I Hit It With My Axe: Episode Seven: No Defense Against Blankets

[TazTheTerrible]

Your supposedly good natured intention is first of all not an excuse. Plenty of bad things are done with good or at least not particularly bad intentions. Incidentally, please, do point out to me how I am a hypocrite.

Secondly, if their chosen profession really didn't matter to you, you wouldn't make such a big deal about a perfectly reasonable tagline. "It's DnD with strippers and porn stars" because that happens to be their most specific and recognizable common trait.

Let's play the switch around game. Imagine someone made a show with the cast of Firefly. Would you seriously cry in outrage at the pandering to the fandom of Firefly? Would you be upset that these people didn't actually act like their Firefly characters when it was marketed clearly as "the cast of Firelfly playing DnD" and not "A DnD episode of Firefly"? Would you make a statement as patently ridiculous as "if this were DnD with the cast of firefly, someone would be getting shot at five minutes in and Mal would make some jokes about it"?

Would you honestly berate the people making it for marketing as "the cast from Firefly playing DnD", claiming that it didn't matter who these people are in real life, only their characters matter?

Well maybe you would. These are big internets and there's a lot of strange people on them.

But yeah, I would see a show marketed as "The Firefly cast playing DnD." Because I like those people and I'd be interested to see them in a situation I hadn't seen them in before and watch their social interactions and quirks. Similarly I was interested to see how this group of adult entertainers would act, playing DnD with friends from (mostly) similar lines of work. I wasn't familiar with any of them before. I imagine if I had been that would've been an additional draw, and there's nothing wrong with that.

Why do you act as if there is? Elaborate to me exactly what is wrong with the premise of this series.

Oh, almost forgot. Did you happen to actually ask all of them wether or not they consider themselves not to be porn stars when not on the job? Most people who have a job I know (police officer, scientist, businessman/woman,...) would call themselves that even when not under hours, but either way it seems like their decission to make, not yours to make for them wouldn't you say?

By the by, yes, I know you're a troll. I imagine most people on this thread do. Relax, you don't have to tell me not to feed the trolls. I just think it's fun to do so from time to time.

 

[chepenoyo]

Way to post cherry-picked data that isn't what was being debated, BloodySoldier.

Here's the actual comment count, as of this moment:
Ep1: 467
Ep2: 298
Ep3: 137
Ep4: 108
Ep5: 118
Ep6: 77
Ep7: 127

 

[Bloodysoldier]

Way to post cherry-picked data that isn't what was being debated, BloodySoldier.

Here's the actual comment count, as of this moment:
Ep1: 467
Ep2: 298
Ep3: 137
Ep4: 108
Ep5: 118
Ep6: 77
Ep7: 127

That is a total spanning more than one day, that is the incorrect way of doing it. But even with the full total it still proves me right. Can you read it says one day. Which Means one day of comments. One day of comments is all you need because it shows how popular the episode was. After that it is irrelevant, anyone should be able to get that.

Your supposedly good natured intention is first of all not an excuse. Plenty of bad things are done with good or at least not particularly bad intentions. Incidentally, please, do point out to me how I am a hypocrite.

To begin with I am not good natured. Your a hypocrite because you say one thing and do another. You say it is wrong for me to point out that we should not use they're professions to catch viewers eyes, and say to me that I am dehumanizing them because I stated what a large percent of people think when they see that tag line. Then go off flaunting they're professions and saying well the porn stars and strippers are just like anyone else. Why do you not call them by they're names? Instead of by what they do for a living. I do not use my neighbors job title as his name. "Hey cop, how is the wife" I call him by his name "hey eric, how is the wife". And when I do use someones job title it is usually followed by they're name.

Secondly, if their chosen profession really didn't matter to you, you wouldn't make such a big deal about a perfectly reasonable tagline. "It's DnD with strippers and porn stars" because that happens to be their most specific and recognizable common trait.

Let's play the switch around game. Imagine someone made a show with the cast of Firefly. Would you seriously cry in outrage at the pandering to the fandom of Firefly? Would you be upset that these people didn't actually act like their Firefly characters when it was marketed clearly as "the cast of Firelfly playing DnD" and not "A DnD episode of Firefly"? Would you make a statement as patently ridiculous as "if this were DnD with the cast of firefly, someone would be getting shot at five minutes in and Mal would make some jokes about it"?

Would you honestly berate the people making it for marketing as "the cast from Firefly playing DnD", claiming that it didn't matter who these people are in real life, only their characters matter?

