/baw/ - General Discussion

Upped my anti-depressant meds to 1/day as part of my ramp-up. The four days of a half dose didn't seem to have much of an effect, but holy shit I'm tired now. Could just be caffeine tolerance/horrible sleep, but, fuck.

I kind of expected this, though; doc said that it could make me a bit antsy/awake, but every time I've been told that it's been the opposite. Guess I'll move it to something I take at night, that should help with sleep problems hopefully.

I got a 400 watt fog machine. I can't see shit now, but it's cool.
Every monster should get a fog machine.

I can't decide if I should keep writing a fanfiction or not. I think it would be a good story, I've got pretty much the entire thing planned out in my head and I've already written a few chapters.

But it would be a long story. Do I want to do that? Do I want to be one of those people who have written a fanfiction in excess of 100k words? I feel like I would really regret putting that much time and energy into this, but at the same time I feel like I'd regret not doing it.

This is a stupid problem to have.

>>394022
What show?
What ship?

>>394016
Do you have a laser pointer? How about some hand-held mirrors?

>>394021
>>394022
Similar problem, but not a fanfic, but a fan-art comic. It sucks.

>>394024
I know a guy who has been working on his Sonic the Hedgehog fancomic for +5 years now.

He has yet to complete chapter 1 because he keeps scrapping everything and starting over.

>>394021
>>394022

Maybe you are asking the wrong questions. Maybe you should ask yourselves why you want to write it.

What is your reason for writing fanfiction?
Is there a story involving the characters or the setting that deserves to be told and cannot work to that extend without the connection to the source material?
Does your work reflect your appreciation of the source to some degree?

Writing fanfiction is just a 'silly' hobby like watching cartoons or playing videogames. Of course it's a "waste of time"; you do it for your amusement, not to earn money or better your social standing or for any other "meaningful" reason.

I wish Facebook had a "Hide all friends posts that are just videos of their kids doing everyday shit" option.

Saw the therapist. Can't say I'm terribly inspired, but it was only a single meet-and-greet session. Talks in a very soft voice, which is probably helpful with other patients but I find it belittling. Made some suggestions that were not new to me and that I had not done in the past because I thought I couldn't succeed at them. Next appt is in two weeks, but hopefully I can get it to weekly; the system imposed on him (as part of a larger healthcare network) doesn't allow scheduling more than one appointment in advance, though he said he can make a note that would allow me to do so. I'll see how these first few sessions go.

>>393992
>What would it take for the two to mix well?
For her to recognize your introversion and you to be willing to go to her things now and then. If you've hanged out a lot already she should have some idea that you're not a social individual, and since she agreed to go out with you that means she's okay with it to at least some extent. So long as you understand that she wants to go out and socialize in general and she understands that you don't want to go to every single thing you're invited to, it should be fine. She might also help you get comfortable being a bit more social, though that doesn't mean you'll start parading around rooms saying hello to everyone.

And, as far as social wrecks go, just meeting a girl puts you leagues above most people on *chans. That you asked her out and she said yes makes you at least wizard-tier.

>>394042
Once again I am reminded of the importance of perspective.

My perception of fanfiction differs from the average (the average being "it's always crappy romance or self-inserting into important characters' adventures") because what I look for is fairly specific.

On an objective level I kind of understand why you'd feel ashamed, but really, why does it matter? Who cares if it's incredibly nerdy and self-indulgent; it doesn't harm yourself or others, so why care? Not every part of your life needs to be productive or presentable.

Is there a way to quickly look up Star Wars lore without having to deal with Wookieepedia's annoying past tense format?

I mean, I get why, but really it just makes it a little disjointing to read through. Especially if you're in the midst of playing a Star Wars game. You know, in the present.

>>394042
People have won Hugo Awards for fanfiction. One of the most popular and lucrative musicals in recent memories is based on a fanfiction. Fanfiction is frequently assigned as required reading in English Literature classes. I think you're fine.

It annoys me how when girls are unconfident, bipolar and irrational it's cute, but when guys are the same thing, it's unattractive.

>>394051
Yeah, believe it or not that's an issue that is considered by feminists to be one of the ramifications of the Patriarchy. Socially enforced gender roles cause men a lot of problems too, and men who fall in to personality types and interests that are viewed as feminine are not only seen as less attractive by women, but seen as less manly by other men and therefore given shit about it because they're not being "what men are supposed to be." This is part of society's views of traits deemed as feminine to be inferior to traits deemed as masculine, and it's part of why it's so silly that a lot of men who would be well served by the feminist agenda have been conditioned to be opposed to it for the same reason--because you face social repercussions for feminine interests like feminism.

And even if you don't consciously think of it as "I would do this, but I don't want to face the repercussions," that stuff becomes so second nature to you due to conditioning that it doesn't even occur to you that that's the reason you're doing something. "Boys don't cry," or "Real men never go to the hospital unless they're unconscious and someone forces them," or "Real men don't let their emotions show," or "Real men don't do (whatever)." You hear it all your life and you just start to take it for granted, until you might really want to tell people what you're going through, but it no longer occurs to you to do so because society has conditioned you to believe that's not what you're supposed to do.

The reduction of the power of gender roles on society would mean that some women who have the urge to find a mate they can "protect" and/or support (this being the primary motivator for men who find that sort of thing in a woman attractive) would not suffer social repercussions for their choice in men, and men who need that same sort of protection/support would not see their own social status reduced for being, effectively, the "woman" in their relationship. These would just be things that are true about those people rather than things that make those people deviant and therefore deserving of ostracization.

