Why aren't there any negative reviews on Ellusionist?

[trashmanf]

if you go to ellusionist forums, right now, you can see quite a few negative reviews. such as "I think the black ghosts don't look as good as shadow masters". those people didn't get banned...

... but that brings up another point, it's really asinine to base an entire review on "well I didn't think these cards looked good". whats important is their faro, finish, stock, cut, etc, not your personal opinion about how it looks!

 

[mattjones]

It is against the rules to talk about other magic sites. I won't lie, but it is true. Try typing "Penguin Magic" in a post and it will come out as "******* *****" (all stars). That is NOT a rumor because I can confirm it as it's happened to me.

Also, ELLUSIONIST AND THEORY 11 ARE SIMILAR IN SO MANY WAYS IT'S RIDICULOUS!!! However, some people still feel the need to make Theory 11 look like a god company and Ellusionist look like dirt. Please people....

Mods.... close the thread. Honestly close all threads having to do with bashing Ellusionist because it is plainly just immature. If some immature 12 year olds don't wish to purchase from E for reasons that don't make sense, then let them.

Any argument against E can be sent to me in a PM and I will gladly tell you why you SHOULD in fact purchase something from E if you like it. Thank you.

-Doug

-EDIT-
Oh, and I have to agree that I like Theory 11 as reviews can be posted of ANY magic product. Not just their own. Also, E locks and/or deletes half the threads created it frustrates me.

Ok... Just a thought:
What if Theory 11 is just a spawn of Ellusionist?
What if Ellusionist just bought the competition by making Theory 11?

.... Wouldn't that be a twist?

 

[Deleted member 2755]

Ok... Just a thought:
What if Theory 11 is just a spawn of Ellusionist?
What if Ellusionist just bought the competition by making Theory 11?

.... Wouldn't that be a twist?

Magic is just one whole big conspiracy!

-Doug

 

[..:Z:..]

Alright, I'll call your bluff.

Who published the review, what was the product, and when?

http://www.elusionist.com/forums/showthread.php?t=78776&highlight=black+ghost+deck+review

We just expect them to eloquent and level-headed. Most of the people who write negative reviews of Ellusionist products either can't do that, or they go to another site to do it where they know fewer people will attempt to ask questions and argue.

Well, this is my favorite example. You see, pokerplayer269 was doing the former (using eloqence and acting level-headed) and not the ladder (going spamming at T11), SteerPike. I certainly didn't detect any animosity in his review (but then again, that's stupid me).

Yet, he get's a half-baked response from such an esteemed elite (is he?) like this:

The Black Ghost deck is printed on the exact same stock as the other E decks.

This thread is stupid... reading it makes me feel like I'm in high school again.

You know, Goudinov, your right. This does remind me of high school.

..:Z:..

If we can, let's keep this civil please, Steerpike:

[Edit by Moderator: Please refrain from attacking other members.]

Thank You.

 

[Brad Henderson]

When does all this take place exactly? I hear all these stories and rumors, but none of these accusations were part of the basic training when I was appointed a moderator.

So either people are overreacting, lying, or my training into becoming a corporate Nazi drone was handled ineptly.

Does it have to be any of these three? It seems that you assume that because YOU have not deleted critical comments that it has not happened. It seems that you assume that because YOU were not trained to delete critical comments, that it has not happened.

It seems you are choosing to believe that the world exists only as your eyes allow you to see it. Is it not possible that there are machinations at foot higher up that have not reported to you?

I have no doubt that you personally do not remove posts and were not trained to remove posts. However, that does not mean that these deletions do not occur. I have shared some specific threads with you privately, however if you care to visit The Magic Woods you will quickly find many posts of people relating how their posts were removed.

It may not be an official E policy, but then again, lots of awful things have been supported and perpetrated by communities that weren't "official policies" - at least not stated and shared with those not at the top.

Having said that, it's their board and they are allowed to do that. The honest forum owner would make it clear that they retain that right and own up to it. The Magic Cafe is over zealous in their deletions and editing, but at least they stand up and take claim to their actions.

Brad Henderson

 

[Deleted member 2755]

http://www.elusionist.com/forums/showthread.php?t=78776&highlight=black+ghost+deck+review



Well, this is my favorite example. You see, pokerplayer269 was doing the former (using eloqence and acting level-headed) and not the ladder (going spamming at T11), SteerPike. I certainly didn't detect any animosity in his review (but then again, that's stupid me).