Well if you did not throw the word cast around then these three paragraphs would not be a waste of time. What you should of said members of firefly instead of cast, because a cast is a group of actors who play the characters not the characters them selves. So if you would of said the members of firefly then you would of had something there.

Well maybe you would. These are big internets and there's a lot of strange people on them.

But yeah, I would see a show marketed as "The Firefly cast playing DnD." Because I like those people and I'd be interested to see them in a situation I hadn't seen them in before and watch their social interactions and quirks. Similarly I was interested to see how this group of adult entertainers would act, playing DnD with friends from (mostly) similar lines of work. I wasn't familiar with any of them before. I imagine if I had been that would've been an additional draw, and there's nothing wrong with that.

o.o these are big internets? Okay jim bob, but yes the internet is full of strange people but so is life. That is what being normal would be. Would I watch the cast of firefly play? Yes but if I had to choose monks over the cast of firefly, I would have to go with the monks.

Why do you act as if there is? Elaborate to me exactly what is wrong with the premise of this series.

The way it is presented is what is wrong with it, a coworker asked if I saw this series and he said, and I quote. "What the hell is up with the escapist, they think because I am a nerd I want to watch whores play DnD and get off to seeing TnA. They can screw off..." Then it gets vivid with colorful language and he rants how he is not like that he has a wife and kids and blah blah blah. I just sat there starring at him like this. o.o

Oh, almost forgot. Did you happen to actually ask all of them wether or not they consider themselves not to be porn stars when not on the job? Most people who have a job I know (police officer, scientist, businessman/woman,...) would call themselves that even when not under hours, but either way it seems like their decission to make, not yours to make for them wouldn't you say?

Would you call a whore a whore to her face, no. Would you call a cop a pig in front of his face then follow it by spitting on the ground, I think not. But sure we can ask them. (This question is only for the porn stars) Girls/Guys would you prefer to be called a man or women who gets paid for sex or by your name character or other wise? (for hair dressers only) Would you prefer to be called cute or adorable? The cute goth girl with the sneaking fetish is the hair dresser right?

There it is asked.

By the by, yes, I know you're a troll. I imagine most people on this thread do. Relax, you don't have to tell me not to feed the trolls. I just think it's fun to do so from time to time.

By definition you are a troll, you know that right? And I prefer the term shark, most trolls spit out vile.

 

[chepenoyo]

Nice of you to stick my name on those quotes for things I didn't say, there.

 

[Bloodysoldier]

Nice of you to stick my name on those quotes for things I didn't say, there.

Yeah I just caught that. That is what happens when you have the same image as someone else. sorry about the mix up.

 

[chepenoyo]

Right, now that we have that out of the way

Just because the data agrees with the point you want to make if you squint at it just so does not make that "the right way to do it". That's what's known as cherry picking data. As I pointed out before. And your response was to ask if I could read.

If you drop the first two episodes as outliers - a reasonable step since many new people are going to tune into the show when it first airs to see what it's about - now we're seeing a more stable audience - then you see a nearly constant graph. It looks like this:

It falls and rises and falls and rises and falls and rises and ends up at about the same place it started. I think you were trying to argue that falling comment count indicated the show shedding viewers, a questionable premise already. On top of that, the data doesn't support your thesis.

All that aside, why be such a boor about your complaints? So the show isn't what you want it to be. When a club in your town, one that you frequent, puts on a weekly event that doesn't highlight the things you like about the club, do you show up every week just to tell everyone how much you think it sucks and how you could do better?

I get that you actually see things to like in the show, and you want it to be even better. But what even better is is a matter of taste, and you're being one hell of a wet blanket for those of us who enjoy it as it is. I'm also pretty sure that if you want to get your way, the way to go about it doesn't include pissing off the people who have the power to enact the changes you suggest. And being the guy who shows up week after week and bitches endlessly can't be making you very popular with Satine or Frankie or any of the other show participants who've popped their head in here so far.

 

[chepenoyo]

*facepalm*

It's like whack-a-mole in here. The airheads? Really? Did the girls do anything to deserve that?

 

[Gildan Bladeborn]

I honestly don't understand the level of vitriol this show seems to generate - granted, the editing at times seems a bit spastic, and the first episode was kind of boring because nothing had really happened in the game yet, but everything else? It's people playing D&D! Honestly, I get the impression all the complainers expected something radically different, perhaps something like sketch comedy or whatnot.

