Then its a good thing thats NOT what I was trying to do, isn’t it?
Telling someone who believes they can do a better job to put their money where their mouth is, is not shilling.
If they truly can do a better job, then apply for the job or SU!
2 Likes
I could agree with DH, although a lot of people wouldn’t, but DK? No way, it’s one of the most popular classes ever. It’s a success squared.
Much less than that, but he can surprise sometimes. However, I’ll be very dilligent next time in finding out how those pearls of wisdom happen, because I’ve found him saying something smart about the very same topics on which later on he knows NOTHING about.
It’s like he’s some sort of a parrott, parrotting what he hears elsewhere and hoping it’s fitting in the reply he’s making. If not, whatever, he’ll just play the “strawman” card.
It’s not bad at all, but Renathal did its part.
And to everyone who talks crap about the normal Hunter, you’re clueless. The one deck he has on the ladder, the control one, is broken beyond any doubt. I’ve never managed to go 50% against it with any of my decks, and I’ve played A LOT of decks this month.
Nice strawman. Nobody told you I applied for their job. It’s you who comes with a ridiculous philosophy which is equivalent to shutting down the elections if the voters are not capable of being President/Prime Minister themselves (which I already told you but you chose to ignore it (which shows the level of your honesty)).
Really?
I can give you examples of viable decks for each other class. Except DH.
Pirate DH was the closest and it was nerfed. But even before it was a hit or miss and not fun at all.
He should change his name to Scarecrow because he’s so infatuated with Strawmen.
You’re correct that it was really inconsistent for an aggro deck and not fun to play. If you didn’t get your cards in the mulligan phase you could basically concede on the spot because you knew you were dead.
I just lost to a Shopper DH who somehow played 3x Umpire’s Grasp
1 Like
Give me the deck code or it didnt happen.
There’s a big difference between supporting someone for a particular job, and telling them how to do that job.
1 Like
That’s a hypocritical stance, because you can’t judge a politician by anything other than having an opinion on their job.
Also it’s just technically wrong; your car may break down; you don’t have to graduate car mechanic’s school to see it.
You can measure what someone does without having an opinion on how someone does. For example, you can look at the standardized test scores of students of a particular teacher, without pretending that you know more about how to teach than the teacher.
1 Like
And who told you I didn’t do also that? You can imagine I didn’t do it but that’s wishful thinking more than having information about how I think.
Also it’s …also technically wrong; someone may know partly the job; they don’t necessarily have to know the whole job but they may judge parts of it.
Choose only one, Mr. That’s a Hypocrite Stance.
Not really. It’s just a usage of both methods at the same time. You can use high level metrics as you mentioned; but it’s not necessary that you can’t judge only part of their job too; e.g. one may be a good network engineer and while they may not be able to judge their gameplay code: they may be able to judge their networking code etc.