Sorry you're going through that though.

>>394051
I don't think that's cute on anyone.
It's annoying at best and down right disturbing at worst.

>>394053
Agreed, I don't find that cute about anyone, female or male. Though it does seem to be tolerated more when the exhibitor is female.

>>394054
Wow no.

>>394055
I dunno. People seem less likely to get frustrated at women that behave that way than they do men.
But to be fair, it not like I've been studying social reaction and shit like that.

In any case, it shouldn't be tolerated from anyone. It should be helped. People deserve to be able to find peace of mind and emotional stability. Both for their own sake amd the sake of those around them.

>>394056
People keep saying that, I'm but 100% certain its the "grass is greener" effect.

>>394057
You know all those tumblr comics of women being antisocial or in embarrassing situations, or just being general NEET nerds?

If it was a guy in that sort of lifestyle, the general response would be "You're pathetic and need to do something with your life." And for females it's "WILL YOU PLZ BE MY GF"

>>394058
So one is advice and the other is objectification.

Hey, its cool. I get it.
You have your opinion and nothing's gonna change it.

But man at least note the fact that you lack perspective.

>>394058
Dude, there's the same comments on both versions - Why are being so selective?

>>394059
>>394060
The point is, most guys who are NEET losers don't want to better themselves. In an ideal world, they'd want a loser gf to be a loser with them. That's where the "pls be my gf" comments come from. Women on the other hand, statistically, don't want that. They don't want to date themselves like men do, and wouldn't go for a loser bf, even if they themselves are losers.

>>394031
>Is there a story involving the characters or the setting that deserves to be told and cannot work to that extend without the connection to the source material?
>Does your work reflect your appreciation of the source to some degree?

Yes, yes and yes.

Honestly I'm pretty proud of the story I've come up with (though I shouldn't really say I came up with it, it is a fanfiction). It's the kind of thing I would've liked to read when I was like 12 and actually read fanfiction. I'd like to think some kid out there might stumble across it and have a lot of fun with it, like I did with all the dumb stories I liked back then.

Plus the reputation fanfiction has makes me want to write a really good one, partly out of spite but mostly because I think the idea of really good fanfiction is hilarious.

Maybe thinking some fanfiction I wrote is really good makes me an asshole but oh well whatever.

>>394042
I could have been a proofreader for you.
And it's not like your reputation on this site can affect your real life man, nobody here is gonna give a shit you write fanfics but me and you've honestly made me really curious. Come on. Come onnnnn.

I'll leave a review. I know firsthand how much you want one.

>>394066
I believe in you, Anon. Make the best Fanfiction for a show that literally had a character turn into bologna.

>>394059
>So one is advice and the other is objectification.
>you lack perspective
Is this kid serious? There are a hundred ways to look at those comments. One is an insult and the other is praise. One is disgust and the other is desire. One is activistic and the other is pathetic. You state your interpretation as a fact, and then insult someone else for not understanding different viewpoints. If you want to keep being a condescending twit to someone who is trying to state their opinion, then go to tumblr where people like that crap.

>>394066
>ZATR
I have no idea what this means.

>I'm not linking it. It's still on fanfiction.net if you want to find it
There are more than 10,000 Invader Zim fanfictions on that site.

Just promise to post a link once you update it.
PROMISE

And is it just me or does fanficiton.net seem kind of dead? I swear it was way more active back when I was frequently reading stuff there. That was like ten years ago, but still.

>>394071
>I have no idea what this means.
I just googled it, it's a shipping (Zim and Tak Romance). I have never actually seen the show though. I don't even fanfic either. This convo is interesting.

>>394068
...It actually had two characters turn into bologna.
I will do it for you, Anon. It will be the greatest bunch of dumb bullshit centered on a couple of jerkass aliens. I will set this ship out to sea on a maiden voyage the likes of which no one has experienced. I will regret all of it, but it will still be done with love and care.

>>394071
>I have no idea what this means.
...Zim and Tak romance.
You actually went a looked for it, didn't you? Look, there's no way I'm gonna build up the guts to post it later, so I post it here and now whille I can.
https://www.fanfiction.net/s/4995066/1/When-I-m-Cleaning-Windows
Enjoy reading crap written by someone who had a tenuous grasp on basic grammar and made questionable decisions regarding the plot.

Yeah, the site's pretty damn dead these days. I think a lot of people went to tumblr or something.

>>394073
Alright, I reviewed it just like I said it would.

The first review is supposed to say "Anon from +4 here" but I guess ff.net's review system can't handle the plus sign so it just says "Anon from 4 here"

Or maybe I'm tired and forgot to hit +, I don't know.

I hate both memes and the twitch community, but goddamn I can't help but chuckle a little when I hear RIP in pepperonis.

>>394085
>I can't help but chuckle a little when I hear RIP in pepperonis.

I have no idea what meme you're referencing here. I've been spending less and less time on forums and the like, which I consider a good thing, but man it's surprising how quickly you fall out of touch with what's going on in the internet.

>>394075
np

And in case anyone wants to see what my dumb shit is like I doubt it but whatever here it is: https://www.fanfiction.net/s/7453835/1/At-Game-s-End

>>394086
Hmh guess I'll just maybe give it a quick loOH MY GOD I LOVE THIS

>>394088
WAIT.
IT SUDDENLY GOT GRIMDARK.