But the Escapist already has quite a lot of that, and listening to/watching people play D&D is funny all by itself - I derive quite a bit of merriment from the knowledge that this group apparently has the same ratio of plans involving setting things on fire that my own group does - truly, some qualities are universal.

Zack is certainly a lot nicer to you than my DM is to our group, he delights in telling us how terrible we are whenever we give him a reason to (which is often, because we are terrible). I'm possibly the worst paladin ever, whee!

Spoiler: Post full of awesome goes here.

I've been an avid fan of all the podcasts WoTC has been putting out surrounding D&D, first with the guys from Penny Arcade (plus Scott Kurtz and Wil Wheaton) and then the Robot Chicken videos. I've also read Zak's blog before. I love playing D&D, and I love watching people play it, now that I can't, due to my current workload. (Yaaay, college!) That said, I think the show could benefit from a few things (don't worry, there's some good news at the end):

First, slowing down on the jump cuts, or at least giving us a sense of time passing. One of the things I really enjoyed about the WoTC 'casts was that they represented an entire play session, which gave a nice sense of narrative continuity. I'd be interested to see what an informative subtitle, such as "two rounds later" would do to help that. One of the most important things to me when I play or DM is the flow of the game?how it progresses over time. There's a very organic process at play, and while I understand the need to edit down a play session to get the most time for the juicy bits, I would appreciate knowing how y'all got from point A to point B, rather than just knowing you made it there.

Second, understanding the rules elements at play here would also be nice. I'm not asking for an exhaustive review, but there are some of us who didn't grow up playing AD&D, and I know that the system Zak's running is a hybrid of both AD&D and 3rd Ed. So, from my point of view, as a player, I'd love to see some of the behind-the-scenes details so that it's possible to have a rudimentary understanding of what people are rolling for.

Finally, I'd love to hear more from the PCs. When Kimberly talked about how much she enjoyed rolling a crit on that elf in episode 6, it was fantastically enjoyable, because it reminded me of my first crit ever, and how much fun that was. Having the players share moments like that with the camera is both compelling and adds a sense of personal connection to game events. As a DM, I know that every person plays differently, and values different things. I'd rather get a taste of who everyone is as a player than what plays they make.

Now, for some praise: this episode was definitely better than some of its predecessors, and the quality of the show in general has improved since episode 1. Whoever is doing all the editing really seems to be catching his or her stride. Also, as some others have mentioned, this definitely brings me back to all the time I've spent around the table, with intra-party squabbling and the usual tomfoolery regarding bad die rolls. Y'all get an A for nostalgia. There's also a great cast sitting around the table, with a bunch of awesome personalities, all of whom seem to be genuinely enjoying themselves, and that's what D&D is all about: people coming together, having fun, and kicking some monster ass.

I guess at the end of the day, the only question that matters is: "Will I watch this again?" My answer: maybe. It's not something like LRR or ZP that I have a physical and psychological compulsion to watch every week, but it's enjoyable. If you improve the show, I'm sure it'll turn into destination viewing for me.

I have to say you make some very good points and your suggestions, if implemented, would go a long way towards making this shift from something I find amusing but don't feel compelled to watch the moment it airs to one of my "ooh, a new [insert video series name here] is out today, must watch it!" favorites. Those Penny Arcade podcasts were really damn funny and informative - I learned just about everything I know about 4th Edition rules from listening to them, and I apparently have a better grasp on the rules now than the other guys in my group who actually own those sourcebooks, heh.

 

[TazTheTerrible]

To begin with I am not good natured. Your a hypocrite because you say one thing and do another. You say it is wrong for me to point out that we should not use they're professions to catch viewers eyes, and say to me that I am dehumanizing them because I stated what a large percent of people think when they see that tag line. Then go off flaunting they're professions and saying well the porn stars and strippers are just like anyone else. Why do you not call them by they're names? Instead of by what they do for a living. I do not use my neighbors job title as his name. "Hey cop, how is the wife" I call him by his name "hey eric, how is the wife". And when I do use someones job title it is usually followed by they're name.

I do use their names when I want to refer to them individually. When I want to refer to them as a group, I'll call them the cast of "I hit it with my axe". When the debate is about them being adult entertainers, I don't see what's wrong with saying *that* they are adult entertainers. And where did I actually say it was bad to use their professions to catch viewers? It's a perfectly reasonable way to pique interest. What is not reasonable on your part is automatically expecting sex from them. You seem unable to make that separation though.

Will I call them "hey porn star" when addressing them? Of course not. But I won't pretend that they aren't either, just like I won't tell my brother he's not an engineer when he isn't working on his studies. Of course he still is, don't be ridiculous.

