Bay 12 Games Forum

Aladdin's reference escapes me.

And Mu'nis al-Muzaffar was a eunuch. Eh...?

Odd, it didn't post. I was basically saying it's the implication that all women are the same. One womans reaction = all womens reaction?

ptw

popcorngate

ftfy

Mmm. That's probably it. I was expanding the freighter fleet continually; I guess I should be building ships to the Shipyard TG and transfering them over once they've completed instead, then?

... Actually, no, I don't know that. You said "A) he shouted 'Allahu Akbar,' kind of gives the game away," in relation to "they're calling it a terrorist attack because of the 'Obvious, visible reasons,'" right? Which implies that "Allahu Akbar" is an "obvious, visible reason" to call something a terrorist attack.

Which implies that people shouting "Allahu Akbar" are "obvious, visible" terrorists [at least when there's an event like this, which I've already explained in my directly previous post how That Is Wrong.]

Unless that *wasn't* in relation to the post directly before yours, which it seems to be directly answering. OR you were poor in writing what you were trying to say.

Oh; and even if it was someone deliberately attacking people, it doesn't automatically make it ideologically motivated if they shout takbir during it; for much the same reasons, takbir also comes when you're in a stressful/high stakes situation, like trying to kill people for any number of reasons. From "I'm going postal because of work stress," to "I'm literally high as balls on I don't even know how many drugs," to "I'm a high functioning sociopath who stopped functioning." To "I'm a diiiick, suck my baaaaalls, you're all wooooorthless, suck my baaaaalls." Honestly, I don't know why people would attack other people like this, so my list of motivations is wonky.

Takbir is evidence that they're Muslim, or were raised Muslim. It's not evidence that this is an ideologically/politically motivated attack.*

*which is one of the few definitions of "terrorism" that doesn't just make *any*thing count as terrorism; an attack intending to forward a political ideology. I mean, if you just call anything that makes people terrified "terrorism," that's literally any attack. *any* attack makes people shit bricks; they're being attacked! Of course they're terrified! So that definition doesn't work.

Quote from: overseer05-15 on October 31, 2017, 03:51:44 pm

If its worth keeping around for months its probably worth bookmarking

But then I'd have to remember and find it later.

Keep it in a folder at the very far left of your browser bookmark toolbar, labeled "Tabs."

re: romance. The "SUDDEN GAY" phenomenon isn't because of "everyone must be gay to please PC! we must shoehorn!" it's because of poor writing; as others mentioned, sudden *sexuality* is the problem, where mere interest in *anyone* [that has a written romantic subplot] is taken automatically and immediately as the player wanting to board the train to pound town.

It merely has a poor reflection on the whole "PC" thing, when you couple it with an idea to not arbitrarily prevent a player from doing something they want; after all, the sexualities of a fictional character are inherently flexible, same as anything else about them, because they're *fictional,* so you can make it conform to the players actions with the only discrepancy being on subsequent playthroughs. (good, or at least good intentioned idea, in my view.)

*and no, i'm not saying *every* game has to have *every* character conform. If for no other reason than because that's a *lot* of writing for "could happens." Only that in an RPG with strong character interaction and romantic subplots, arbitrary restrictions based on the *fictional* sexuality of a *fictional character* [hyperbole] "crush [certain] players dreams," for no reason.

I feel like there might be room for some diplomatic outreach here, especially if it were some of the more contra-NK countries involved like the States or Canada or the U.K. offered, if they were to offer assistance in the rescue and clean-up, esp. the countries with experience dealing with nuclear incidents like the States (Three Mile) Japan (Fukushima, even if it wasn't as bad as people make it out to be) Russia (Chernobyl) or Chile (not nuclear, but they have dealt with rescuing people trapped underground recently)

I mean, I doubt the Kimmy would accept it; if for no other reason than it's a secret ("secret") nuclear test facility and they wouldn't want the Americans to learn about their cutting edge gerbil-on-treadmills power station technology (to go along with their early-modern ICBM tech; Ahhh, Norky priorities! "Nuke the world, but what's a lightbulb?") but it's a cheap way to gain diplomatic points just to *offer,* innit? Play The Game and all that.