *******s... or just elitists in general (and not even Competitive).

All I did was ask for confirmation. A simple "yes" or "no". If you think that's "badgering" then go watch any given American "lawyer show" to be proved wrong.

Now you're just reinterpreting your own argument so that you are still right. Quit grasping at straws.

No I'm not. I haven't edited my original post since right after I posted it. The rules for the challenge are clearly written (not every time the challenge is mentioned, though).

It clearly states all that. Go re-read the OP, please.

1. Yes, there are tons of them, just as there are tons of scrubs, to say otherwise to this statement would mean you're trying to lash out at scrubs; even if it means defending elitism. "Competitive playing doesn't have as many elitists as casuals have scrubs". It doesn't matter how many one side has, what matters is that both sides have them and it's stupid to even begin to say you are sure of how many numbers one side has.

2. The same argument can be made with how you worded things. I could also say most elitists are competitive.

3. I also hate stupidity, I just remain under control when talking about it.

1) The question is not "how many of them are there", the question is "How often do they post on Smashboards or insult Casuals who go to tournaments" and "How many are there in comparison to non-Elitist Competitives". I made this clear in the OP. Because so many people seem to be under the impression that there are tons of them in general, that they might even outnumber the non-Elitist Competitives or that they post a lot on Smashboards, two statements that are, in fact, false.
2) Yes, and? I never said what you claimed I said, still. You'd also be wrong because far more Casuals (at least here on Smashboards) tell Competitive players off for not using Items, etc. than vice versa (I could employ quotes).
3) I remain under control. I just employ biting sarcasm in my everyday life. It's a lifestyle choice.

 

[MookieRah]

An elitist player is competitive. A competitive player is not always an elitist.

I disagree, cause when people go to these forums just to tell us how we are playing it wrong how is that not being elitist?

When reading a heated debate on this subject people need to actually read the entire debate. Far too often people start at one page, see a few statements out of context, and then make tons of assumptions.

Competitive elitists exist, but they are simply not as many of them as most of you guys would believe. Honestly, I'm wiling to bet that the percentage of competitive elitists would be similar to scrubs, it's just that there are tons more casual players than competitive players.

 

[Uchiharakiri]

SERIOUS ****ING BUSINESS. It doesn't MATTER how many each "side" has. This is not a war to prove which side is right. This is just logic. If there are more casual scrubs than comp. scrubs, then why would that affect you? You're not a casual (or even competitive) if you treat a video game this seriously.

I think you underestimate just how little I care about both sides of this argument.

 

[QueTee]

it's a conspiracy, the government is trying to trick you!!

 

[Uchiharakiri]

I disagree, cause when people go to these forums just to tell us how we are playing it wrong how is that not being elitist?

When reading a heated debate on this subject people need to actually read the entire debate. Far too often people start at one page, see a few statements out of context, and then make tons of assumptions.

Competitive elitists exist, but they are simply not as many of them as most of you guys would believe. Honestly, I'm wiling to bet that the percentage of competitive elitists would be similar to scrubs, it's just that there are tons more casual players than competitive players.

I agree with you MookieRah. Competitive elitists exists, there are not as many of them as some might think. The same is applied to scrubs, there are not as many as Yuna might think there are simply because he sees more of them flaming than the competitive elitists on these boards; just because there are more casual players than competitives. Let's count, It would be wise to say that he hasn't seen more than 50 of these scrubs he hates so much flame him or others for his views; compare this to the actual amount of casual un-elitist players on these boards and out; and he is instantly invalidated with his claim of most elitists being casuals.

Fact of matter is, this is Smashboards, and elitist casuals, being elitists; will find the time to come on here and let off a few noob words. That does not mean the majority of us casuals are elitist scrubs. There are a few of them, but they do not represent us, the majority. I'd feel safe in saying there are just about as many casual elitists as there are competitive ones, what do you say Mookie.

 

[Drunken_Dragon]

there is no right or wrong, these are vauge social associations. every one stop forming your ideaology from precanned notions, stop making assumptions; and stop partaking is chidlish debates about whos better/more just/ logical than who. its not worth the effort, we could all be doing better things with our time.

 

[Merfy]

No I'm not. I haven't edited my original post since right after I posted it. The rules for the challenge are clearly written (not every time the challenge is mentioned, though).

It clearly states all that. Go re-read the OP, please.

check your post.

Seriously, who started the rumours and urban legends and why do so many people perpetuate them without ever seeing proof of them?

Who are these elitist competitive players certain people love to complain about and bring up as examples of how the Competitives are putting the Casuals down? And where are they? I haven't seen them post anywhere. MookieRah (who's a mod and therefore has an obligation to sift through all posts) hasn't seen them. And neither anyone else, including the people complaining about them if we are to judge from their responses to me challenging them to bring up examples (either stunned silence or admissions of them never having actually seeing any (this one is rare)).

According to the Myth, there are many Competitives who are Elitist. Some seem to think they're in the majority. Some seem to think they're just many. Some claim they're "few but very loud".

Not even the "very loud" part is true since I haven't seen any of them around on Smashboards, especially not in these parts. I mean, if they're so loud, we should be seeing tons of posts from them.

According to the Myth, the Competitive Elitists hate the Casual Smashers. They put them down simply for being Casual. They view being a Casual as something less than being a Competitive, that Casuals are stupid, that the opinions of Casuals never matter in anything, that all Casuals are trash at the game, etc., etc., etc., etc.