Well if you did not throw the word cast around then these three paragraphs would not be a waste of time. What you should of said members of firefly instead of cast, because a cast is a group of actors who play the characters not the characters them selves. So if you would of said the members of firefly then you would of had something there.

... that was rather my point. They wouldn't be the characters, they'd be the people. Just like Satine, Sasha, Mandy and Kimberly are people, not their roles in some porn flick. In the same way, it's silly and objectifying to expect a porn movie, just because several of the people in it have starred in porn. This is the Escapist and this wasn't marketed as porn, it was marketed as DnD, played by strippers and porn stars. There is a very important difference there.

I'll grant you, many people wouldn't immediately make that distinction, but it's still a prejudice. Just because a whole bunch of people share it doesn't stop it being a prejudice.

Why do you act as if there is? Elaborate to me exactly what is wrong with the premise of this series.

The way it is presented is what is wrong with it, a coworker asked if I saw this series and he said, and I quote. "What the hell is up with the escapist, they think because I am a nerd I want to watch whores play DnD and get off to seeing TnA. They can screw off..." Then it gets vivid with colorful language and he rants how he is not like that he has a wife and kids and blah blah blah. I just sat there starring at him like this. o.o

And that makes it their fault obviously . For the record, that was sarcasm. Yes, I can imagine that sort of a reaction to the series, but that doesn't make the reaction the correct one and the series at fault.

Your coworker and most people who have this reaction make the implicit assumption that the point of this series is to enthrall them sexually and that this is some sort of insult towards them. They are making the implicit assumption that, because the people starring in it are adult entertainers, this must carry over into everything they do. The assumption that they can't be involved in something that doesn't directly have to do with sex.

And when the evidence of this series tells you otherwise the reaction is "Well then they aren't porn stars when they're not starring in porn, and these people shouldn't have been telling us that they were."

snip

Would you call a whore a whore to her face, no. Would you call a cop a pig in front of his face then follow it by spitting on the ground, I think not. But sure we can ask them. (This question is only for the porn stars) Girls/Guys would you prefer to be called a man or women who gets paid for sex or by your name character or other wise? (for hair dressers only) Would you prefer to be called cute or adorable? The cute goth girl with the sneaking fetish is the hair dresser right?

There it is asked.

Much along the same lines as the previous paragraph, again the assumption that porn is shameful or bad or something. No, I wouldn't call a cop a pig, to his face or otherwise. I would call a prostitute a prostitute or whatever term she prefered. I'd call a cop a cop to his face. I wouldn't greet them with "hey cop", but I wouldn't dance around the fact that they were, in fact, a cop.

I'd call the people in this series by their name when talking to them, and I wouldn't dance around the fact that they are strippers and porn stars. I imagine if they were at all embarassed about this fact, they wouldn't have put it in the tagline and mentioned it repeatedly in the very first episode.

 

[GuiltBlade]

Having not watched this since its 2nd showing I was surprised to see that it has, indeed, got better.
But not much, editing isn't as awful but it's merely atrocious at best now.

And at least people aren't complaining about how bored they are in it, although that seems to be because they salved their disinterest with alcohol.
Still have next to no idea what's happening, moments in the game which could potentially be hilarious are cut down to mere seconds while moments where the cameraman was drooling into someone's breasts are left at full length.

Editing, pacing, narrative, comedy. These are things it could contain, please forward this to the producers desk along with the other hundred or so similar comments made by all the other people who require more than a premise to be entertained.

I shall probably watch episode 14 if it ever gets that far and then compare notes.

 

[Jenx]

*sigh* I'll repeat this again, hopefully someone will notice it this time - This show is not "bad", it's not "good" either. It's just boring. And it's not boring because it has girls or pornstars or whatever playing D&D. Do you know why it's boring?

Because it's boring to watch someone else play D&D! Yeah! I dunno about you guys, but I'd prefer to go get a group, sit down and play then sit and watch or listen to someone else playing.

So far the only such gaming podcast/show I've kind of liked were the Penny Arcade ones, and that was mostly for the drawings that came with it, most of the podcast was as boring to listen to as this show is to watch.

 

[Kojiro ftt]

I dig it. Keep it coming.

 

[tamerman]

another awsome episode ;P

 

[Slycne]

Way to post cherry-picked data that isn't what was being debated, BloodySoldier.