NOPE. THAT WAS WAY TOO BIG A TONAL DISSONANCE
WTH
WHY DID YOU DO THAT DEAR WRITER.

I APPRECIATE THE HUMOR YOU'RE PUTTING IN THERE BUT SERIOUSLY?

Your fortune: You will meet a dark handsome stranger

I am happy to report that IHOP will accept most drunken apologies given at 3 AM, even if they aren't really directed toward them.

>>394090
I should probably change the warning in the foreword to "This is a dark comedy."

I thought the comedic elements were enough to offset the grimdark but maybe not. Most of the story is basically horrible shit happening to the characters but always being played for laughs. The exception to that is the part with Ilia getting killed, but that more serious moment was just for buildup so the [CENSORED] version of what happened to her would have better payoff as a joke.

Thanks a lot for letting me know what your reaction was, I really appreciate it. That said, if you or anyone else wants to keep talking about it please either use the review system or message me on fanfiction.net. I already feel like kind of an attention-whore for linking to the story without being asked to, and I don't want to derail the thread with it.

>>394091
There's clearly a story to this. Would you like to share with the class?

>>394024
I have a laser pointer AND one of my walls in my living room is covered in mirror tiles....for some reason.

>>394092
Fun fact, I was just about to ask for a link when you yourself posted it.

He finally told me he loved me.

While he was drunk.

Despite remember other events that happened around the same time, he says he doesn't remember saying it.

So that sucks. When I told him about it he said "well, maybe I feel it but I have a hard time saying it."

Whatever.

>>394097
Dump his ass.

Oh god, remember the crazy SJW friend I mentioned last thread? Now she's trying to claim that as an asexual she's super oppressed and trying to shoehorn herself into the greater LGBT struggle and be considered as a part of all these LGBT events and movements, even though you'd think her self-described "nanogirl" status would be a more valid excuse. If I was LGBT myself I would be facepalming so hard at this mockery.

>>394107
Yeah, the thing is, while I recognize asexuality as a thing, I don't really see how asexuals are oppressed. Perhaps under-represented (though even then, is it so much that asexuals are underrepresented, or is it that asexual characters in fiction rarely bother labeling themselves? For example, a large chunk of protagonists in shonen anime are effectively asexual despite not treating it as a lifestyle--Monkey D. Luffy comes to mind).

But even that being said, I can see being an asexual could lead to being ANNOYED by other people trying to hook you up with people, or annoyed that culture tends to make a big deal about romance. But is anyone actually bullied, treated different by the law, or has anyone lost a job because of their asexuality?

By the way, to any asexuals in the thread, these are not merely meant to be rhetorical questions to prove a point. They're at least partially in earnest. If this stuff has been happening to you or to people you know, please tell me about it, I'm interested to hear. If I am simply ignorant of the suffering you're going through, I would like to be educated. But thus far I am not aware of any real oppression happening to asexuals beyond, at worst, lack of acknowledgement.

I know for sure that my friend's stance regarding this issue is unambiguously in the wrong, because a week before this she also started a big shitstorm with some of her other friends after she condemned the phrase "humans are sexual creatures" as hate speech against asexuals (thankfully for my sanity I stayed out of this one). I mean, I'm a complete virgin who's never really been interested in sex and perfectly fine with staying that way for the forseeable future, to the point I'd probably hold off on sex within a relationship unless we've been together for like years and mostly as a means for emotional intimacy, so I wouldn't consider myself a "sexual creature" by any means. But that's just ridiculous, and the opposite stance, slut shaming or whatever the fuck it may be, has probably caused way more harm over the centuries.

And does asexuality deserve to be under in the LGBT umbrella? No offense to the asexuals who do think it should be, but I figure absence of sexual interest is not the same as absence of gender or any other nonconventional orientation sexual interest/gender, which have had a history of honest to god abuse. The closest I can think of is virgin shaming, "they just need to get laid", or whatever, but that's just it. Bullying, people finding excuses to be mean, but not oppression. I can't think of anyone who's ever been beaten to death because they swore off the idea of having relationships in general as opposed to rejecting them with spiteful individuals.

I think the deal with asexuality isn't exactly opression - but this: not being actually considered a valid sexuality.

There's a difference with not getting laid/horny and being asexual. The main deal with asexuality is just validation.
Good on you guys for acting out precisely what the issue is about.

>>394111
At least she's not calling herself a demisexual.

>>394120
You should count yourself lucky. The only reason people use labels is so they can stop treating the labelled as fully human. Once you are a labelled individual, you lose agency in the mind of those who apply that label. You are no longer "John," you are "John the Asexual." You are now treated as an instance of the Asexual Template. You see that as a force for solidarity among other asexuals, but for non-asexuals, it is used only as a force for enforcing Otherness. You identify yourself as no longer a member of whatever Tribe makes up the majority, and a member of another Tribe--and at the center of all Tribal groups is the assumption that any other tribe, including allied tribes, is a rival, in competition for resources. Perhaps not an enemy, but certainly not "One of Us," either.

You can pass in any tribe you choose to belong to. But in trying to set yourself apart, in your own tribe, you aren't fighting Tribalism, you are only increasing the number of tribes. When really our goal should be to eliminate these tribes, and treat others as individuals rather than as instances of templates. Not "John would not be interested in you Janet, he is a homosexual," but "You may be barking up the wrong tree, Janet, I've only ever seen John date guys."