Yet not a single one of my challenges of "Name 5" has been answered. Why is this? Could it be because the myth is, gasp, false. I don't know, maybe some a-hole Competitives are Casual Haters (probably true, there are many Competitives, some of them probably hate Casuals, just like how some of them might be racists, homophobes, chauvanists and/or Republicans, there are idiots among all groups, even MENSA). But they're few and far inbetween. And they don't really post that much, especially not in these parts of the boards.

Note: Stupidity is usually not tolerated. Just because some Competitive Smashers might have flamed some Casuals who've posted some truly stupid things does not mean they're flaming the entire Casual community or hate the Casuals as a whole. There's stupidity everywhere. Just like if I punch a girl tomorrow, it doesn't mean that I hate all women everywhere.

I'm sure there will be people who will challenge my claim of this myth being false. Before you reply, though, take my challenge:
Name 5 Competitive Players (must be verifiable, I mean, Sephiroth Smasher 29449, does that really sound like a Competitive Smasher to you?) who are Tourneyidiots (do not use the term "f*g" in my presence!) or Elitists.

I mean, if there are so many of them, then you should be able to name at least 5, right?
__________________
Helios' spijkerbroek is vet lelijk en ziet er dom uit
Last edited by Yuna : Today at 01:59 PM.

Note at the end, you clearly edited your post.
Also note. You said

Name 5 Competitive Players (must be verifiable, I mean, Sephiroth Smasher 29449, does that really sound like a Competitive Smasher to you?) who are Tourneyidiots (do not use the term "f*g" in my presence!) or Elitists.

Now, you asked me to name 5. And I did. You did not ask for me to come up with them on my own.

The topic at hand is not whether there are a lot of Competitive players who are elitists in general but whether or not there are a lot of Comptitive Elitists. That is that and this is this.

A competitive elitist is an elitist who is competitive.

 

[staindgrey]

I disagree, cause when people go to these forums just to tell us how we are playing it wrong how is that not being elitist?

When reading a heated debate on this subject people need to actually read the entire debate. Far too often people start at one page, see a few statements out of context, and then make tons of assumptions.

Competitive elitists exist, but they are simply not as many of them as most of you guys would believe. Honestly, I'm wiling to bet that the percentage of competitive elitists would be similar to scrubs, it's just that there are tons more casual players than competitive players.

lol Just like taking one line from a long post out of context and then making assumptions?

What I meant by competitive is not the AT-using smashers. I simply meant that if one is elitist, it's safe to assume that this elitist attitude came about due to his or her competitive nature. I think it's rather impossible to be an elitist when one isn't competitive. Sorry, I guess I should have clarified what I meant by "competitive".

The big problem that I have with the thread in general is the fact that Yuna is not seeming to even observe everyone's input, which was what the thread seemed to be all about in the first place. Instead, he's picking out the posts that argue against him, pick them apart bit by bit and refute them entirely. This isn't a slam on you, Yuna, I'm simply pointing out your very one-sided point of view. I've seen good, thought out opinions on both sides of this argument, but you seem to only entertain those that are against you. Is it so hard to say to someone, "Good point"?

Go ahead and break my post into 5 different parts and shoot down each one, I don't care. I think it's funny how people seem to forget the fact that these are message boards. Expecting any kind of valuable logic from the majority is just expecting way too much.

 

[Tiwaz]

I don't really meet many casual haters in the Melee community. Most of the elitist douchebags I meet hate competitive players that aren't as good as they are and completely ignore the casual players.

But yet, I hope that girl you punch isn't my sister.

 

[Yuna]

check your post.

Note at the end, you clearly edited your post.

Right after just writing it, yes. And I mentioned this in the post you just read. I mentioned it to pre-empt any claims that I might've gone back and changed the rules.

Also note. You said

Now, you asked me to name 5. And I did. You did not ask for me to come up with them on my own.

"Before you reply, though, take my challenge:
Name 5 Competitive Players (must be verifiable, I mean, Sephiroth Smasher 29449, does that really sound like a Competitive Smasher to you?) who are Tourneyidiots (do not use the term "f*g" in my presence!) or Elitists.

I mean, if there are so many of them, then you should be able to name at least 5, right?"

The "You" in this case is the Singular form of "You". It's in the subtext. I guess I was wrong for not clarifying that. I apologize for this.

A competitive elitist is an elitist who is competitive.

Not in "our" definition for the argument at hand. An Elitist Competitive is a Competitive Player who is Elitist because they are Competitive and who dislikes people who aren't Competitive (i.e. Casual).

 

[Paingel]

You have a very "anything other than my opinion is wrong" mentality which is inherently elitist.

And what about the times when she IS right and everyone else IS wrong? What then? Is that a matter of elitism? Or is it just a matter of having her facts straight?

If she's right then she's right, and flaming her isn't gonna change the fact that she has her **** together and the flamer doesn't. That's not elitism. That's just the way it is.

Now, if you give me a case where she doesn't have her facts straight, then that would be a different story. But since you were kind enough to point out "flaws" in her logic, then I thought it fitting that someone should return the favor for you. ;D

"Watch out for false prophets... By their fruit you will recognize them." ~Matthew 7:15-16