Yet, he get's a half-baked response from such an esteemed elite (is he?) like this:



You know, Goudinov, your right. This does remind me of high school.

..:Z:..

If we can, let's keep this civil please, Steerpike:



Thank You.

Wow.... so the rumors of E closing and/or delete thread that have bad reviews was true..... well I'm shocked to be honest. However, that could just be the work of someone who doesn't deserve the title of moderator. I'm not attacking you, I'm just asking for more proof. However, I still personally would prefer for this thread to be closed as it's just an attack on another company.....

-Doug

 

[orchestrion]

You know sometimes it makes me wonder if threads like this are made just to incite pages-long arugements between members. I'm not trying to look down on you guys with a holier-than-thou attitude since I've done plenty of stupid things on message boards, but I really don't see a need for all the bashing of Ellusionist or other sites. If you dislike them then that is your opinion. Nobody on Theory 11 really cares if you think Ellusionist is a stupid site or vice versa. Both of these sites exist to further the art of magic. I don't know about you guys, but I think that's something we should all be glad for.

 

[Steerpike]

Well, this is my favorite example. You see, pokerplayer269 was doing the former (using eloqence and acting level-headed) and not the ladder (going spamming at T11), SteerPike. I certainly didn't detect any animosity in his review (but then again, that's stupid me).

Did you read that thread past the first post? It wasn't the original post that got the thread closed. It was what it devolved into. It doesn't require a lot of critical thinking or deductive abilities to figure that out.

Here, take a look at this:

http://www.elusionist.com/forums/showthread.php?t=80156

Right on the first page.

It seems you are choosing to believe that the world exists only as your eyes allow you to see it. Is it not possible that there are machinations at foot higher up that have not reported to you?

I don't like going into conspiracy theories.

I'm going by my own experiences. I'm trying to follow-up on claims, but the majority of them I find are just pedestrian incidents that get blown dramatically out of proportion. It's so very, very jading.

 

[Ineski]

I've written a couple of reviews there of the most ridicilous effects of theirs. So far my reviews of KAOS, Axis Change and Gaff deck have been deleted. I also posted http://www.antinomymagic.com/swiss.htm this article there to see what they had to say and it as well got deleted and I got a warning from an admin or someone. Not so nice.

 

[Steerpike]

I've written a couple of reviews there of the most ridicilous effects of theirs. So far my reviews of KAOS, Axis Change and Gaff deck have been deleted. I also posted http://www.antinomymagic.com/swiss.htm this article there to see what they had to say and it as well got deleted and I got a warning from an admin or someone. Not so nice.

What was your screenname there? I'm going to go check on this.

As for posting the Swiss article, you're not the first to attempt that, and it never ends well. We don't let people post it there because it's full of thinly-veiled attacks, bogus strawman arguments, and shameless elitism. It's never a pretty sight when somebody shows the lack of foresight to put that up at the E boards.

 

[trashmanf]

holy crap Ineski!!!!! that article is GREAT!!!!! thanks for sharing , sir! I'm loving this read and I'm only halfway through it! here's nother couple exclamation points on the house, !!!!!!!!!!!

 

[Brad Henderson]

As for posting the Swiss article, you're not the first to attempt that, and it never ends well. We don't let people post it there because it's full of thinly-veiled attacks, bogus strawman arguments, and shameless elitism. It's never a pretty sight when somebody shows the lack of foresight to put that up at the E boards.

So, what you're saying is: E does not allow posts that criticize their products or behaviors?
Thanks for clearling that up.

Jamy Swiss is one of the more renowned thinkers and writers in our field. He has no personal stake in E or "Street Magic" but offered an interesting analysis of his thoughts on the subject - making it very clear that he did not reach a definitive conclusion.

Even then, E is so afraid that someone may question their practices they refuse one of magic's leading thinkers the right to have a voice on their board?

This is not the place to argue Jamy's essay, but you have just very clearly established that criticism of E will not be tolerated on their board.

Brad

 

[trashmanf]

yep , ellusionist = north korea

 

[Steerpike]

This is not the place to argue Jamy's essay, but you have just very clearly established that criticism of E will not be tolerated on their board.

