But it comes with the implicit ideation that there should be support of either side in this conflict, and the reality is that this hasn't changed my mind on the situation: Let them kill each other.
Wait, really? That's stupidly misleading.
To be fair, with a release date the day before election day, I don't know how much this will influence it.
That said, the ads for the movie probably will.
EDIT: Don't worry, I misunderstood.
(when they aren't being propped up by outside interests).
But that's the thing: It is already being propped up. You leaving isn't even a dent of a dent. All of both KiA's combined could leave and it still wouldn't matter. Because it's already being propped up externally.
You're not wrong that, eventually, ties need to be cut. But equally so, abandoning all these spaces leaves them as pure echochambers. The issue is skirting the line between engaging in those spaces and being able to guide people into the spaces that aren't objectively shitholes. And the reality is, that as much as we might want it to be otherwise, normies aren't going to come here or any other alternative. They're not going to abandon Reddit like Digg was abandoned. Because even if they do know about the issues and even understand, they simply don't care enough.
Your biggest challenge is giving them an actual reason to leave. Because a significant number of people are there. Yes, the people higher up are exclusively leftist, and a significant portion of the userbase is too, but it's also true that an equally significant portion simply don't care about these topics when online. They are the silent majority, and they're not silent because they're biting their tongues, they're silent because they have nothing to say because it simply doesn't interest them. It'd be like asking you about your opinion on species of Bolivian Ants, and unless you already hold interest in that topic, there's a pretty low chance you're going to be chiming in with your opinions on the matter.
We often talk about "a vocal minority", but often forget that even engaging in any discussion in the first place is already a minority activity. The vast majority don't chime in.
And that doesn't even tackle the issue of decentralisation and how hard it is to combat that against people who love centralised platforms.
You say that like they aren't happy with the slop we're being served. They love how gaming has degenerated into glorified movies, with the only thing standing in their way now is difficulty.
It's ultimately what it was all about. They wanted games easier because they hated that others were better than them.
"also remember when you guys actually capitulated? you updated your review score policies and disclosed your relationships? that was so pathetic"
10 years later and she implicitly admits that Gamergate was in fact about ethics and a lack of industry disclosure.
Thanks for playing, Leigh.
She was the one that penned the original "Gamers are Dead, Gamers don't have to be your Audience" article.
Though considering the GameJournoPros list that later came to light, I can hardly call her the author with certainty considering this was probably made among them and then altered slightly for each republication.
Autists are really susceptible to this for some reason.
You're promised acceptance. And it's easy acceptance.
They don't want to be women. They want to be treated like women. They want the perceived social benefits. They want to be treated as intrinsically valuable by society at large, rather than a disposable wallet.
I don't entirely blame them for wanting those things. The sad thing is that they turn to what is ultimately an addiction, constantly chasing these things they will never actually achieve. And when it doesn't work out, more often than not they turn to pushing it on others to delude themselves that they didn't make the wrong decision. The decision to turn to grooming is part of the denial to keep the delusion going.
As much as I think they're scum, I do also feel sorry for them. Because it must suck going through all that and still being a loser at the end of the day.
I watched it last night and couldn't disagree more.
Aesthetically, you're correct, it looked amazing. There were clear influences from Alien Isolation too. And there were some interesting ideas with the aliens. But the film explicitly relies on the characters being idiots, and I mean being idiots and not just lacking in information. The film relies on positive reception with "winks and nods to the other films"..... what are these "winks and nods"? Blatant line repetition or scene replication. Because you liked those scenes in the other films, yeah? So you'll like those scenes done all over again but worse, right?
And then there's the contrivances. I know a contrived plot is generally a given for just about any horror, but this was a little too much. Between a door conveniently being too strong for young adults to smash but weak enough for handful of facehuggers to smash with ease (but later glass doors being too strong), and an elevator on a space station designed with a counter-weight system, it was just too much for me. Just silly little contrivances over and over and over.
Oh, and the rhythm of the plot? Do you want the second half of Covenant again, which was the second half of the original Aliens but worse? Congrats, you can have that yet again.
Honest to god, I would rather watch Alien Resurrection again. Because for as bad as that movie is, it's at least entertaining. Hell, I'll take Prometheus and Covenant over this.
If I wanted to watch the old scenes, I'd watch the originals films they're from. Not this film that does them again but worse. Is it without bad scenes? No, there were some good scenes, but they were few and far between.