>>394123
The whole labels thing goes two ways. Though sure, splitting what separates us is an ok goal, we shouldn't be saying "accept eachother DESPITE your differences" but more "accept eachother BECAUSE of your differences."

What one calls label, another calls part of their identity. Like nationality, school, where one's grown up or travelled. That stuff shapes you and its no reason to leave behind merely because you aren't accepted because of a facet of your life.

Regardless of whether people think asexuality is a kind of sexual orientation or not I'm pretty sure saying that people like to have sex doesn't even come close to being hate speech and anyone who says it is, tries to censor discussions of human sexuality in their presence, or tries to equate their struggles to more prominent LGBT groups deserves a sound slap to the face from someone who has suffered through true discrimination.

>>394124
No, you're confusing what one does with what one calls oneself. Elimination of labels doesn't mean the elimination of different behaviors, it means treating those things as quirks of the individual rather than markers used to identify someone as a member of a tribe. There is no reason one has to "Identify as X" to continue doing the things that X currently does, or believing the things that X currently does. I do not have to Identify as a Gamer to play video games--and in fact, refuse to do so because the Gaming Community is horrible. You do not have to Identify as Asexual to be Asexual. You do not have to Identify as Black to continue observing the traditions of your african ancestors.

Obviously the "Identify as Black" one isn't something we can work with right now--this is about goals, not Current Reality. Right now, certain groups are classified as Other by society regardless of what they identify as. Black people will be regarded as Black regardless of whether they think of themselves so, because their Label is largely based on visual identifiers. Gay people will be regarded as Gay regardless of whether they identify as such if their sexual preferences are known. In those cases, the tribe has been created for you, and not acknowledging them only gives up the benefits--it doesn't eliminate the negative effects of those identities. In those cases, embracing one's label for solidarity makes perfect sense for as long as people continue to see these people as Other.

>>394125
>censor
That word doesn't mean what you think it means.

Telling friends how dare they talk about sex on Facebook because the site is her safe space and they're giving her panic attacks by making her remember past discrimination for being an asexual sounds like censorship to me.

>>394129
That's not censorship, that's just being a whiny asshole. It's not like they can delete their messages or block them from continuing to talk about it and ignore them.

>>394129
>censorship
You keep using that word...

>>394129
Being a shitty person who makes LGBT people look bad =/= censorship.

>>394129
No, that is called "suffering the consequences of saying something." Having to deal with the social ramifications of having said something is not censorship. It is how dialogue works.

>>394129
I see it as one of two things, she is quite possibly lying as an excuse to force people to cater to her whims (which happens quiiiiite a lot especially with the kinds of people who frequent Tumblr and LJ), or she's extremely emotionally fragile to begin with and therefore people do need to be careful and avoid talking with her in general.

>>394095
Hm. Well I'd be happy to talk about it if it doesn't really bother anyone. Or we could just start a fanfiction/writing thread on /coc/.

>>394090
Would you mind telling me what part of the story the tonal dissonance became a problem? Was it Ilia's death scene or did it happen before that? I'm gonna trim down the last two chapters and try to add some more funny lines, but it'd help to know which part began to throw you off and why.

>>394140
>she is quite possibly lying as an excuse to force people to cater to her whims
You say it as if these are powerful people.
Its just a person on the internet complaining about people on the internet.
Facebook, Twitter, Tumblr, Reddit, Stormfront,... its the same principle but you're just focusing on the example you disagree with.

>>394141
I was reading through it too and the Ilia death scene was VERY much out of left field. There was no build up, an at no point did the story even imply it'd get that dark.

>>394143
Well it's still pretty douchey in principle to make up an illness and paint yourself as a false martyr just because you don't like what your friends are talking about. There are more reasonable ways to change the subject than jumping straight to "you guys are a bunch of assholes, stop triggering me!". If that's how you're gonna be, it's not much of a friendship.

>>394140
To be fair, it's not the first time she's done this. She's upper middle class and lives in one of the safest neighborhoods in my hometown (Boston), yet a year ago she mentioned that she's sometimes deathly afraid of leaving her house and going to class because she's worried she'll get raped or killed because of her race, and here she is now advocating violence against white people because of their race, the irony.

I didn't think much of it at the time, but that was probably the first big warning sign even before she dove headfirst into the Attack on Titan fandom. I don't want to unfriend her because it would be rude, and she still considers herself to be on good terms with me despite the previous incident, but I wish there was some way to put some perspective into her and show just how offensive and trivializing she can be without falling over all her SJW tripwires. And unless something extreme happened to her within the last two and a half years since we went apart, I highly doubt she has legit PTSD or any other such mental disability. She used to be able to talk politics with other people and agreeing to disagree instead of resorting to bullshit tactics when she didn't like where the argument was going like language policing (OK so I admit censorship was the wrong word to use. Language policing is probably more appropriate, but it doesn't change the fact that what she's doing is still pretty stupid).

>>394145
>she is now advocating violence against white people because of their race
...

...are you SURE "sjw" is the phrase you wanna describe her with?

>>394141
Yeah, I just thought that was completely ... random.
So far you built up this comedic "lol vidya amirite?" position during a rainy night with the highest peril at that point being "Mario went poof but without the poof/The princess is gone you little perv!".
Then suddenly going "And then there she was picking flowers after scolding link to get BUTTCHEEKS out for a run and OH NO GORE GORE SLASH SLINGING SLASHER"

So
yeah

>>394143
>>394148
Okay, thanks for the feedback.

