Lightning's blog is completely filled with memes and is known to be a comedic person, if you are upset over a measly joke that you simply did not comprehend, then it is your fault.
The Blogger Battle
Sort:
Apr 7, 2022
0
#123
Rodgy wrote:
ChessPawn921 wrote:
Rodgy wrote:
I not only find it hilarious, but also sad that one of our fellow human beings is getting pissed that I post a April fools blog and attacks me and shame me for posting false news. Not only have they said that I do not deserve top blogger for posting fake news, but they clearly are under assumptions rather than facts. If you would've known, the head of chess.com content specifically gave @Lightning and I permission to post a April Fool's blog... pftt, some people.
And what assumptions exactly am I under?
You think that I should not be top blogger since you were under the assumption that I was not given permission to post an April Fool's blog.
Even if you didn't ask for permission, it should have been fine, as Chess.com did an April Fools post last year, so nobody should have taken your posts seriously. Even if it was frowned upon, it shouldn't be bad enough to remove your Top Blogger status. And if it was, that's not for him to decide. So @ChessPawn921 had no reason to be upset.
Apr 7, 2022
0
#124
alphaous wrote:
Rodgy wrote:
ChessPawn921 wrote:
Rodgy wrote:
I not only find it hilarious, but also sad that one of our fellow human beings is getting pissed that I post a April fools blog and attacks me and shame me for posting false news. Not only have they said that I do not deserve top blogger for posting fake news, but they clearly are under assumptions rather than facts. If you would've known, the head of chess.com content specifically gave @Lightning and I permission to post a April Fool's blog... pftt, some people.
And what assumptions exactly am I under?
You think that I should not be top blogger since you were under the assumption that I was not given permission to post an April Fool's blog.
Even if you didn't ask for permission, it should have been fine, as Chess.com did an April Fools post last year, so nobody should have taken your posts seriously. Even if it was frowned upon, it shouldn't be bad enough to remove your Top Blogger status. And if it was, that's not for him to decide. So @ChessPawn921 had no reason to be upset.
Ngl I kinda get the impression that he’s just salty that he isn’t a top blogger
At first I really thought he was joking when he left comments and said stuff like that. But he actually believes what he says, then according to him neither Roger nor I should be a top blogger. I won’t speak for myself, but will say it’s ridiculous to say that about Roger.
Apr 7, 2022
0
#125
So true. Roger's had Blog of the Month, he's one of the most popular bloggers, and he has good variety in his blogs, there should be no doubt that he deserves to be Top Blogger. Same for you, your blogs are popular, funny, and well-written. So anyone saying you don't deserve Top Blogger is blatantly hating. I detect some jealousy, but I don't want to spread harsh feelings so we might as well drop the subject.
Apr 7, 2022
0
#126
ChessSBM wrote:
B1ZMARK wrote:
ChessSBM wrote:
B1ZMARK wrote:
ChessSBM wrote:
I still don’t really get the benefit of making blogs.
There aren't a lot of benefits to existing, either
Actually there is.
There is a benefit to existing because...? The difference between existing and not existing is sentience. However, that is not necessarily a "benefit". It's just something that is, because that's what existing is.
It would be like saying blue is better than red, because blue has more blue than red has blue.
Benefits of existing is x. x is y. y is x. Simple? Sorry if you want a better explanation of what is x, then I would say it is z.
Alternatively, you could list some benefits to existing. I am just saying that any potential benefit to existing cannot be compared to not existing, since we don’t know what that is like.
Apr 7, 2022
0
#127
alphaous wrote:
So true. Roger's had Blog of the Month, he's one of the most popular bloggers, and he has good variety in his blogs, there should be no doubt that he deserves to be Top Blogger. Same for you, your blogs are popular, funny, and well-written. So anyone saying you don't deserve Top Blogger is blatantly hating. I detect some jealousy, but I don't want to spread harsh feelings so we might as well drop the subject.
It wasn’t jealousy. That’s a different matter. It was a question of @Rodgy talking about something we all know to be false. Prove to me that en passant is removed, and I will drop the topic.
Apr 7, 2022
0
#128
ChessPawn921 wrote:
alphaous wrote:
So true. Roger's had Blog of the Month, he's one of the most popular bloggers, and he has good variety in his blogs, there should be no doubt that he deserves to be Top Blogger. Same for you, your blogs are popular, funny, and well-written. So anyone saying you don't deserve Top Blogger is blatantly hating. I detect some jealousy, but I don't want to spread harsh feelings so we might as well drop the subject.
It wasn’t jealousy. That’s a different matter. It was a question of @Rodgy talking about something we all know to be false. Prove to me that en passant is removed, and I will drop the topic.
