|
Rough Lobster posted:The weird thing about Gamergate is that I've seen posts about it for years but somehow don't know what the gently caress it's about. Like, I deliberately didn't seek out information because it sounds dumb as hell but usually in these cases I'll pick up enough information through osmosis to have a working understanding of the underlying issue. It's "icky girls have cooties and they're in our treehouse!"
|
#
?
Nov 15, 2017 04:34
|
|
|
|
| # ? May 27, 2024 17:34 |
|
|
Who What Now posted:Where do they say up front that they're going to lie about their reviews? Inco posted:Contrary to the old saying, there absolutely are incorrect opinions. Inco posted:Reviewing media is very subjective, but all reviews have to actually deal with the media. Inco posted:"I didn't like Schindler's List because I found it absolutely preposterous when Hitler rode into Auschwitz on a robotic horse and murdered everyone in the camp" is not a valid review of Schindler's List. Neither is showing the first, second, and fourth lines of a soliloquy and then saying that the soliloquy makes no sense. NorgLyle posted:They're not reviewers. Grem posted:That's definitely part of the problem. I think CinemaSins is stupid and annoying and just straight up liars, but it's worse when I see a comment on their videos saying that because of the review someone won't be going to see the movie. They're actively hurting a film with criticism that is totally incorrect. Inco posted:As is mentioned in the video I linked, the problem with presenting knowingly fake criticisms next to valid criticisms is that it becomes hard to tell which is which. Postal Parcel posted:I hate to jump in here, but I have literally never heard of clickbait NOT being referred to as your prior definition. What in the world do you think Buzzfeed and UpWorthy article titles are?
|
|
#
?
Nov 15, 2017 04:36
|
|
|
If you have women in your organization, they need to stick to making coffee and such. The smarter ones can do a decent job at database organization and some kinds of database programming, and there are plenty of good female content creators, though the top ones are always male. But women are maladapted to large group dynamics. They are better than men at one on one social dynamics, for example superior ability to read people, but though this impressive in family scale groups, women fail disastrously at functioning larger groups, and if you give women leadership roles in such a group, the group will not accomplish its goals. Gays similarly, although the way they fail is different from the way women fail. The trouble with convergence is that it leads to obvious and spectacular failure. The converged organization just cannot perform its goals. (Remember the Obamacare website.) Now someone is going to say NAWALT (not all women are like that. But if you have any group of substantial size, the rare exceptions, supposing the rare exceptions exist (and the lack of credible poster girls suggest that they do not exist) are too rare to have much effect on the overall group dynamics. And a group of women, or a group containing any significant number of women, cannot keep its eye on the group goals. Women have to operate under male supervision. This creates a problem in that if the supervision is actually effective, they will seduce their supervisor. The traditional solution to this was either that they were married to their supervisor, or an all female group with an female hierarchy, but with males monitoring the performance of the all female group at every level, for example the traditional system in hospitals where the doctors and orderlies were all male, the nurses were all female, and were under the authority of a female head of their organization, the matron, but the male doctors monitored and directed the nurses moment to moment. Similarly, priests and nuns. The modern state exists because of modern military discipline. The modern industrial economy exists because of the scientific method, and the joint stock corporation, and the joint stock corporation exists because of double entry accounting. SoX has smashed double entry accounting, Harvard has smashed the scientific method, and convergence is now smashing military discipline.
|
|
#
?
Nov 15, 2017 04:39
|
|
|
Tiggum posted:To be clickbait it has to be deceptive though. If it really is a list of 20 lifehacks I won't be able to live without then it's not clickbait it's just an accurate (if attention-grabbing) headline. What makes it clickbait is that it draws you in by promising more than the article or video can deliver. Or by deliberately withholding the one piece of information the audience actually wants, like "you won't believe which celebrity just admitted to taking drugs". All I'm looking for when I click that is the name, which could be in the title but isn't because they don't get paid if I only read the title. The term is pretty self-explanatory. It's bait to lure you into clicking, with the implication that the result is a trap, ie. not what you were hoping for. Then it's still deceptive. The "Everything Wrong With" videos don't exhaustively list everything actually wrong with a film, and therefore still fall under your fuckin bonkers definition of clickbait.
|
|
#
?