The reason I made that part so overly dark was because I thought that more contrast between that and the overly safe censored version would make the censored version funnier, but I guess I took it too far. I'll probably just rewrite the whole encounter and scrap that joke idea since it necessitates going grimdark for a moment. I thought it was funny enough to be worth it but oh well.

The main thing I'm trying to improve on is mixing humor with different kinds of suspense. I was expecting to eventually hit a snag like this where the balance is off. Glad to know you enjoyed it up to that point, at least.

I finally found that music video. The one that used to play on Jane Doe's livestream. Probably something really popular that should have already been in my bookmarks, but whatever.
//youtube.com/watch?v=vMGSH0J0dUU

>>394151
I enjoyed it afterwards, and you do have some writing chops and I will admit I laughed a bit.
It just didn't benefit the story as a whole.

Anyway, when are you thinking of updating again?
I really would like to read more.

From this day forth, I will stop taking anything my parents say seriously.

Today they attempted to convince me that being wealthy and strong enough to easily protect a girl is more important than you both making each other happy.

>>394160
Did they also ask when you were going to buy a house

>>394160
I hope you don't have a sister. Because if you do, I feel for what her self esteem may be like.

>>394154
It'll probably be at least two weeks before the next update, I've got schoolwork to take care of and I want to edit that one chapter first. Plus some other stuff I gotta do.

>you do have some writing chops
uguu~

Saw yet another doc today, this one said "fuck it, hard stuff" and has me starting a higher dose of Venlafexin ER (Extended Release) at the end of the end of the week; I take the regular Venlafexin (non-ER) I have now until then.

I'm not big on taking meds for depression, as three past attempts all went nowhere. Especially since the regular venlafexin leaves me gassy and groggy, but supposedly those will disappear after a few weeks and aren't as bad with the ER, anyway...

Sickness season is starting. I haven't been this sick in a long time. The last time I've been to a doctor was five years ago when I was hit by a car.

Those new 10 Euro bills look really nice. Fresh money looks nice in general, though.

A while back I did some really dumb shit over the last 4 months and lost all my friends, who I've known for a few years. It fucking hurts and I still have to actively stop myself from checking their facebooks, twitters, etc. and seeing them happy without me. There is no peace from this hell.

In other news, I'm using a blank page of my sketchbook as a plate for my sandwich because I'm too lazy. I've hit a new low.

>>394179
That sucks, I hope you're able to patch things up with them.

Friendly reminder to BACK UP YOUR FUCKING FILES. NOW. LIKE RIGHT FUCKING NOW. AS SOON AS YOU READ THIS.

I just had a scare. Lost some things but was able to access the most important things.

>>394181
I keep all the things that would really need recovery in either Dropbox or Google Drive anyway.

I am just about at my wits end.
What is with this prevailing attitude that demands people find a group, single out the most negative aspects connected to it, regardless of the individuals involved, and use it to fully damn every last person associated with it?

How is that logical? How is that helping anything? What are you trying to protect that is more valuable than developing our overall social understanding? I mean, can someone explain this to me?
I don't understand it at all. I don't even know how to properly word what frustrates me about it.
It's like there's a level of defensiveness so strong that some people go full on offensive. Damn the whole for the actions of a few, attack them before they attack you.

I just don't get it.

>>394180
I can say without a doubt that things will never be patched up. I fucked up hard and I've lost them for good. None of them really gave that much of a shit about me anyways. Nothing is ever going to replace them or being able to chill in skype and shoot the shit with some of them. The last few days in particular have been pretty difficult. I've done nothing but browse 4chan, talking to nobody.

I should have just been less trusting and more manipulative, deceitful, and mercenary with them, really. I was too honest and open.

>>394185
Path of least resistance and psychological self-defense mechanisms. People oversimplify complex issues because that's easier (== less stressful) for them. People refuse to consider opposing viewpoints because their subconscious is trying to protect them from mental integrity failure.

People are rarely driven by hard logic.

Ebola in America has the CDC emailing nurses like my mom offering airfare, hotel costs, and other stuff in order to get people to train others on how to properly use the protective gear for it. She's pretty freaked out about it.

>>394179
Been there.
Oh how I've been there.
Hope shit gets better for ye.

>>394185
A group is as good as the best and as bad as the worst.
That's very much implicit in any group you willingly join.
Like, thats one of the things you're signing up for.

"Hey, are you willing to be associated with this? Yes? Then join. No? Then don't."

Its like that with p much everything.

>>394185
>Someone threatens a school shooting/bombing in the name of a movement.
>"Man we're not all like that."

>>394192
Heh. More like
>"we just want kotaku to have objective reviews!"

>>394191
How did you get over it? I'm atrocious at meeting and getting to know new people.

How do you enter a thread now, anyways? I don't see an option that let's you do it without quoting someone.

>>394192
>>394193
Anyone who gives a damn (and boy do I use "gives a damn" loosely as the only people who get angry at kotaku in 2014 are people who are looking to get angry) about game reviews needs to distance themselves away from Gamergate.

Aside from the fact that the pool is already poisoned with manbabies and misogynists, why in the hell would you want to associate with people who threaten terrorism?

