DotA wins or losses don't show up anywhere within battle.net, being a 'custom' game. It's all about having a 'good game', and unfortunately, a new person on a team can quickly turn it into something else.
Adding to what I said above, consider that when a team loses, it can take 45 minutes to an hour. If the game is just one team dominating and the other (with the novice player) just waiting for defeat, it's not all that fun. That's a lot of time wasted, which adds to the hostility you see. This can probably be considered a chief flaw in DotA's gameplay, but it may just be a consequence of a very desirable trait - that of being highly team based.
I have certainly experienced this. The problem is, in general, that just one missing link on the team becomes a major handicap for the 4 other players. All it takes is for one player to give opponents a few easy kills for the opponents to gain enough experience and equipment to become more or less unstoppable. This, combined with the fact that DotA is played on chiefly on Battle.net where the average age is seemingly mid-teens and you've got a recipe for problems.
My advice, if you want to get in to it, is to first play with AI players (you can download a map with AI players at getdota.com). This will get you acquainted with how to control your hero, what items there are, figure out how to stay alive in your lane, and some other fundamentals. Then, when joining a game, participate in the team chat. DotA is very much a team game. Ask for help, and in my experience, you'll get it. Pick a hero that sounds fun (maybe one you practiced with using the AI), and ask for advice on item builds and for a player to team up with in a lane. If people know you're new, and that you're trying to learn, they'll cut you some slack.
For those unaware of what DotA is, it's a team based strategy game where you control a single character (called your hero) with varied abilities. The goal is simply to destroy the enemy team's main structure, which is protected by multiple towers of progressive difficulty and, of course, enemy heroes.
During the course of the game, you attempt to kill as many neutral computer units as possible in order to collect money, buy items to improve your character, gain experience and skills, and kill enemy heroes. When you get into the strategy a bit more, there are far more goals to attend to, such as harassing enemy heroes and denying them of experience and money, 'ganking' enemies with your teammates, and etc. There is a lot of depth in the game play and lots of general strategies to pick from.
As the subject says, DotA is really the only game I play these days, and I've been playing it for years. There are around 100 heroes, each with their own set of unique abilities, strengths, and weaknesses. The game is intuitive to play and always interesting. It also runs on old hardware, being based on a blizzard game, although it can take a while to load.
If this game is even a fraction as fun as DotA, and has a native Linux client, it's a must buy from me.
Errors put the browser in "dumb rendering" mode. Rather than a "best effort" approach, browsers should, upon detecting a serious error in the input, drop to "dumb mode" - default font, default colors, etc., after displaying an error message. Much of the incompatibility between browsers comes from inconsistent handling of bad HTML. So there should be a penalty, but not a fatal one, for bad code.
You're arguing that the browser should harm consumer's experience of the web in an attempt to get web authors to fix their stuff. In reality, it will simply cause consumers to blame their browser (assuming it works somewhere but not others). Nay, dealing with bad markup is a browser feature. Sad, but true.
Downloadable fonts. Netscape used to have downloadable fonts. The font makers bitched. Bring that feature back, despite the whining. No more having to express fonts as images.
This is accomplished with CSS's @font-face declaration. Firefox 3.5 supports it, possibly others do as well. HTML should not concern itself with fonts.
2D layout The "div"/"clear" model of layout was a flop. Horrors of Javascript are needed just to make columns balance. Absolute positioning is overused as a workaround for the limits of "div"/"clear". (Text on top of text happens all too often.) Tables were actually a better layout tool, because they're a 2D system. HTML needs a 2D layout model that can't accidentally result in overlaps. There are plenty of those around; most window managers have one. There's been a quiet move back to tables for layout, but people are embarrassed to admit it.
While your claims of a resurgence of tables-for-layouts and failure of float/clear is debatable and definitely deserving of a citation, this problem is again already addressed by CSS via the display property, with values like "inline-block", "table-cell", "table-row", etc. IE support is finally here in IE8, so all vendors' latest browsers support this.
As far as the laws of mathematics refer to reality, they are not certain, and as far as they are certain, they do not refer to reality. -- Albert Einstein