It was Bungie.

343 had (and probably still has) a hate boner for people who worked on the original Halo games. They barely tolerate the original VAs. I would imagine being part of Microsoft's culture they also hate Marty's politics but that's not the primary reason.

Bungie fired him, forced him to surrender his stock in the company, and withheld the profit-sharing that he was entitled to. He sued Bungie and they settled.

A consolation prize given that they lost and can't give her a post as a reward for her collaboration.

“It’s 100 percent political,” a former Pixar employee who identifies as trans says about the Win or Lose decision.

No, it’s “just being a decent human being.”

I would have assumed they were triggered because they have way more than just 10 people blocked.

I predict that Witcher 4 will be at least a modest success coasting on the success of the previous game despite this bullshit. Just as TLoU 2 was a modest success.

Good luck selling gamers on Witcher 5 or TLoU 3 though. That DEI money must be pretty good to be worth killing huge franchises over.

Actually, sweaty, it's because it's a male power fantasy. Women's and men's brains are exactly the same, but women don't sexualize men the way men do women. Get woke. ✊🏿

Reminds me of the “Dear Sub-Human Filth” copypasta. These people are almost beyond parody.

From https://archive.ph/jIO2G:

He said he made the decision because the charges against Hunter were politically motivated and designed to hurt him politically.

Fucking hypocrites...

I'm guessing they're trying to create a crisis and dump it on Trump. If they're not careful it will backfire, though, and make him look like the hero.

Which of the following do you believe would more positively affect the birth rate and the health of society?

1. All of the men who are pretending to be women suddenly become normal men, and no men in the future make that choice.

2. All of the women who are not having families suddenly decide that having families is a good idea, and no women in the future make that choice.

I know which one I would bet on.

I prefer them not policing speech.

I prefer that rules be enforced equally.

This isn’t them not policing speech, this is them not policing speech that they like. They’ll be more than happy to continue policing your speech. Maybe if the rules were enforced equally they would have to change the rules to not censor the people they agree with.

Archive of the Reuters article: https://archive.ph/OpF20

Gilchrist and host Jon Stewart referenced former President Trump’s rhetoric about Detroit, with Stewart saying he’s baffled as to how the race could be so close in the state.

Probably because people who live in Michigan know that Detroit is a shithole better than anyone else.

The shape at the bottom outside the window looks like a turboprop engine and exhaust, like on a Saab 340 (see here or here) or Embraer 120. In that case there wouldn't be any middle seat, but the Saab 340 and Embraer 120 don't have winglets, wouldn't be that spacious, and perhaps most importantly of all (and I can't stress this enough) would probably be overweight from the luggage that lady is carrying.

What’s unclear is whether Musk’s changes fall in line with Apple’s app store guidelines, which mandate that social networks offer “the ability to block abusive users from the service.”

I bet they “reached out for comment” as well.

You could always view tweets from someone who blocked you by logging out or opening the profile in a private tab. Or using a different account like the article discusses.

Hard to see how they could provide equal time when they file a day before the election. Also I would imagine you’re supposed to file before the appearance, not after.

Of course they do. They believe (rightly or wrongly) that they will be the ones who get to define what "disinformation" is, either by controlling the government directly or pulling the strings via the deep state.

The ad had several inaccuracies regarding facts such as the number of times King had been arrested during the protests, what song the protesters had sung, and whether students had been expelled for participating.

The Court said that because of these core American free-speech principles, it would have to consider Sullivan's defamation claims "against the background of a profound national commitment to the principle that debate on public issues should be uninhibited, robust, and wide-open, and that it may well include vehement, caustic, and sometimes unpleasantly sharp attacks on government and public officials."

TIL that "untrue" and "vehement, caustic, and sometimes unpleasantly sharp" mean the same thing.

Exposure to fluoride above the public health recommended amount over many years can result in skeletal fluorosis, a condition that causes weaker bones and joint pain. A federal review published in August by the National Institutes of Health’s toxicology program concluded that higher levels of fluoride is linked to lowered IQ in children.

Kennedy has a long history of sharing baseless conspiracy theories

"What he's saying is true... Now let us tell you about how it's a conspiracy theory."

I do think that if Trump wins the stock market will probably drop rather sharply at the beginning of his term, not because Trump is bad for business but because values are overly inflated and the companies like BlackRock pulling the strings will want them to fall to make Trump look bad.

decided at the last minute

Maybe. Or maybe they decided to do this in advance, and only announced that they would at the last minute so that it would be too late to stop them…

As a reminder of what the allegations were about: https://archive.ph/dr8aT#selection-1949.0-1949.11

Wikipedia just deleted the article, of course. Here are some of the arguments the weasels there made to justify the decision:

A redirect might be appropriate but I think much of the text might be skirting ethical issues so it should be deleted first so it doesn't appear in the history.

The only possibly appropriate content is already covered in the MrBeast article, though I'm not convinced that even that is justified.

already covered and the article history has too many BLP vios to justify preserving . Can be recreated as a redirect afterwards (ideally with EC protection to prevent this from being re-created again)

focuses on people who are "underrepresented in our electorate," Lopach said, "such as people of color, young people, and unmarried women."

They're purposefully targeting groups likely to vote Dem.

What about the remaining 10%?

That’s the part that got cut off...

Funny though, caring about the "country at large" would generally be considered pretty nationalist, wouldn't it?

Performative “patriotism” seems to be a thing among the left this election cycle. It’s not genuine, of course; it’s just “feel good” bullshit.