And while +4 seems to be a whole lot more intelligent than say 4chan , don't bother defending this with "well it's just the internet!". If there was ever a "wild west" age of the internet where you could say whatever you want and not have it taken seriously, we are far beyond that time. We're in the age where people say moronic shit and then actually bother to follow up on it.

>>394194
It was a pretty tough climb for me, because I brought most of that friend-losing upon myself with my shitty behaviour and actually abusing their care for me. I wanted to burn bridges with people I honestly called friends and got what my dumb ass wanted at the time.

Getting over it involved a crap load of soul searching and finding something I personally found fulfilling.
I guess I tried my best to find a passion for something and in doing so, I became friends with whomever was associated with said interest.
Yeah, most people are online friends, but... I dunno, guess thats up to you if you wanna pursue.

I guess the main thing I did was try to be good to myself.
And everything else followed.

I'm not even sure I'm completely recovered from the consequences of my behaviour back then. Personally.
But at least I...
I dunno. I think I'm smarter from it.

>>394195
At the VEEERRRY bottom there's a "reply" line.

>>394195
Click the post number.

>>394187
>>394191
I think I just need to vent a bit. I'm just so tired of seeing people use hate in guise of heroism. From anyone.
Seeing someone shoot the flock to harm the foul doesn't seem right.
>>394192
>>394193
>>394196
This whole Gamersgate nonsense is only is only one tiny portion of a whole issue that's been under my skin for years. There have been other instances recently, but I won't bother to bring those up. Don't get me wrong, I want strong journalistic integrity and less power to gamer journalism in general, but I don't define myself as a participant of the movement exactly because of this problem.
People have done terrible things in the name of many well intentioned movements throughout all of time. but moments of tragedy and idiocy by lone idiots should not define the groups, unless claimed by their leaders. Especially dangerous in these days of easy anonymity and unorganized hashtag activism. Every vaguely organized point of that recent movement was eager to warn others not to threaten those involved.

My moral compass basically boils down to 'Don't forcefully interfere in others lives unless they request it'. Obviously that encompass acts of ending lives. These threats of terrorism are inexcusable, but only by those that made the threats. Like I said, I just needed to vent my frustrations somewhere. Thank you for hearing me out. I feel a bit calmer about everything.

Apathy is death.

>>394185
In a lot of cases, the reason people blame the entire group for the actions of some members of that group is that the group is rarely willing to fully address the problem members of the group and condemn them the way that they deserve. Either you get a situation like the police, where the "good cops" refuse to bear witness against the bad cops, or you get a situation like Gamers, where rather than address the problems inherent to Gamer culture, they prefer to make "Not all Gamers" arguments about how "That guy doesn't REALLY represent us." Somehow, these people keep showing up, and they do not feel like they are likely to face ostracization for their behavior from the people they view as peers--because they won't suffer ostracization for their behavior from their peers. Because a large portion of gamers are the sorts of nerds who avoid real world conflict, even if avoiding conflict means enabling toxic behavior.

You've said yourself that your policy is basically "Don't interfere with other's lives." In most cases, that's laudable behavior. But in a lot of situations, refusing to interfering in other people's lives is tacit approval of their behavior. By refusing to speak up when these people treat other people badly--engaging in bullying or propagating toxic philosophies amongst your peer groups--you are telling them "I do not disapprove of your behavior."

Because they can't see inside your mind. They don't know you disapprove if you don't say anything. And lack of disapproval is effectively approval. These people believe that their behavior represents the majority opinion, and that they are therefore justified in their behavior, because too many people who do disapprove of their behavior are unwilling to say so for fear of causing conflict.

If you do approve of their behavior, then that's fine. But if you don't, you should be aware of the fact that you are contributing to the problem by not fighting it. And that is why people lump you in with the people who are engaging in the behavior itself. Because while you might not approve of that behavior inside your own head, the behavior you engage in tells the people who do engage in that behavior that their behavior is acceptable.

I'm heavily inclined to believe that gamergate is nothing more than sexist bullshit masqueraded as caring about the state of video game journalism (which is a joke in itself, tbh). This is evidenced by the entire movement repeatedly exposing women online to actual danger by leaking their personal information.

If they actually gave a shit about "gaming" then they would have raised this shitstorm over more important things. Things like Crytek refusing to pay their employees on time, Gamespot firing Jeff Gerstmann over the Kane & Lynch incident, the atrocious working conditions of the game industry itself, etc.

Not "Small time female indie developer is promiscuous and cheated on her boyfriend." That's a ridiculous hill to die on.

>>394203
>But in a lot of situations, refusing to interfering in other people's lives is tacit approval of their behavior.
And my very policy is in disapproval of those actions.
I do voice my disapproval of the evils of others that would connect with my group, but I rarely attach myself to groups because I suppose I'm cautious of being pre-judged due to it. No more fanbases, no more politics, no more subculture. It's all too much drama for my taste and I'm tired of trying to explain myself to the sort of person who assumes the worst of me because someone shat on the rug at our party. If I could find a party where no one shat on the god damn rug, I would probably look into it, but for some horrible reason demanded by fate, every God damned party on this fucking internet has to have at least one wretched little malefactor has to lay their stinky little brown polyps right where I want to stand.
>>394204
I don't think it's wise to ignore the very real impact that reviews have on developers and gamers alike. It's easy enough to say that you can just ignore them, but for better or worse these things really do affect our hobby in a fairly substantial way. I don't think asking for credibility and integrity (especially concerning relationship transparency) is a bad thing. Death threats, harassment, doxxing are though. Shit moves birthed by cowardly thoughts and I will never support them.
If people have already made up their minds about it, what point would my words make? Would it just be dismissed as just a "Not all X" excuse?