Here's the actual comment count, as of this moment:
Ep1: 467
Ep2: 298
Ep3: 137
Ep4: 108
Ep5: 118
Ep6: 77
Ep7: 127

Something to keep in mind with regards to this, number of comments and actual traffic share little correlation. We have episodes of series here with up to 3 times the normal amount of comments, but that episode can still have far less actually page views than another piece of content in the same series.

 

[chepenoyo]

True that.

 

[Bloodysoldier]

To begin with I am not good natured. Your a hypocrite because you say one thing and do another. You say it is wrong for me to point out that we should not use they're professions to catch viewers eyes, and say to me that I am dehumanizing them because I stated what a large percent of people think when they see that tag line. Then go off flaunting they're professions and saying well the porn stars and strippers are just like anyone else. Why do you not call them by they're names? Instead of by what they do for a living. I do not use my neighbors job title as his name. "Hey cop, how is the wife" I call him by his name "hey eric, how is the wife". And when I do use someones job title it is usually followed by they're name.

What is not reasonable on your part is automatically expecting sex from them. You seem unable to make that separation though.

Will I call them "hey porn star" when addressing them? Of course not. But I won't pretend that they aren't either, just like I won't tell my brother he's not an engineer when he isn't working on his studies. Of course he still is, don't be ridiculous.

How Does that work logically? You should stop reading out of context because this just came full circle once again. You need to open you eyes more and stop reading line by line, I was using that as an opening, as a way to show how that tag line comes along to most of the norm. Yet you still come back around with this narrow minded view and assuming the wrong thing.

By that logic then the crazy guy saying he is god must really be god. Using job titles to help you at humanizing them in your point of view. But it more dehumanizing. There are far better things to use than just they're job titles. And I thought Satine is a artist now and is no longer an 'adult entertainers'? So would it not be artist, stripper, a hair dresser, and a super cute gothic girl with the sneaking fetish.

Well if you did not throw the word cast around then these three paragraphs would not be a waste of time. What you should of said members of firefly instead of cast, because a cast is a group of actors who play the characters not the characters them selves. So if you would of said the members of firefly then you would of had something there.

... that was rather my point. They wouldn't be the characters, they'd be the people. Just like Satine, Sasha, Mandy and Kimberly are people, not their roles in some porn flick. In the same way, it's silly and objectifying to expect a porn movie, just because several of the people in it have starred in porn. This is the Escapist and this wasn't marketed as porn, it was marketed as DnD, played by strippers and porn stars. There is a very important difference there.

I'll grant you, many people wouldn't immediately make that distinction, but it's still a prejudice. Just because a whole bunch of people share it doesn't stop it being a prejudice.

^ My above statement should of clarified why I used that as an opening.

Why do you act as if there is? Elaborate to me exactly what is wrong with the premise of this series.

The way it is presented is what is wrong with it, a coworker asked if I saw this series and he said, and I quote. "What the hell is up with the escapist, they think because I am a nerd I want to watch whores play DnD and get off to seeing TnA. They can screw off..." Then it gets vivid with colorful language and he rants how he is not like that he has a wife and kids and blah blah blah. I just sat there starring at him like this. o.o

And that makes it their fault obviously . For the record, that was sarcasm. Yes, I can imagine that sort of a reaction to the series, but that doesn't make the reaction the correct one and the series at fault.

Your coworker and most people who have this reaction make the implicit assumption that the point of this series is to enthrall them sexually and that this is some sort of insult towards them. They are making the implicit assumption that, because the people starring in it are adult entertainers, this must carry over into everything they do. The assumption that they can't be involved in something that doesn't directly have to do with sex.

And when the evidence of this series tells you otherwise the reaction is "Well then they aren't porn stars when they're not starring in porn, and these people shouldn't have been telling us that they were."

In a business since its a great way for cheap marketing but its cheap marketing, but most of the good indie videos/movies have done well without such cheap marketing tools.
But this series does not need such tools.

Much along the same lines as the previous paragraph, again the assumption that porn is shameful or bad or something.

And again refer to my previous statement.

I'd call the people in this series by their name when talking to them, and I wouldn't dance around the fact that they are strippers and porn stars. I imagine if they were at all embarassed about this fact, they wouldn't have put it in the tagline and mentioned it repeatedly in the very first episode.

Satine is still a porn star? I thought budding artist, as she stated in previous comment. If they do not care if it is out there then why do they care if someone berates them on the internet about it. They do care, everyone cares about how they come off to people. You can say "I do not care what people think of me!" But in the end of the day there is that nibbling Q-bert in the back of your mind going. "I hope I did not come off as too much of an arse today!"