Yeah, ok, but everyone knows the en passant removed thing was an april fools joke...
It was funny. On April Fools. A day for pranks. What's the big deal?
Apr 7, 2022
0
#130
Saying that posting an April Fools joke is false information is absolutely ridiculous. If that's the case, then what do you say about the Chess.com staff posting that draws were removed last year? Everyone knows that it was an April Fools joke, and nobody was thinking that they were 'lied to', they were just appreciating the joke. So you calling him out for spreading false information makes you look like the fool. If you can't appreciate non-offensive humor, don't comment on it and don't form a grudge against someone because of it, all it does is spread negativity.
Apr 7, 2022
0
#131
B1ZMARK wrote:
ChessSBM wrote:
B1ZMARK wrote:
ChessSBM wrote:
B1ZMARK wrote:
ChessSBM wrote:
I still don’t really get the benefit of making blogs.
There aren't a lot of benefits to existing, either
Actually there is.
There is a benefit to existing because...? The difference between existing and not existing is sentience. However, that is not necessarily a "benefit". It's just something that is, because that's what existing is.
It would be like saying blue is better than red, because blue has more blue than red has blue.
Benefits of existing is x. x is y. y is x. Simple? Sorry if you want a better explanation of what is x, then I would say it is z.
Alternatively, you could list some benefits to existing. I am just saying that any potential benefit to existing cannot be compared to not existing, since we don’t know what that is like.
This is getting extremely philosophical, so I will conclude this conversation by saying: existence is nice for most people, so let's appreciate our existence. And let's also get back to discussing blogs.
Apr 7, 2022
0
#132
alphaous wrote:
ChessPawn921 wrote:
My blogs are actually instructive
Your blogs are instructive, but mostly at the beginner level. At the intermediate-advanced level, people might not find your blogs instructive anymore, although I do consider your blogs well-written. At the intermediate-advanced level, people would enjoy a higher rated player breaking down his moves in a humorous and somewhat instructive fashion, like @Rodgy, @Lightning, and @DanielGuel. And the storytelling of tournament recaps is important. Why do you think @GothamChess's recaps have been some of his most popular videos? People enjoy that, and let's face it, watch a high rated player analyze his games for long enough, and you will learn something. And also, there are other methods of instruction on Chess.com, so a humorous blog can be a breath of fresh air. And the people who have voted are more familiar with Lightning's blogs. Those are my thoughts on why he has more votes than you.
If you are right, I might as well quit blogging as well as chess
Apr 7, 2022
0
#133
Rodgy wrote:
i was obviously joking about it being removed lmao
“It's not, I literally have screenshot evidence of tweets.”
— @Rodgy, in response to my calling his post out as fake
Apr 7, 2022
0
#134
It was still April 1st when he posted that, you were ruining the joke and he either thought your post was a clever joke or you ruining the fun, but in either case, he decided to continue the joke. He added an April Fools disclaimer the next day.
Apr 7, 2022
0
#135
As I said, it was an obvious joke, and you really should let it go. There was no problem in the first place, and you are just creating drama over nothing.
ChessPawn921 wrote:
Rodgy wrote:
i was obviously joking about it being removed lmao
“It's not, I literally have screenshot evidence of tweets.”
— @Rodgy, in response to my calling his post out as fake
April 1st, I support my joke and claim that it is true as it is a day of pranks. April 2nd, I change the blog and edit it saying happy april fools and admit that it was a joke...
Apr 7, 2022
0
#137
Rodgy wrote:
ChessPawn921 wrote:
Rodgy wrote:
i was obviously joking about it being removed lmao
“It's not, I literally have screenshot evidence of tweets.”
— @Rodgy, in response to my calling his post out as fake
April 1st, I support my joke and claim that it is true as it is a day of pranks. April 2nd, I change the blog and edit it saying happy april fools and admit that it was a joke...
Exactly! Almost everyone enjoyed the joke, @ChessPawn21 is being upset for nothing.
Apr 7, 2022
0
#138
I can't see how someone can argue with someone with their basis being that an April Fools article that was clearly an April Fools article, and even admitted to being so by the author, is fake. It's technically true, but a 5-year-old should know that and it's not offending anyone. It's a waste of time to make that argument!
I not only find it hilarious, but also sad that one of our fellow human beings is getting pissed that I post a April fools blog and attacks me and shame me for posting false news. Not only have they said that I do not deserve top blogger for posting fake news, but they clearly are under assumptions rather than facts. If you would've known, the head of chess.com content specifically gave @Lightning and I permission to post a April Fool's blog... pftt, some people.
And what assumptions exactly am I under?
You think that I should not be top blogger since you were under the assumption that I was not given permission to post an April Fool's blog.