So you finally get why groups and identifying as groups as an idea is shit.

Took you a while.

>>394206
No see, thats the thing.
Wanting integrity in media? Thats fine.
Using bullshit arguments like "Bitch slept with this guy for coverage/reviews/awards" which wasn't even god damn true which seems to be the thing that initiated the whole thing is, as I've said, bullshit.

(Man, people were on Zoe's shit for EVER. Way before this started.
You think this is anything other than them bouncing on it?)

Like, yeah. I'm glad you can tell how crap this whole thing is.

Sigh.
So yeah, also identifying with websites (I'm guessing this has to do with the 'sting' you get with anyone saying "lel 4chan is tresh" on twitter and having a really cute bunny webcomic at the same time) but the truth is, why would anyone want to identify AS A GROUP with a website is beyond me.
I went to 4chan.
Does it offend me to be told 4chan is, as some would say, tresh?
Nah.
I'm not THE website.
I don't believe in what a vast majority of the website believe in.

Therefore I am not 4chan.
Same with tumblr. And I'd say same with being a weiner-haver in the sense that I get the "Bro culture" surrounding it is pretty much 99% of weiner-havers.
...

Anyway, there's people who're doing stuff for vidya jernalism who don't go under Gamer G8.
You could look into thta.

>>394207
What do you mean? I haven't conscientiously committed myself with a group in 3 years. At least I don't think so.
I just don't think it's right to dismiss one person based on the actions of another when the only thing connecting them is an ideal not wholly related to whatever ill deed what actually performed.
I think joining together for a cause or something as simple as enjoying a show is a powerful and entertaining tool, but the eagerness to bite each others heads off because a few idiots don't know or want to play fair is just too much. There's a blood lust there I don't want to be near.

>>394208
>Using bullshit arguments like "Bitch slept with this guy for coverage/reviews/awards" which wasn't even god damn true
It wasn't? I can't say I was following it closely enough to find out. Like I said earlier, it was just one of many things that have been happening that lead me to my first post. Politics, religion, sexuality, and fandoms. The usual suspects , but all at once while I've already been feeling il and tired from a lack of full sleeping hours.

In any case, I appreciate the discussion.

>>394210

>It wasn't?

At best, the guy who wrote for Kotaku wrote a few sentences about Depression Quest after he'd started a relationship with Zoe. He didn't write a review of DQ for the site. I haven't seen any actual evidence that Zoe used sex to get better coverage or whatever.

And really, though the GG "side" won't admit it (for PR reasons), that is how this whole Gamergate mess got started: people got pissed at Quinn, figured out that wasn't a good look, and pivoted to "CORRUPT GAME JOURNALISM" to distance themselves from the constant barrage of attacks on Quinn.

Now they're using conspiracy theory nutter language ("false flag", "shill", "redpill", et al), openly trying to disprove the legitimacy of every instance of a "threat" made towards anti-GG people (e.g. the recent threat towards USU and Anita Sarkeesian), and doing absolutely jack shit in terms of trying to solve the myriad issues of games journalism (especially the coziness of AAA devs/publishers and major gaming sites like IGN).

And while they'll do everything possible to distance themselves from the misogyny and the namecalling and the hate, they'll never be able to undo the damage of being seen as in league with the fools who do that sort of bullshit. (Especially if all they do is sit around on 8chan and circlejerk themselves about how they can see through the false flags or whatever.) By the admission of a pastebin in one of the 8chan/gg/ stickies, GG has no real organization and no goals/objectives/demands/etc. They say this is done to avoid the possibility of cause corruption/distraction, but it also makes them look like a bunch of idiots flailing around because they're pissed at some pet issue and can't really do anything about it.

You know what other famous "group" did that sort of thing just a few years ago? Occupy Wall Street.

Keep in mind harassment and death threats are going both ways. People in general are just assholes.

If anything GamerGate has granted the gaming press complete immunity from criticism because they can just point at that fucking maelstrom of hate and retardation and go "you're THAT if you don't agree with us".

>>394211
>They say this is done to avoid the possibility of cause corruption/distraction, but it also makes them look like a bunch of idiots flailing around because they're pissed at some pet issue and can't really do anything about it.
It also leaves them open to radical elements taking over the idea to promote their own bullshit, which is basically what happened from the beginning. Just like Anonymous: no recognizable leadership allows anyone to claim their actions are part of the group at large.

>>394213
It doesn't grant them anything, but many are acting like it does.

>>394211
IIRC part of what caused it to really blow up were the DMCAs and huge post nukes. Regardless of whether the accusations were true (chances are they aren't), that certainly didn't help and probably got a lot of otherwise non-political people on edge.

Just discovered frosting shots exist. America has gone too far.

>>394213

No, it doesn't. You can advocate for a change to journalistic ethics within the gaming journalism world without having to align yourself with GamerGate.

(Fat chance of that change ever happening without a massive sea change in how the gaming journalism world deals with AAA publishers, though.)

>>394213
EA already tried that a few years ago ("people who don't like Dragon Age 2 are HOMOPHOBES"). It's unlikely to stick because neutral/anti-GullibleGate people who care won't be any less likely to call out corporate bullshit.

