Announcement

Collapse
No announcement yet.

Guardian Application Feedback

Collapse
This topic is closed.
X
X
 
  • Filter
  • Time
  • Show
Clear All
new posts

  • #76
    Originally posted by Ohlid View Post
    The sophistry is vexing at this point. This entire blurb is nothing but post hoc and blatant appeals. Speculation uses no evidence. It cannot be upheld to any standard of legitimacy. There is no, “It’s possible that…” or, “I cannot think of another reason but this one…” — all speculative. There is no substantiation for any conjecture you posted. You are jumping to conclusions — that is the most fundamental explanation. There is nothing inherently wrong with speculation other than the context you are using it in; speculation cannot be used to form an argument. Speculation can attempt to be persuasive, but fundamentally, stripped of the sophistry, an argument based on speculation is void of any veracity.

    And c’mon — you cannot think of any other reason why we only got three new guardians instead of five. It is a convenient preface to pushing post hoc fallacies to the forefront of the mind. Under-qualified applicants is not the only possible idea; among many others that instantaneously surface in my thoughts include: a lack of hierarchical management infrastructure to train and be responsible for Guardians, a gradual implementation of new Guardians to be more thorough in training each, and problems exacerbated by the present problems in the real world.

    As aforesaid, this is exasperating. I have yet to find a convincing point in this thread that argues that status-quo would actually change with younger Guardians, and the conflation of observation and evidence do not make that any easier.
    I used that reason to justify less applicants because really, it’s the most plausible one, in my opinion. I’m not an Ubisoft employee. I have no idea of what’s happening whatsoever, and I have no way of knowing. But by using logic, I’m able to have a certain idea of what’s happening. I can’t be dead certain because, as I said, I have no way of knowing what’s happening in there, but I’ll go with what seems most likely to be happening. As I said, they handled 6 guardians just fine, so what’s stopping them from doing so again? More Guardians save them a lot of trouble, and the special situation happening right now in the entire world isn’t really a problem, since the work at Ubisoft seems to be almost entirely digital. They can do their jobs in their home and won’t have many problems. But even after this entire thread you might still think speculation won’t prove much, and that’s okay, everyone has their own opinions, but we can work around that. Speculations aside, I still have plenty of arguments why they should reduce the age requirement. I’ll save you some trouble and state one here. Younger people learn faster than older people. There are plenty of studies about this, but I’ll pick one on Columbia University’s virtual library (has a very good reputation). Here is the link to it. As I said, that would save a lot of trouble for Ubisoft and might even allow even more Guardians per application, since they can learn faster.

    Comment


    • #77
      Originally posted by John S. View Post
      I used that reason to justify less applicants because really, it’s the most plausible one, in my opinion. I’m not an Ubisoft employee. I have no idea of what’s happening whatsoever, and I have no way of knowing. But by using logic, I’m able to have a certain idea of what’s happening. I can’t be dead certain because, as I said, I have no way of knowing what’s happening in there, but I’ll go with what seems most likely to be happening. As I said, they handled 6 guardians just fine, so what’s stopping them from doing so again? More Guardians save them a lot of trouble, and the special situation happening right now in the entire world isn’t really a problem, since the work at Ubisoft seems to be almost entirely digital. They can do their jobs in their home and won’t have many problems. But even after this entire thread you might still think speculation won’t prove much, and that’s okay, everyone has their own opinions, but we can work around that. Speculations aside, I still have plenty of arguments why they should reduce the age requirement. I’ll save you some trouble and state one here. Younger people learn faster than older people. There are plenty of studies about this, but I’ll pick one on Columbia University’s virtual library (has a very good reputation). Here is the link to it. As I said, that would save a lot of trouble for Ubisoft and might even allow even more Guardians per application, since they can learn faster.
      Alright man whatever “14/15 year olds learn faster sure” but also 14/15 year olds are in also something called “puberty” and “Immaturity” which is at the max when you’re 14/15. All you say is “oh they learn faster and more candidates” when was even learning or needing more candidates a problem? what do they even need to learn faster?? Like You already saw what the answer was in Your last thread, everyone said no to it, Nekorei even was there. As You can see they didn’t change. Then what are You even on about?

      If they ever decide to stoop so low and lower the age requirement to 14 and 15 then I’m quitting this game honestly. Last thing I want would be a 14 or 15 year old to moderate a game like this.

      Can you also not repeat the same thing you say, you just constantly reply to every comment that disagree with you with “Oh they’ll learn faster though” and “more candidates” Bro I can name 100x more better things of a 16+ year old then a 14/15 year old. I can even compare them if You want and 16+ year olds will be far beyond 14/15 in every aspect

      I’m also gonna quote my good buddy here SumoTravis30 on what he had said:
      *If you're a <14-15 year old whining about the Guardian Requirement being at 16 years old, especially if it's using no/redundant/invalid arguments, they're just making a good reason why the requirement is there in the first place.*
      Contact me on Discord: Recheh#0001
      Console Growtopia Discord Server
      https://discord.gg/TkGayKu

      Comment


      • #78
        My question got completely ignored:

        Remember they said there would be 5 Guardians per application
        Where did they say this?

        However, at what age do you consider a full head on adult?

        Younger people learn faster than older people.
        You can NOT say that 13 is much younger than 16. 16 is still too young. It's not even close to adulthood. Even then, I think we should up the age requirement for applying.

        I am pretty sure the article provides evidence for teens in general, to adults being 30.
        Learn to love yourself, before you love others.
        Instagram: @gt.mera
        Discord: //#6666

        Comment


        • #79
          man at this point, op should just accept that it shouldn't lowered. Every said point had been countered and there's honestly no point lowering it. They added less guardians this time, and so what? there was no applications opened during the time being too, you can't just assume they're running out of people to promote l o l
          IGN : Liquify

          support my wholesome Axolotl thread!

          Comment


          • #80
            Originally posted by Liquify View Post
            man at this point, op should just accept that it shouldn't lowered. Every said point had been countered and there's honestly no point lowering it. They added less guardians this time, and so what? there was no applications opened during the time being too, you can't just assume they're running out of people to promote l o l
            Do you not understand, Liquify? They only added 3 Guardians this time! Based on other's speculation, I can conclude that there isn't any worthy guardians aged at 16+!
            Suggestions:

            Maximum Purchase personal setting

            Suggestion box with many items

            Comment


            • #81
              While we appreciate the enthusiasm you have towards helping the community, that won't change our outlook on the age requirement for Guardianship. We don't currently have any plans to lower the age requirement in any capacity, and it's incredibly unlikely that we ever will. The requirement exists for a number of reasons.

              To clarify: us picking 3 Guardians this wave doesn't at all mean we're running out of candidates and doesn't prove anything. We're happy with the pace we're choosing and training up Guardians.

              Closing thread.
              Contact me on Discord: Misthios#3697.

              Follow me on Instagram: misthios.gt

              Comment

              Working...
              X