That's not what I said and you know it. Criticism itself isn't out of line. It's how you express it.

Just about everyone who has posted that article to the site usually followed it up with a statement to the tune of, "We now have proof that Ellusionist and everyone assoicated with them are wrong and should be stopped." Because of that, we just don't allow it to be posted. It's done far too often from a place of hostility and acts as a lightning rod for trouble.

Personally, I don't think the article is so much a criticism as an attack.

Swiss is obviously extremely intelligent, but this was not flattering of him to write it.

yep , ellusionist = north korea

There was no such thing as clinical depression until someone got the idea to describe something he didn't like by comparing it totalitarian regimes.

 

[..:Z:..]

Did you read that thread past the first post? It wasn't the original post that got the thread closed. It was what it devolved into. It doesn't require a lot of critical thinking or deductive abilities to figure that out.

Here, take a look at this:

http://www.elusionist.com/forums/showthread.php?t=80156

Right on the first page.

I'm on a time-crunch so I just kind of skimmed the first page and I didn't really get your point. I'll re-read it again later but it doesn't matter. It's not relevant to the thread I just advised.

Your saying that what they we're delving into was so brit, vulgar, space-wasting, and considered by Goudinov such an atrocity that it was worth deleting the entire review/thread?

Everyone was being extremely civil there (I thought civilized discussions and debates were allowed in the forums over at E?)! But that's just me.

Apparently, I need to look at that thread with the cynical attitude and mind set in order for me to find the hostility. Amazingly, it still eludes me.

I guess I'm stupid then? I guess I should hide my incompetence by switching to the use of witty sarcastic remarks and one-liners and vague solutions. The Dilbert method always works!

..:Z:..

 

[Steerpike]

Your saying that what they we're delving into was so brit, vulgar, space-wasting, and considered by Goudinov such an atrocity that it was worth deleting the entire review/thread?

It wasn't deleted because you can still look at it. It was closed because people had managed to derail it so thoroughly.

I guess I'm stupid then?

No, you're just being stubborn and even more judgmental than me, if that's convievable. You just pick an extreme, and when you don't see it in one example you call it proof. I just call foul.

Perhaps you should actually read the thread I linked to. It would do you some good to actually listen to what other people have to say.

 

[..:Z:..]

It wasn't deleted because you can still look at it. It was closed because people had managed to derail it so thoroughly.

Derail it so throughly? Wow....

If you guys actually value properly written reviews (with eloquence and level-headed-ness), than why not just delete of all of those nasty-ass posts instead of the review? What, too much effort? Not worth resurrecting?

No, you're just being stubborn and even more judgmental than me, if that's convievable. You just pick an extreme, and when you don't see it in one example you call it proof. I just call foul.

All you have to do is look at all of the closed review-threads. There are tons of fouls in those sections!

Perhaps you should actually read the thread I linked to. It would do you some good to actually listen to what other people have to say.

I can't get over the irony of that statement.

You say that a negative post has to be eloquent and level-headed. Does that apply to positive reviews as well? Apparently not because I see (constantly) a whole lot of:

"Ths is soooooooo awsome and cool like totaly get it and stuff becuse it just so ez to undearstund and...."

Why is it you guys allow positive reviews like that to stay alive but you won't allow the negative (yet, eloquent) reviews draw more than a few breaths?

..:Z:..

 

[copperfield 14]

Well I haven't read the thread since there is 6 pages to read but I don't see the point of another E thread. All people do is argue, and we want peace not war.

 

[Deleted member 2755]

Well I haven't read the thread since there is 6 pages to read but I don't see the point of another E thread. All people do is argue, and we want peace not war.

Thank you.

-Doug

 

[Dylan P.]

The fact of it is that if yoyu write a bad review then you get banned from there forums. I know. I was banned.

All I wrote was that street magic would get a 6 out of 10 in my book because I felt that it did not give good advice for approaching people and really doing street magic. I also said that I did not aprove of the women being dressed up in revealing clothing like that.

Maybe they took that as offense but it wasn't meant to be. I was just stating my opinion and I was banned. Other reasons include that the kids are naive. I am also not sure about this but I think that Ellusionist may delete all negative reviews even if they weren't innapropriate.

Hope I could help.