Nov 15, 2017 04:39
|
|
|
Inco posted:Then it's still deceptive. The "Everything Wrong With" videos don't exhaustively list everything actually wrong with a film, and therefore still fall under your fuckin bonkers definition of clickbait. Gays show up for work infrequently, drunk, and stoned, steal the petty cash and office equipment, commit acts of violence against co-workers. If a high socioeconomic status male commits a crime typical of low socioeconomic status males, he is probably gay. Women are more conscientious than men, gays considerably less conscientious than straights. If a lawyer swindles his client, probably Jewish. If he flat out robs his client with a knife, probably gay. Drug tests are low status, for low status people and low status jobs, and high status people resent them, so you lose some smart people by drug testing, but on the other hand, you keep out most of the gays without committing sacrilege against political correctness. Discriminating against drug users is a good proxy for discriminating against all the people you are forbidden to discriminate against. Unfortunately drug testing does not discriminate against women, but fizzbuzz type tests do discriminate against women very effectively. If you insist that those who manage technical people have enough technical ability to understand what those they manage are doing, you can keep women out.
|
|
#
?
Nov 15, 2017 04:43
|
|
|
You’re a true hero, LoB. 
|
|
#
?
Nov 15, 2017 04:48
|
|
|
Please everyone shut up about CinemaSins. Especially you, Tiggum.
|
|
#
?
Nov 15, 2017 05:04
|
|
|
Lottery of Babylon posted:Gays show up for work infrequently, drunk, and stoned, steal the petty cash and office equipment, commit acts of violence against co-workers. If a high socioeconomic status male commits a crime typical of low socioeconomic status males, he is probably gay. Women are more conscientious than men, gays considerably less conscientious than straights. If a lawyer swindles his client, probably Jewish. If he flat out robs his client with a knife, probably gay. Where does a gay woman fall in this ranking Asking for a friend
|
|
#
?
Nov 15, 2017 05:05
|
|
Absurd Alhazred posted:I was a D&D mod when the Gamergate thread was moved there, and for the life of me I couldn't get anything out of it. It's not about anything coherent ideology, it's just a complex of conspiracy theories and gut reaction related to an imagined community of gamers. It wasn't that complex. People were just mad that women existed.
|
|
|
#
?
Nov 15, 2017 05:08
|
|
|
Avenging_Mikon posted:Zombie as stand-in for minority, yes. Zombie as stand-in for capitalism, shoot it in the head. Twice. Ultimately there's such a broad swath of zombie media out there that's it's impossible to claim that any one reading or treatment is the one truth beyond some incredibly broad fundamentals. There's plenty of stuff that portrays zombies as an absolute other that must be battled for our own preservation, and there's plenty of stuff that questions every part of that, whether zombies are an unsavable other, whether they must be fought, or whether the fight is actually preserving anything. But the latter has been around long enough in enough properties that anyone claiming "if zombies attacked us tomorrow, idiots would be concerned for their right because we are such a decadent society of sjw snowflakes" comes off as pretty dumb. I'm pretty sure that exact story is out there, except it takes the logical step of showing the sympathetic people just dying because they wouldn't defend themselves instead of worrying that they exist at all.
|
|
#
?
Nov 15, 2017 05:10
|
|
|
there wolf posted:Ultimately there's such a broad swath of zombie media out there that's it's impossible to claim that any one reading or treatment is the one truth beyond some incredibly broad fundamentals. There's plenty of stuff that portrays zombies as an absolute other that must be battled for our own preservation, and there's plenty of stuff that questions every part of that, whether zombies are an unsavable other, whether they must be fought, or whether the fight is actually preserving anything. Fear the Walking Dead's first season had something akin to a "Black Lives Matter", "hands up, don't shoot", etc. type event in the first season when people were just getting used to There's also the movie "The Returned"(or the returners?) that deals with Zombie Rights after a drug that slows the infection has been discovered(similar to PrEP I guess) and a movie where the zombie threat has almost disappeared, but people are so hungry for excitement that there's an island that has a safari-like experience with those who are still zombied but haven't been killed. Bonus points because there's what could be considered a millenial liberal activist who causes the island to erupt into chaos when she releases the zombies from captivity and gets bitten/eaten.
|
|
#
?
Nov 15, 2017 05:18
|
|
|
Absurd Alhazred posted:I was a D&D mod when the Gamergate thread was moved there, and for the life of me I couldn't get anything out of it. It's not about anything coherent ideology, it's just a complex of conspiracy theories and gut reaction related to an imagined community of gamers. that was one of the funniest threads to follow, watching a gaggle of subhuman mouthbreathers get slowly ground down into nothingness by an endless legion of pedants
|
|
#
?
Nov 15, 2017 05:20
|
|
|
Cythereal posted:It's "icky girls have cooties and they're in our treehouse!" It's half that and half "Mom's threatening to take away my videogames!"
|
|
#
?
Nov 15, 2017 05:31
|
|
|
Lottery of Babylon posted:NAWALT Nah Walt
|
|
#
?
Nov 15, 2017 06:10
|
|
|
nerdz posted:Nah Walt Lost for like 3 seasons.
|
|
#
?
