What a complete load of overblown rubbish.
I have said it wasn't created for the purpose.
I have also recognised answers could appear in the blog.
Don't put words in my mouth.
Who needs to do that when you absolutely said this:
Well if you believe that the Gran Turismo Pit Stop blog was created to answer questions from GTplanet, then you have an over-inflated sense of self worth.
And said it in response to someone pointing out that the Pit Stop blog was started (and
announced) in part to answer Q&A questions?
I've made a handful of comments at best directly on this topic regarding whether the blog was created to answer GTP question.
Six posts on a topic seems awfully dedicated to something to just be casual interest in setting the record straight. That's if you don't want to consider this current bit or the first time to be directly about the Q&A part even though the argument itself is/was very similar.
Oddly, but not surprisingly, you jumped down my throat last time and said I was "repeating himself in increasingly pretentious ways",
Which you've amusingly done
again.
to which I had to remind you
Remind me of what? Even in that post you attempted to weasel out of admitting anything you said was wrong.
Couple examples:
Yes, you did. You did so multiple times towards multiple members, even when it was made sure to state that the Q&A function of the blog was only a
part of it. I quoted you doing so above.
And before we even leave the sentence:
been suggested that some answers may appear on the blog.
It wasn't a "suggestion." There was no misinterpretation on anyone's part but your own. It was explicitly stated by Jordan that a major function of the Pit Stop blog was to answer Q&A questions. And we now know that the entire idea was from someone official, be it PD or Sony, so we also know (assuming the first post being a Q&A answer wasn't enough of a tipoff already) that the information Jordan gave was accurate when the program was announced.
That was early October and I've hardly, if at all, posted in this thread since.
And yet here you are broaching largely the same topic again unprompted.
So to suggest I'm a hypocritical white knight throwing my non-existent weight around on some crusade is so exaggerated it's laughable.
Let's examine each part to see how true that is:
This one doesn't even require me to look for posts:
Don't put words in my mouth.
He said after a half dozen posts arguing against a concept ("The blog was only ever made to answer questions") that none of the people you were arguing with actually seemed to say.
Going out of your way to defend PD against something they said would be the case using some truly amazing selective interpretation of other things that they said and straight up misrepresentation of what people are arguing against you have said.
throwing my non-existent weight around
Acting as if your interpretation of PD's statements for the blog's use are more valid than anyone else's; including Jordan (who was undoubtedly told directly how the blog would be used since we now know that the entire Q&A was Sony or PD's idea), everyone who took Jordan's comments at face value and PD's themselves considering their actions regarding the blog in its early days.
22 posts in this thread. 13 of those is dictating that you (and seemingly you alone) hold the one true idea for what the blog was about as stated by the excerpt in the OP, to the extent of going out of your way after not talking about it since "early October" to essentially bring it up again.
So where is the exaggeration, pray tell? What part is "overblown rubbish"? The site's search feature is much more powerful since the move to new forum hardware. This stuff isn't hard to look up.
granturismo.com is the place for official news.
End of story.
Except all those times where it isn't. Sony doesn't always treat it as the place for official news since they have/had a habit of just talking directly with gaming websites instead and not putting the information released on the Gran Turismo website. Kaz certainly doesn't treat it as the place for official news, since the interviews he gives which often say more about the games than any press release almost never appear on the Gran Turismo website. And not all of the official news that is on the site is actually accurate because the site has in the past gone long stretches without any updates at all. No amount of italics on your part changes any of that.
End of story.
Not that it matters:
To suggest otherwise is complete nonsense.
Good thing I didn't suggest otherwise, even though it's wrong anyway. I simply stated that the Sony-run website that has in the past fallen hard on the side of not actually keeping track of what PD has done with their games is not in any way a direct link to PD like you were implying it to be.
The other sites are also 'direct-ish links' and whether you personally find them valuable or not simply isn't the point.
That's convenient, isn't it? So why is it that a bunch of press releases prepared by Sony (since we know from Famine that Sony is the one who does the PR legwork for the series) posted on Facebook and Twitter are as much of a direct line to PD as the blog that PD themselves run?
FYI, the link to the original post is included in the speech bubble.
A totally valid comment considering it was 3 months since the poll had started.
5 months since you broached the subject the first time.
3 months since you broached the subject last time. You yourself implied that you were arguing against the opinions of many that had already apparently been expressed unchecked for a long time.
So what's the problem with the comparison?
Why would you re-quote something out of context from an entirely different thread from months ago?
Because it was fairly amusing when contrasted with your behavior in this thread. Even the previous 3 sentences about obvious agendas fit very well with the nonsense you've been throwing around in this thread, but the fact that you said the word "poll" kept me from quoting that as well.
The context is actually quite similar indeed if you were capable of any introspection whatsoever:
Do you actually hoard away old quotes of people you like to target?
Nope. But I have a good enough memory to recall a post where you shouted down someone for repeatedly going against the loudest opinion because most people disagreed with him
and notice that over half of your posts in this thread have been attempting to shout down the loudest opinion because you disagree with it. Or, more to the point, the twisted strawman that you keep pretending the loudest opinion is.
Anyway...
Care to explain how it's false? There was never a official statement made confirming that the blog would solely be used for answering the questions from the Q&A forum.
Because the blog solely being used to answer Q&A questions was rarely, if ever, a thing people actually claimed to be the case. People complained a lot when the period after the sound question was answered devolved into "Kaz and his wacky Nurburgring adventures", and there was some heehawing about whether or not that stuff fit as being related to GT. And people certainly expressed increased exasperation that more and more time had passed without any Q&A material and that posts were being made that had nothing to do with the Q&A.
Which was a perfectly fair (if increasingly redundant) response to new blog posts since no matter how Aussie_HSV or anyone else tries to spin it answering Q&A questions
was a specifically stated purpose of the blog; but that's an altogether different thing from mass groups of people claiming anything like "the blog was made solely to answer Q&A questions." In fact, looking it over every the subject was broached people arguing that it was a reason the blog was started people went out of their way to state that it was only
a reason. Not the sole defining reason.
Going all the way back in July people were still making sure to say that they expected Q&A answers
in addition to the "fluff" stuff.
It's the same thing regarding this new blog post. People never expected that the blog was going to become the one true outlet for everything GT, but that doesn't stop people from acting like that is what the complaints have been about all along.
Even when people deliberately avoided claiming that they felt that answering questions was the sole reason the blog was created:
The person who owns the GT fansite in semi frequent contact with Kaz who stated in no uncertain terms that one of the purposes of the blog (and the very first thing done with it, in fact) was to answer the fan questions PD promised to answer?
everybody knows "He didnt create pit stop just to answer questions", nobody is "expecting blog posts only about such".
using your words again, you "seem to not get" that pitstop, along with the casual posts, was and is intended to be used to answer the questions that kaz asked us to make with the intention to answer at pitstop. since there arent any answers in there yet, some of us find this answering slow pace too slow.
Posts like this were still thrown around in response:
Well if you believe that the Gran Turismo Pit Stop blog was created to answer questions from GTplanet, then you have an over-inflated sense of self worth.
Thats not what the blog's creation is for and neither does it say such. You think the q/a isnt working well? Is it because you have in your mind that the blog was created for such a reason? Because its not.
tl;dr: Anyone who says that the blog's only purpose was to answer Q&A questions is wrong, but I can't think of anyone saying that in the first place to argue against. Anyone who says that the blog wasn't intended to answer Q&A questions is also wrong, and I can think of several people who
did say that.