This clip that I'm linking was recorded in 2019.
https://www.youtube.com/shorts/GTn1He86oJk
For those that don't want to watch the minute-or-so clip, it basically points out that in 2018, Russia had 400 arrests for posts on various social media. And that's a travesty. It then points out that there were 3300 arrests in the UK for posts on social media.
There is no doubt about this. It's not ambiguous. It's not a matter of debate. The reality is that the West is living under tyranny. A very comfortable tyranny, but tyranny all the same.
The issue is that for decades, media has portrayed tyranny as this all oppressive force that leaves the people in a depressive shamble. A dystopia. But the truth is that isn't needed for tyranny. It just needs useful idiots to turn a blind eye because the thugs of the state aren't beating in their heads.
Tyranny came to the west a long time ago. And it's grown, and grown, and grown. Never let these people obfuscate the truth. They are tyrants, through and through. There is no excuse for their actions.
They look so..... hollow.
And I know that there've been a few ex-influencers that have said as such about that "lifestyle" (and I use that very loosely), but even then they look like imitation people. Just waiting for the next product to consume and sell. I'd feel sorry for them, except I'm not sure there's really a "them" to feel sorry for. What's left of being a "person" when you're like that?
That is true, and there's plenty of plot-lines that try to push the "here's this rebel faction of the agency", but it still pushes the idea that these people who are infringing on peoples rights are the outliers and not the main agency.
But you are right that many of the villains are the way they are through the government, and not just some rebel faction.
Honestly, I suspect Firefly is never getting a revival now because of the message it ultimately held, which was largely anti-government, or at the very least anti-centralised government. It was popular back in the day for such a stance (look how close Ron Paul actually got to winning the primaries. That's the reason his face was a reaction image for quite some time). Could you imagine how quickly it would kill a career to make a project that's actually anti-big government anymore? One that's actually critical of the establishment as a whole? I don't see it happening anytime soon in the mainstream, but once upon a time, it was popular, and not just because people like rebels.
There's a reason that Alan Moore hates his work. Because it speaks far more to an anti-central power, and that's a right-wing ideal, even if he doesn't want to accept it. And Whedon's work with Firefly reflects that.
Zach is supposedly a libertarian, but that label is so broad these days that it could mean anything from "I just wanna smoke weed in peace and everything else is fine" to "I want actual small government". I've not really looked into it solely because I don't care that much. Like yeah, cool, one of the very few non-leftists in Hollywood, but I also don't care what some actor has to say about politics regardless. I don't go to a bus driver for tax advice, I don't go to a lawyer to buy a fridge, and I don't turn to actors for political takes, even if a good or bad take can come from anywhere.
But it is surprising when you see people who by all rights shouldn't be fans of something actively and openly propagating that very thing. Like Chuck was 2007-2012. That was right after the PEAK of things like Obama's administration utilising smart tech (TVs being a big one in the media at the time) for the purposes of monitoring US citizens. But here are two people that should have been critical of that basically shilling for the NSA and CIA. It's so bizarre.
Wanna know the best thing about this thread? That archive shows where the thread was at that point, and so many people LEAPT at the opportunity for group-think. But take a look at it now. The thread is deleted and locked (no surprise there from the mods), and all the top comments are rightfully calling the devs out for being pissy about two reviews that mentioned pronouns.
People bitch about legacy media being eager to run with a story and then never correct it once later information comes out, but social media like Reddit is worse. Because those idiots that instantly and eagerly ran to defend those devs will never admit that the devs manipulated them by omitting the truth of the situation.
These people WANT to be victims. They do not want to be accepted. They want the social currency that victimhood gets them.
Honestly, it goes back years for this kind of thing. Watched Chuck for the first time a few years ago, and it's kind of amazing just how blatantly the show is federal propaganda. Just unabashedly pro CIA and NSA. And it's weird because you have both Zack Levi and Adam Baldwin, both of whom are right-wing/libertarian adjacent, and it's just shocking how pro-state the show ends up being.
It's nothing new, but once you start noticing things like that, it's hard to not always notice it.
Does this mean I can also opt out of online/central moderation too? Or is that non-negotiable? (obvious answer is obvious)
By your logic, there should be no removals, nor bans, for any reason, under any circumstance, because all removals can be re-displayed as "preservation" including illegal content.