Nov 15, 2017 07:51
|
|
|
Walt Walt Don't Tell Me
|
|
#
?
Nov 15, 2017 08:07
|
|
|
https://twitter.com/Bardissimo/status/930557471189618690
|
|
#
?
Nov 15, 2017 08:22
|
|
|
Tiggum posted:No there aren't. There literally can't be. There can only be popular and unpopular opinions. There are facts, about which one can be objectively right or wrong, and there are opinions, which are statements of preference. However you phrase it, whether it's "I [don't] like this" or "this is {good|bad}" or even "this is [im]moral" it's a statement of preference and is true for you whether or not it's true for other people. That's exactly the mindset that gives you neo-nazis parading in US streets and allows the KKK to still exist in loving tyool 2017 "Well he's of the opinion that white males should rule the world, and who are we to say that's not correct. White supremacy is just unpopular!" (USER WAS PUT ON PROBATION FOR THIS POST)
|
|
#
?
Nov 15, 2017 10:16
|
|
|
Fathis Munk posted:That's exactly the mindset that gives you neo-nazis parading in US streets and allows the KKK to still exist in loving tyool 2017 This is a comment on the topic of a random youtube channel and people liking/not liking it and now we're at neonazis. Is that a proper Godwin? I don't want to comment on the initial topic or anything, but if anything is IOSM, it's a full-on Godwin! Midnight Voyager has a new favorite as of 11:03 on Nov 15, 2017 |
|
#
?
Nov 15, 2017 10:59
|
|
|
Yeah it's pretty much a Godwin 
|
|
#
?
Nov 15, 2017 11:13
|
|
|
 
|
|
#
?
Nov 15, 2017 11:13
|
|
|
you know that iint real
|
|
#
?
Nov 15, 2017 11:24
|
|
|
Ever notice how you never see Tiggum and Misterbibs arguing in the same threads? (USER WAS PUT ON PROBATION FOR THIS POST)
|
|
#
?
Nov 15, 2017 11:26
|
|
|
Fathis Munk posted:That's exactly the mindset that gives you neo-nazis parading in US streets and allows the KKK to still exist in loving tyool 2017 By enforcing anti sex rules selectively upon the elite, we make the elite unattractive, with the result that women want to mate dysgenically. We need to enforce anti sex rules selectively upon the non elite. Obviously it should be illegal and subject to the death penalty for a man and a woman to get together behind closed doors, when that woman belongs to another man, so in a sense this is a move in the correct direction, but the trouble is we are only restraining the sexual behavior of affluent white males, not of dope dealers, criminals, and blacks, so criminals and blacks get all the pussy, and get to look, and act, way more manly than the guy in the corner office. The concept of consent requires verbal and verbalizing consciousness. And sex predates verbal and verbalizing consciousness by a very long time. The part of your mind that decides to have sex is far older and more powerful than the part of your mind that is capable of making up a narrative about what you are doing and why. We can meaningfully apply the concept of consent to marriage, where a woman consents to move from one household and the authority of one male, to another household and another male, but trying to apply it to sex winds up with the absurdity that each thrust needs a legal notary. If the door is closed, and the woman does not swiftly make an exit, sex is likely to ensue, and she consented to the likelihood that it would ensue. If a man and a woman are together in private in a secure place for a reasonable length of time, there is good chance that they are going to have sex regardless of what they theoretically intend. If a woman consents to be alone with a man in private, she knows full well that sex may well ensue. If you cannot really expect to leave the large economy sized bag of potato crisps half full, regardless of your intentions, you cannot really expect to refrain from having sex, regardless of your intentions. The reason Harvey Weinstein is now getting in trouble is that he is fat and has been getting fatter. If he had lost weight and lifted iron, he could have hit them over the head with a brick and gotten away with it. The trouble with the way the left is enforcing restraints on male sexuality is that it means that Jeremy Meeks gets all the pussy. We need to enforce a no-getting-together-behind-closed-doors rule starting with Jeremy Meeks, rather than starting with Harvey Weinstein and Mike Pence. Our testosterone is falling, and we are getting stupid. But that the left is getting stupid is a very good thing.
|
|
#
?
Nov 15, 2017 11:58
|
|
|
Fathis Munk posted:That's exactly the mindset that gives you neo-nazis parading in US streets and allows the KKK to still exist in loving tyool 2017 (USER WAS PUT ON PROBATION FOR THIS POST)
|
|
#
?
Nov 15, 2017 11:58
|
|
|
MOOBS! posted:you know that iint real I thought there was a good chance, yes.
|
|
#
?
