Thumbs up to Dr. Sylvan, Down to O'Connell

[GoatChunx]

As a frequent viewer of StarCityGames.com, I am generally impressed by the content of that website. Steven Menendian (I hope I spelled your name correctly) rights great articles. I enjoy you Mr. Tendrils. My favorite writer ever, though, is Phillip Stanton. When your looking for data he's your man. He keeps track of the metagame and its history.

Just recently he spoke out on Italy and ridicule. He wrote a great article saying "hey guys let's stop being so elitist and we should leave Italy."
I thought Mr. Stanton deserved high praise for that. Instead Steve O'Connell writes a rebuttal article. When one writes a rebuttal article, one should consider if the rebuttal is necessary. Dr. Sylvan has the data as well as a valid point. What is Steve O'Connell's point in discrediting Dr. Sylvan?

[Zherbus]

Just recently he spoke out on Italy and ridicule. He wrote a great article saying "hey guys let's stop being so elitist and we should leave Italy."

Where did I ridicule Italy? When one makes a criticism, it's common practice to point out what needs the criticism. Did anyone else see me make fun of italy? I dont think there was so much as anything resembling a bad word towards Italy. I wrote a rebuttal because I think Dr Sylvan made too many assumptions and generalized too much. Some of his points needed addressing. I apologize for speaking freely.

[Anders Noer]

I myself, found both articles very interesting.
Stantons article was a fresh breath of air, showing a more open and unbiased view of metagames outside America. I think it is an important step towards getting the level of Type 1 up. A worldwide metagame doesn't exist yet (as it does in Standard , limited and block metagames), but I think we're getting closer with articles such as these.
On the other hand I found Zherbus's article just as great as a follow-up to Stanton's views. It shored up some of the holes in the first article by giving a subjective view of the data collected.
Steve's rebuttal makes you remember not to always just eat raw, all the stuff you read on the INTARWEB. Even if posted on a respectable site such as SCG.
I saw no ridicule towards Italy in that rebuttal, just a critical view at some of the data that Stanton presented.
Good Job by both writers.
(I'm sure that Zherbus finds most of Stantons article correct. He just pointed out a few flaws in it, which is useful to us all. Including Stanton)

[Zherbus]

(I'm sure that Zherbus finds most of Stantons article correct. He just pointed out a few flaws in it, which is useful to us all. Including Stanton)

I find pretty much all of Dr Sylvans stuff to be correct. This time I felt he needed some response. But, for the record, I always look forward to Dr Sylvan's stuff.

[BlkXplsn]

It's also good to keep in mind that cold hard data isn't immune to being colored by personal perceptions... when you believe in an idea, the evidence may "support" you regardless of what it actually is. Anyone who writes an article already has an opinion, it's just a matter of whether it is apparent or not.

Lies, damn lies, and statistics, or something.

[GoatChunx]

I feel like I owe Steve an apology. I can't pretend I didn't write my post like that, and it really was not a good way to kick off things at TMD. I apologize profusely for my conduct here. As to the site administrator's question, I do not dispute that you didn't criticize Italy in your article, but I was a little miffed that you chose to write a rebuttal article to Dr. Sylvan's, though in retrospect I see your point as being legitimate as well. Again I apologize for my conduct. Also, I hope we can welcome the whole world into the fold of our Type I thinking.

[jpmeyer]

I feel like I owe Steve an apology. I can't pretend I didn't write my post like that, and it really was not a good way to kick off things at TMD. I apologize profusely for my conduct here. As to the site administrator's question, I do not dispute that you didn't criticize Italy in your article, but I was a little miffed that you chose to write a rebuttal article to Dr. Sylvan's, though in retrospect I see your point as being legitimate as well. Again I apologize for my conduct. Also, I hope we can welcome the whole world into the fold of our Type I thinking.

Personally, I thought the two articles said two different things:

"Don't dismiss a metagame because it isn't like yours..."

"...but still remember that in the end, your metagame is the one that you need to prepare for."