EDIT: Role filled! Thanks for anyone who reached out!
Im writting a Social Commentary paper and need someone who has been around overwatch for awhile. Someone who is pro rework and or revert mercy for this paper. It is definetly supposed to be biased and I just need an “expierenced proffecinal” on the topic for it to be valid to my teacher.
Plan:
I just need to ask a few questions about mercys state and have a mini interview via message. I also need proof of your rank.
If you’re interested pls reply as soon as you can because my paper is due tuesday hahaha. Thanks!
You just destroyed any credibility this paper had/would have.
Sorry, but if I’m the teacher and receiving a school paper thats biased I’m failing them. That’s not how you construct an argument.
And if anything, you’re INTENTIONALLY making it biased…?
Try reaching out to Titanium. He could help you write a master’s thesis on Mercy’s current state and why she needs changes. Seriously. Look up some of his posts.
Have written forum essays on her issues even before she got reworked
Have been through the SNAFU of The Ten Megathreads
Was invited to Titanium’s (the user who wrote the Mercy Theisis about her state that is the #1 most liked post on these forums) Mercy Discourse Discord by the man himself
And I view #ReworkMercy as a very old movement that has just happened to semi-recently gotten public attention
I am not a high rank. I am mid-plat. But I can and have churned out essays on a daily basis about Mercy, her relationship to the larger playerbase, and how her balance interacts with the balance of the game as a whole.
It absolutely is. Chances are this kid was given an assignment that required him to write an argumentative essay. You do not make the opposing argument for the other side in this kind of writing. Please don’t spread misinformation.
Speaking as a teacher: It completely depends on the type of assignment. Not all arguments boil down to a facts-and-stats-and-logic kind of situation. Opinion articles are a thing, after all.
“Prove whether or not a rework is objectively the best thing for Mercy, based on hard evidence” (leaving aside that it’s a pretty flawed premise) would require an unbiased approach.
“Present your case for reworking Mercy” inherently invites bias.
Well thanks to you I learned that it is a french thing to write every composition with the “thesis antithesis synthesis” structure.
I believe exposing only one side of an argument is a flawed approach.
Again, it depends very much on what the goals of the paper are.
Doing research on the current status of Mercy and what might improve her play? Then yes, you’d need to dig into the various positions of revert / rework / buff / leave her alone / etc.
But “Explain X position on a subject” can be a goal of a written work. “Give your own opinion of Y, and explain your reasoning” can be a goal of a written work. Not everything has to be “Compare A and B ideas” (although that is certainly a valuable thing to do as well, just not suited to every topic).
This isn’t misinformation at all. The person is trying to get out what they think is best for Mercy. It only makes sense to include all positions on her current state. If anything you’re spreading misinformation.
Alrighty, I could get behind that. There are certain situations that excuse it, but if you’re making an argument on why you should rework Mercy, you’re gonna strengthen your argument by disproving the other sides. For example they could include something like; “I do not believe that leaving Mercy in her current state, or simply buffing would work, because…”
That strengthens the argument. In this situation it makes sense to include things like that.
I think bias might’ve been the wrong term for what I’m trying to say.