Bay 12 Games Forum

Please login or register.

Login with username, password and session length
Advanced search  

Show Posts

This section allows you to view all posts made by this member. Note that you can only see posts made in areas you currently have access to.

Messages - muldrake

Pages: 1 ... 35 36 [37] 38 39 ... 60
541
I am currently at a town hall in a "safe" red district.

Everyone here is an angry liberal.

The Republicans should be afraid.

Politicians often mistake slightly favoring them over a repugnant alternative as being some kind of mandate for every crazy ass thing they believe.

542
General Discussion / Re: Things that made you go "WTF?" today o_O
« on: March 18, 2017, 01:18:00 pm »
On the original subject, there's a world of difference between "gg" and "gg ez", ferex.

I agree.  And also, I was actually being a jerk in my original etiquette response, partly for the fun irony of actually violating etiquette in a post talking about etiquette. 

But I shouldn't have done that here, and I'm sorry about that.

In general, the gg thing is intended well, and as an act of sportsmanship, and taking offense at a "gg" is usually an act of jerksmanship.

543
Other Games / Re: Gaming Pet Peeves
« on: March 18, 2017, 01:02:23 pm »
Dark satire of what exactly?

WH40k's inspiration and aspiration seem to be pretty much entirely to be as overblown, overdramatic, and grim as a metal album cover. It's space metal opera. It's grimdark in such a larger-than-life way that you can't really feel emotionally invested in anything but the spectacle of it. it has fun with the grimdark because it keeps trying to outdo itself in just how big and overblown it is and has just tons of silly shit in it (the entirety of orks as a race).

That's true, but the dark satire was of itself.  You weren't supposed to take any of this seriously.  At the outset, it was supposed to be FUN.

544
General Discussion / Re: Things that made you go "WTF?" today o_O
« on: March 18, 2017, 12:46:55 pm »
I was going to reply to Tack, but then went with a PM, but then this response happened and :I
Guys, stop fighting over assumptions. One side is annoyed by the unspoken context and assumed a rather bland intent. The other DID THAT for reasons unveiled now.

You're right.  It was a jerksauce remark I now regret.

545

How does that change anything about it being quite dubious to rank candidates on their ability to win the election?

I was very specifically limiting that qualification to the issue of candidacy and yes, if you win the election, by definition you are the best candidate, that being someone standing for election and then actually winning an election.

In a functioning democracy, that also has some loose connection to being actually good at the office.

(...)

That has to be some pretty darn loose connection. I seriously doubt Al Gore would have messed up the United States foreign affairs the way Bush did.

I was criticizing the functionality of our democracy in that comment.

I didn't vote for Al Gore, though.  I voted for Nader, for which I will never apologize.

546
DF Dwarf Mode Discussion / Re: What's going on in your fort?
« on: March 18, 2017, 12:41:35 pm »
12 of them were killed by the 16 year old Hammerlord named "The Somber Lessons of Virginity".

We need to get better at getting these guys laid, because, like, seriously.

547
I don't see it as a rational thing, but it doesn't stop me from discussing it. They'd have to get it paid for first and other than that starter downpayment thing Trump did do, I don't see it getting paid for anytime soon.

The environmental and cultural mitigation survey thing is definetly going to delay it for quite a while, years probably. So, it'll be a while before it even gets started.

And yeah, I read somewhere of him saying that allies owe vast sums to NATO. It seems to be more of pandering to his base, even though it appears like backstabbing Merkel after meeting with her.
Pretty sure he was saying this kind of stuff back before he even ran for office? I don't remember it coming up during he's actual campaign, though I might of missed it in amongst the mass of other nonsense. I was wondering if/when it'd rear it's ugly head again.

He may not have said that word for word during the campaign, but he's definetly said things along the lines of that. Which is why I said it's just pandering to his base, even though it really does look like he's backstabbing Merkel.

IMO, when interpreting Trump actions, if you have a choice between thinking he's playing 4 dimensional chess and thinking he's just bungling his way into another failure, assuming he has no clue what he's doing is usually the safest option.

548

How does that change anything about it being quite dubious to rank candidates on their ability to win the election?

I was very specifically limiting that qualification to the issue of candidacy and yes, if you win the election, by definition you are the best candidate, that being someone standing for election and then actually winning an election.

In a functioning democracy, that also has some loose connection to being actually good at the office.

I think it should be obvious from the fact that I voted for Hillary that I thought she'd be a better President, but from the fact that he won the election, Trump was clearly a superior candidate, for the purpose of winning an election.

Muldrake's point has little to do with the quality of the candidate as leader or human being, his point was that last year's candidate were the two worse candidates in his memory in terms of electability. Not sure I agree, but that's all he said.

While I am very good at burying my own point in favor of arguing about nonsense, this is pretty much my point, to the extent there is one.  Trump was an awful candidate.  Hillary was even worse, even though her policies were, IMO, better.

I'll note there were a substantial number of voters who were entirely aware of what Trump is and actually voted for him for that reason, although I think a substantial number of other voters voted for him literally having no clue what a piece of shit he is.

We now have a shit sandwich for President.