Right, now that we have that out of the way

Just because the data agrees with the point you want to make if you squint at it just so does not make that "the right way to do it". That's what's known as cherry picking data. As I pointed out before. And your response was to ask if I could read.

If you drop the first two episodes as outliers - a reasonable step since many new people are going to tune into the show when it first airs to see what it's about - now we're seeing a more stable audience - then you see a nearly constant graph. It looks like this:

It falls and rises and falls and rises and falls and rises and ends up at about the same place it started. I think you were trying to argue that falling comment count indicated the show shedding viewers, a questionable premise already. On top of that, the data doesn't support your thesis.

All that aside, why be such a boor about your complaints? So the show isn't what you want it to be. When a club in your town, one that you frequent, puts on a weekly event that doesn't highlight the things you like about the club, do you show up every week just to tell everyone how much you think it sucks and how you could do better?

I get that you actually see things to like in the show, and you want it to be even better. But what even better is is a matter of taste, and you're being one hell of a wet blanket for those of us who enjoy it as it is. I'm also pretty sure that if you want to get your way, the way to go about it doesn't include pissing off the people who have the power to enact the changes you suggest. And being the guy who shows up week after week and bitches endlessly can't be making you very popular with Satine or Frankie or any of the other show participants who've popped their head in here so far.

I keep reading complaint, so by my understanding you just jumped into a middle of a conversation with out first figureing out where or how it originated. So I will help you. It started when misslisa tryed to troll me but all she could troll was my random statement. which goes somewhere along the lines of ' yawn the comments get lower with each episode" which she responds with the total comment count of 3-6. Then I followed up with a correction. Which by total or by doing a day count my random comment still holds rellavence. understand chepenoyo?

I will also explain to you why geting a one day sample of comments is better.

Lets take any web video series that is older than three years and is very popular. By now they will have thousands of comments so if you took the total comments and say 'this series, first episode was widely popular when it came out, look at the total comment count. 5k comments oh wow'. So from your logic what this guy did it the correct way, by taking the total number at the time and without even an intelligent thought put behind it and used it to prove his statement right. That sir/madam is cherry picking data.

To say I went cherry picking data holds as much relevance as saying a empty sack of potatoes is full. Either way you put it total or by using the comments on the first day of release. would still prove my statement right and misslisa's wrong. As in real life everything goes up and down or down and up and it will continue. Help yourself out do not jump into a conversation and turn it into a trivial debate when in the end what was a correct statement is still a correct statement.



P.S.
O3O Everyone at my tabletop night has finally convinced me to buy my first at-43 box. I got those damn dirty apes. So no more borrowing units!

-cough- okay I am still borrowing units mostly the ones that I have to buy in separate packs. But I am now a proud owned. Instead of a proud cheap borrower.

 

[Bloodysoldier]

Sorry for the triple post internet bugged on me

 

[Bloodysoldier]

sorry for the triple post.

 

[MissLisa]

It started when misslisa tryed to troll me but all she could troll was my random statement. which goes somewhere along the lines of ' yawn the comments get lower with each episode" which she responds with the total comment count of 3-6. Then I followed up with a correction. Which by total or by doing a day count my random comment still holds rellavence.

I didn't troll you, I fact-checked you.

I put comments for 3-7 NOT 3-6(you made another factual error) and i did only those because I only NEEDED those to prove your statement inaccurate. The comments aren't getting less and less and not even the first day comments are getting less and less.

 

[Bloodysoldier]

It started when misslisa tryed to troll me but all she could troll was my random statement. which goes somewhere along the lines of ' yawn the comments get lower with each episode" which she responds with the total comment count of 3-6. Then I followed up with a correction. Which by total or by doing a day count my random comment still holds rellavence.

I didn't troll you, I fact-checked you.

I put comments for 3-7 NOT 3-6(you made another factual error) and i did only those because I only NEEDED those to prove your statement inaccurate. The comments aren't getting less and less and not even the first day comments are getting less and less.

You still can not read can you?

As in real life everything goes up and down or down and up and it will continue.

Marketing, relationships, emotions, ect. Everything has its ups and downs, from the first ep. the comments have been going down at a steady rate and just now they are going up, then they will climb then they will fall that is the way it shall be. Do you deny this? Because by your logic nothing in life has its ups and downs.

What I say is as accurate as my personal beacon locator/gps. Many things follow this pattern 'Many' things.