geekwithsoul

For various reasons, I’ve gone to political rallies for a good portion of my life. They can be really fun or incredibly boring. There’s a sense of community you get at a concert or church service, and at the good ones, it can be quite a charge to be sharing the moment with others. At the bad ones, it can seem shrill or too amped or on the opposite side being dull as dishwater.

tl;dr - basically like a school pep rally for adults, but without the drawback of being required

Or people without any media literacy are more likely to vote for conservatives…

Not really sure your premise holds. I mean, sure a bunch of tradwives and their husbands might get upset when a woman declines to have kids, but in general I don’t think most people care. I’ve got kids but most of my friends don’t and I can’t imagine anyone caring one way or another.

Um…that’s basically every convention that has ever existed.

I think what a lot of people missed from the original video is that while it wasn’t the point, the first games did critique capitalism even if that wasn’t the main point. Would highly recommend people check out Tim’s videos directly - each one is usually about only 15 minutes long, but taken together is a masterclass on game dev and story telling.

Never said it didn’t. Doesn’t change the fact that Microsoft is notoriously worse by every metric and because of its position in the market is far more potentially damaging. Almost like if you sell an OS as something that can be trusted to run mission critical applications, you probably shouldn’t phone it in when it comes to securing that OS.

A third party vendor whose entire business model is predicated on the fact that security is such an afterthought at Microsoft that enterprise customers need to resort to this kind of crap for a bare minimum of security.

I had a Reddit account I opened in July 2009 that was fairly active and I deleted all my posts and comments when I left - mainly because I felt I couldn’t trust the company that ran it to be good stewards of the content and decided they weren’t entitled to it. All the stuff that’s happened in the last year has just reinforced that conclusion.

Reddit makes money off the content everyone contributes (as well as the hard work of so many unpaid folks doing moderation) and that’s not a model I choose to support. Some of the conversations I was involved in had really help information on a number of topics, and while I’m sad that information isn’t still available to others, I think the overall good is better served by not supporting a site so at odds with my beliefs.

I have +1.5k hours across all the Fallout games, and in general love Tim Cain’s games, and so no surprise I liked Outer Worlds. It’s smaller in scope than some people wanted, but considering the size of the team that developed it, it’s got a lot packed into it. Writing is top notch, gun play is fun, only real knock against it was that it was too easy.

“…The Economist reported 462,000 and 728,000 Russian soldiers were out of action by mid-June”

https://www.politico.eu/article/russia-army-lost-70k-soldiers-ukraine-war-uk-defense-ministry/

Now that’s both killed and wounded, and based on analysis of leaked docs from US DoD. How much is any of it true? Probably will know in 50 years or so, but whatever the exact number is, it’s likely more than they’ve lost in all military actions combined since WWII.

I don’t disagree with any of that, but again that context wasn’t obvious in your original post.

Also, those anti-democratic tendencies are inherent in all large organizations. And yes, it takes constant pressure to limit it, but that pressure needs to have a laser-like focus to be effective - otherwise bureaucracy and inertia win. That said, I’ve been involved in politics for almost 40 years, and the cliquish, insular, shambling monstrosity of the DNC is a mess - but it’s still actually better run and more open than any nationwide Democratic or GOP political committee in this country’s history. I mean the bar is on the floor in that regards, but progress and success are possible if done smartly.

Then help me understand - how do you feel that sharing this without the correct context was constructive?

Then my only advice would be to try and share in ways that are constructive rather than the opposite.

You could have just admitted it was a mistake without the grandstanding. All Democrats criticize the Democratic Party - it’s like a requirement, and it doesn’t make you special.

Criticism is our strength, though it’s often viewed as a weakness by others. But that criticism needs to be grounded in facts and reality, or else it undercuts the actual germane and real criticisms that need to be discussed and acted on.

If your post was in error, as you said, delete it and post something constructive. Maybe even link to the same thing, note the age of the link, but ask what needs to be done to make sure this doesn’t happen again. That might actually be a useful discussion. Otherwise you’re just throwing metaphorical molotovs and doing unintended damage.

I simply outlined the only two possible motivations for the post that I could think of and gave OP a prompt to explain if it was simply a mistake on their part. Did I miss a motivation that explains the context of the post?

This statement was from 23 July and has been overcome by events. Harris is the nominee. The only reasons to share this 3 weeks after it was published is to either pretend that there is dissent on the left about who should be the nominee, or it was a simple mistake and you didn’t see the date. Which is it?

I was in my early 20s and was visiting a friend’s house. His wife had a friend visiting that I’d never met. We were introduced and the first words she said to me were “Do you know your features are wasted on a guy?” and then went on to provide specific details.

We were married a year later. And that was 30 years ago.

Believing accusers should always be the first step. But when independent organizations investigate and find that accuser’s story is contradicted by known facts and not corroborated by other witnesses or any evidence whatsoever, then no, we shouldn’t still believe them.

It’s Tara Reade first off. Secondly she defected to Russia in the company of a known Russian intelligence asset whom she termed a “friend.” So excuse everyone who thinks her story might be suspect.

Thief Deadly Shadows in 2007. The one after that was The Orange Box later that same year.

BTW, for peace of mind, don’t be me and download your purchase history and add up how much you’ve spent on games over the years.