More persistently peddled lie than caricature, but I guess that works, too. FTFE, etc., etc.
Now I may be mistaken on this, I know the whole email thing wasn't a big deal, but I recall a quote from Hillary Clinton saying that she got confused about which email to use and that she didn't know how to use the email was her defense against the claims at first.  Despite whatever the actual explanation was. (If I understand correctly now it wasn't actually an unusual practice)  Was I misled about her explaining the emails away by essentially saying they were too complicated for her?  That's my biggest sticking point against her, that she supposedly pled innocent due to stupidity.

Ronald Reagan did the same shit in Iran/Contra.  The only difference is he was more charming when he told that particular series of lies.

I don't believe it for a minute.  Hillary is a lawyer, she was legally educated and is highly intelligent.  IMO she knew the email server shit was illegal and a dodge against FOIA requests and other legal requirements, and chose to do it anyway.

549
Like, what kind of comparison could you use to portray the absolute unacceptability of this behavior?

I'd compare him to Berlusconi, another corrupt near-fascist politician who literally ran for office just for profit.

I'm just not getting the obsession with comparing him to Hitler.  I don't like Trump at all.  But I do think the absolute obsession with viewing him as some kind of ultimate evil is not at all productive and is, perversely, virtually ensuring we have to deal with this dick for 8 years instead of 4.

550
General Discussion / Re: Things that made you go "WTF?" today o_O
« on: March 18, 2017, 07:26:34 am »
I just read 'autism' and skipped over the rest of his post because I assumed he was an EL who popped over from the -chan's.

You wouldn't have been terribly wrong in that assumption, but that kind of thinking is exactly what is wrong in current discourse.  Congratulations for exemplifying that.

I do deliberately front-load my posts with the kind of language that discourages people whose opinions I don't care about from even reading them, though.

551
If we define candidates by their ability to win, then Adolf Hitler and Erdogan are examples of good candidates......

Am I alone in being sad whenever a comparison to Hitler just doesn't instantly disqualify you from being taken seriously just because Hitler?

Despite that, though, and limiting this to Hitler, Hitler did not get elected to be an absolute dictator.  Seriously, look at the history.  The Weimar Republic was weak and barely democratic at all.  The environment in which Hitler got elected to the limited position he held constitutionally forced him to fake a bunch of bullshit, like the Reichstag Fire, just to get his chancellor position.

The United States, with a centuries-long history of checks and balances and limitations on executive power, cannot be compared seriously to the situation Hitler inherited.  It's an absolute fucking joke.  I am embarrassed by supposedly "fellow" liberals who try to compare an entirely legitimate election to Hitler seizing power.  Please, quit doing this.  It's embarrassing.  It's dumb.

Does anyone here even remember Godwin's Law?  (I know it is about the frequency of Hitler comparisons and not about you losing the argument once you bring up Hitler.  But seriously.  The moment you drag in Hitler, you really should lose.)

Also, I'm not saying the person I'm responding to is particularly awful, and sorry Antioch, I apologize in advance because you aren't the jerk I'm talking about.

552
Do you just define good canidate by ability to win?

Yes.  By definition, the candidate who wins is the best candidate.

That doesn't mean they're best at whatever job they're applying to via the process of an election.  From the fact that I voted for Hillary, I obviously thought she'd be a better President than the current idiot in the office.

However, it is an established fact that in a heads-up contest between the two candidates, Trump won.

553
Other Games / Re: Gaming Pet Peeves
« on: March 18, 2017, 06:18:22 am »
Again, the problem isn't in the presence of dark elements or "gritty elements" or whatever. The problem is that there's often nothing else to it. Nobody seems to have a sense of humour or have something good or funny happen to them. It's just constant misery and pain and darkness and at some point, constant tragedy ceases to be tragic and just becomes boring.

You need some ups to balance the downs because that makes the downs much more emotionally resonant. Without moments of levity in Dwarf Fortress, the game would be a miserable slog to play.

What are you talking about is basically grimderp (Warning! Very addictive and kinda NSFW), it was one of the reasons Batman: AK sucked. It was trying to be "gritty and dark" so much that I didn't give a shit about anything.

It's also why WH40K attracted a horrible fanbase.  It's supposed to be a ridiculously dark satire and instead, most of the people who play it now take that shit as seriously as it's possible to take it, and it is basically the definition of grimderp.

554
DF Dwarf Mode Discussion / Re: What's going on in your fort?
« on: March 18, 2017, 06:15:43 am »
What is the most humane way of murdering absolutely useless migrants who show up just to pop you over the limit where you get titan attacks?  NOBODY WANTS CHEESE YOU IDIOTS.  GO AWAY.

555
General Discussion / Re: Things that made you go "WTF?" today o_O
« on: March 18, 2017, 06:01:50 am »
Has autism become the new normal or something?

Saying gg after a game is just etiquette.  Etiquette is how people deal with other people they hate or are angry at, or just lost to, or just won to, but without being a jerk about it.

Seriously calm down. 

Yes, etiquette is fake.  You're saying nice things to someone you don't like.  That's the whole point.  That's how we have civilization instead of the entire world being some Hatfields vs. McCoys thing forever and ever.

Pages: 1 ... 35 36 [37] 38 39 ... 60