Nov 15, 2017 12:01
|
|
|
Tiggum posted:No it isn't. Acknowledging that opinions are not objective facts doesn't mean you have to tolerate ones you disagree with. Unless it's your opinion that all opinions should be tolerated, I guess. But the two are not connected. "All people should have the same rights and opportunities" is an opinion, and if you hold it then you oppose white supremacists. You don't have to pretend there's some objective morality that exists in the universe to want to eliminate certain beliefs and actions. It's people getting together as a society and deciding which opinions they generally hold in common that forms the basis for laws. There isn't an objective reason that murder is bad, because the universe doesn't care if we kill each other. But we care. We have very strong opinions on the subject and we generally don't tolerate anyone who advocates for murder. Not because "murder is bad" is an objective statement of fact but because it's a popular opinion. Meanwhile, every liberal woman on Facebook is currently blowing up feminism to protect Hollywood with the #metoo campaign. There is no scenario in which both Hollywood and feminism survive. Ten years ago they could have sacrificed Weinstein to gin up enough outrage to get Trump.
|
|
#
?
Nov 15, 2017 12:10
|
|
|
RareAcumen posted:Ever notice how you never see Tiggum and Misterbibs arguing in the same threads? Science! 
|
|
#
?
Nov 15, 2017 12:11
|
|
|
Interesting new take on ending a derail from some posters there, didn't pan out this time but sure look. Godspeed. Joy Reid is terrible https://twitter.com/NuclearTakes/status/930214256737488896
|
|
#
?
Nov 15, 2017 12:18
|
|
|
Sarcopenia posted:Tiggum and Misterbibs right before hitting that Submit Reply: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=cJziegBSNXg 
|
|
#
?
Nov 15, 2017 12:18
|
|
|
I'm imagining that your avatar is the OP.
|
|
#
?
Nov 15, 2017 12:23
|
|
|
EmmyOk posted:Interesting new take on ending a derail from some posters there, didn't pan out this time but sure look. Godspeed. I don't know why, but seeing an image like that and then scrolling down and seeing "Gourmet Hot Takes/NuclearTakes" below it with no comment makes me laugh myself silly.
|
|
#
?
Nov 15, 2017 14:04
|
|
|
Trig Discipline posted:Y'all may have already seen it, but there's a Chrome extension that renders Trump's tweets in crayon and sometimes it's actually kinda adorable. this is hilarious
|
|
#
?
Nov 15, 2017 14:26
|
|
|
Absurd Alhazred posted:I was a D&D mod when the Gamergate thread was moved there, and for the life of me I couldn't get anything out of it. It's not about anything coherent ideology, it's just a complex of conspiracy theories and gut reaction related to an imagined community of gamers. GG is the standard reactionary impulse repurposed for males that don't have charming suburban ranch houses (plus garage) w. white picket fences, 2.5 respectful children and a happy homemaker housewife in an apron. Indeed, thanks to late-stage capitalism, they will likely never have any of those things. Lacking the traditional levers to pull on in order to get them all creepily over-protective & hot under the collar about the encroaching 'other,' the ideology gets refocused around video games instead.
|
|
#
?
Nov 15, 2017 14:58
|
|
|
I think they're just losers who can't get laid
|
|
#
?
Nov 15, 2017 15:16
|
|
|
Weatherman posted:I don't know why, but seeing an image like that and then scrolling down and seeing "Gourmet Hot Takes/NuclearTakes" below it with no comment makes me laugh myself silly. Please follow Gourmet Hot Takes. It's totally up the alley of anyone who reads this thread. https://twitter.com/NuclearTakes
|
|
#
?
Nov 15, 2017 15:23
|
|
|
Gamergate was started because Zoe Quinn's ex was mad she broke up with him so he spread around the most obvious lie in the world. 4chan and Reddit were so eager to kick girls out of the gamer treehouse they bought it entirely and the ~*rest is history*~.
|
|
#
?
Nov 15, 2017 15:56
|
|
|
 Not going to worry about getting rid of his name because he is a real loving moron and this is public. I'm just curious what exactly is, 'a little bit of gayness'? I want to see that sliding scale. enigmahfc has a new favorite as of 16:08 on Nov 15, 2017 |
|
#
?
Nov 15, 2017 16:04
|
|
|
There's not an actual video to play so I have no idea what this is referencing. Gay sex on the new Star Trek?
|
|
#
?
Nov 15, 2017 16:22
|
|
|
|
| # ? May 27, 2024 17:34 |
|
|
It's Seth MacFarlane's new show on Fox, The Orville. Which doesn't have enough jokes to be a Star Trek parody or the actual thoughtfulness to be a good Star Trek. It's funny because the episode he's complaining about depicted sexual coercion played for laughs and consent gained through chemically altering people, but the real problem for him is the guy was drugged into being gay.
|
|
#
?
Nov 15, 2017 16:29
|
|