By your assertion of my logic, you mean. You seem to think disagreeing that YOUR interpretation of THIS instance (and/or any other) means that I disagree with ALL instances of moderation.
This is what I mean about you being jaded. You've lost all respect for any critique. Any nudge in the right direction. You just handwave it away as some crackpot that wants no rules at all, when that simply isn't the case.
And that's why now you're not even bothering with the content of the issue. Instead you're diverting into other attack to deflect away from the critique at hand: This comment should not have been removed, and was only removed solely on the basis that you found it icky. And while I agree that it can be interpreted that way and would therefore be disgusting, I also know the clear fucking intent here. That you want to assume the worst is a direct fault of your own, not a fault of the community at large.
There are several ways to find out exactly what was said if you really want to.
"Please sir, you're free to speak in this specially designated free-speech zone"
What a fucking joke.
you have never been able to advocate for children getting raped. No in in KIA1 ever allowed it. No one ever allowed in KIA2 ever allowed it before I got added. I carry on that tradition.
Cool, great, but frankly, I doubt you in that this comment included what you say it included. It might be interpreted that way. But I doubt it's as cut and dry as you are making it seem to be. Your word does not have the trust-worthiness that you seem to think it does. And going "well, if you just jump through these hoops that make your experience objectively more frustrating, you can still totally follow along" is utterly stupid.
So sure. Carry on and continue to pretend like nothing is a problem. Like you're not jaded and beginning to ignore long-time users here simply because YOU don't want to acknowledge there's a problem. Hide behind that which is easy to defend while you ignore your other shit solely because other places are less open and "lackadaisical". Because again, fuck that pedo shit, but I still doubt you.
Edit: After looking it up, yeah, I don't think this should have been removed. Is it an asshole comment? You bet. Is it encouraging rape? No, and only someone demented would think so. Especially considering you don't know the circumstances. What if the man who got her pregnant was also legally underage? I'm not a fan of it, but I'm not retarded enough to not know that these days, sadly, kids are getting sexual far younger than they should. And they shouldn't. That isn't encouraging rape, and you damn well know it.
There's been talk (and attempts) at this stuff for years (For example, Here's KiA5). The problem is that the more this stuff happens, the more splintered it all gets and each tiny little offshoot is more personalised and niche and as a result, more insular.
Unless you get a near 100% adoption rate via exodus, it's just going to cause less cohesion. And what sucks is that people like Dom know this. So either people jump ship and the community gets divided up into more factions, or we stick around and bear his bullshit. It's a lose lose for everyone but people like Dom, which is why for months now people have been pleading with him to either change his ways or let someone else in to help out, all to no avail.
I honest to god find it baffling how ANYONE trusts an alphabet agency. After decades of admitted wrong-doing, for some reason with absolutely no motivation at all, we're meant to believe these agencies somehow self-reformed, and then we still see shit like bulldozing terrorist camps, secretly cremating bodies and "there was no motive" over the worst public shooting in US history (Stephen Paddock).
At every opportunity, these agencies have spent decades actively working against the public, but for some reason there's this very weird very obtuse belief that they arbitrarily changed their mind.
And I don't know what's worse. The people who believe the lie that these agencies are the good guys, or that they can or even should reform them to work in their favour.
It was victim-blaming the rape of a minor.
And how do we know that now? You've censored it, and it's down to your diminishingly trustworthy word.
Since when did we shift from free speech, even unlikable speech, to censoring that which is uncomfortable? I know I'm not the first to make this point, but come on, this is hard to defend as anything less than censorship because it makes you uncomfortable.
And I have no problem with it making you uncomfortable or angry or whatever. But this place was always meant to get away from that Reddit mentality of constant censorship on the emotional reactions of controlling mods. You were legitimately better than this. And I get that modding leaves anyone jaded, but it's such a shame that you don't want to even consider that maybe you're not doing the right thing by the rest of the sub.
And yet it got positive reception, and open discussion. Why are we taking a broad approach to restricting speech here again?
And don't get me wrong, fuck that pedo freak right off, but why extend that to proper discussions? You just make it harder for anyone else coming in to follow along with what was being talked about.
There's your problem. That site is a cancer, infested with SocJus and has industry ties.
It's just a trinity of shitty traits for a group to have.