GoofusGate isn't going to, say, stop Jim Sterling from taking a dump on whatever dumb ripoff scheme becomes popular with the industry next.

It surely won't stop the usual suspects from trying though.

Lesson: don't drink /pol/'s kool-aid if you want to be taken seriously. Diplomacy is a thing.

>>394211
>You know what other famous "group" did that sort of thing just a few years ago? Occupy Wall Street.
OWA *did* have goals--bringing attention to Income Inequality (which it succeeded at) and bringing about campaign finance reform, and continues to operate. WolfPAC is an OWS project and is doing a lot of good in helping to support political candidates, and OWS has bought out and erased several million dollars in student loan debt as well.

>>394211
In fact, didn't the original post from the ex-boyfriend detaling Quinn's supposed infidelity state that whatever misdeeds Quinn did, buying good reviews with sex explicitly wasn't one of them.

>>394212
Yeah, IIRC part of the reason TotalBiscuit (who seems like an otherwise decent guy, similar to Jim Sterling) is even throwing his lot in with the GamerGate folks is because of legit social justice warriors excoriating him for what was a cynical but fairly reasonable attitude and poisoning him against them, letting him be suckered into being a useful idiot and throwing his credibility away trying to fit his non-political square peg into their right-wing hole when he would've served better as a figurehead for a third faction of aggrieved non-political gamers.

There's basically no excuse for supporting the Gamergaters. They're basically just conspiracy theorists, imagining a vast cabal of evil feminists and SJWs working to destroy their hobby by making Depression Quest popular. They're so fixated on this narrative that it never even occurs to them that it's a bit ridiculous to go chasing after broke indies as the source of all evil in the industry when the too-close relationship between rich publishers and slavish publications is right over there.

But because they're conspiracy theorists, there's no sense arguing with them, any more than there's any sense arguing with someone who thinks the moon landing was faked, or that Obama was born in Kenya to be a muslim sleeper agent and destroy America. The only thing to do, really, is ridicule them. At great length. Whenever they pop their heads out.

>>394227
On the one hand, Depression Quest IS kind of a crappy game in this day and age (nobody cares about Zork anymore and that still gave you a lot more freedom), and it would be annoying to see the market flooded with imitations. On the other hand, all that does is add maybe a few minutes of digging through crap to find what you like. Nobody is forcing you to buy them nor does it stop people from making more mechanically-accomplished or socially indifferent games either. Who fucking cares. All it will really do is make the game industry expand to cater to a variety of non-competing audiences. I mean, the live-action genre now encompasses all sorts of things like films, miniseries, TV shows, Youtube clips, and generally you don't see them cannibalizing each other.

>>394227
Then there's also the fact that they're p.o.'d because "sjws and political correctness are censoring muh gaem reviews! I don't know what to buy anymore!" Insisting games get given certain scores based on what sjws tell them, or because a reviewer is an sjw.
Like

...
ugh.

>>394229
>Insisting games get given certain scores based on what sjws tell them, or because a reviewer is an sjw.
See, and one of the big problems with that is that they are often the same people that insist that games can be art, and art criticism is not expected to be objective or unbiased. Criticism is about subjective experience and is often informed by the politics of the critic and of the times, and what the piece of art says both about the artist and about the time they live in.

Not that scores are really something associated with criticism anyway. Criticism is supposed to take the form of essays, not report cards. Game reviews are almost never games criticism.

>>394230
Well, Polygon did take several points away from their ratings of Dragon's Crown and Bayonetta 2 because of perceived sexism in the games which had nothing to do with the gameplay. It's not a problem right now since it's only a handful of people doing it right now. But it could become a problem in the future in the extremely unlikely situation that other institutions follow their lead and rate game based on perceived political agendas when there are a myriad of more important, objective things to look at like controls/camera/framerate/glitches. But that's only because of the way Metashitic is systematically fucking people over based on arbitrary numbers like what happened to the guys behind Fallout: New Vegas. If we switched to a Rotten Tomatoes system then it shouldn't even need to matter and these GamerGate loons wouldn't have a leg to stand on.

Also, just because this nightmare scenario i described is the barest shred of possible doesn't mean it will. It's a fucking bogeyman at this point. Besides, if we ever escalate there I can guarantee you there will also be equally retarded rightwing reviewers who will give Bayonetta 2/10 scores elsewhere for promoting misandry or claim Assassin's Creed glorifies terrorism. And it's not like journalists aren't doing this in a nonpolitical sense already and rating games unfairly high because they want the triple A ad monies.

>>394232
>But it could become a problem in the future
But see, my point here is: how is this a problem? If we were to accept as a given that games are art rather than mere leisure, then one must judge the entire experience created by the game, and not just the gameplay. If the critic in question has less positive experience because of the politics of the game, then there is absolutely no reason their critique shouldn't be more negative because of it.

Like, let's extrapolate this to the point of absurdity: let's imagine someone makes this game. It has the best gameplay of all time, and redefines video games in some fundamental way because of how much fun it is. However, the game is a game where you play a guy who likes to fuck toddlers, and while the gameplay itself doesn't actually involve fucking toddlers, the political philosophy behind the game is one which says that fucking toddlers is virtuous, and it hits you over the head with this diatribe in pretty much every cutscene. It's like an Ayn Rand novel, only instead of making everything revolve around fellating the rich, it all revolves around infant rape. There are frequent, disturbing scenes of the child predator you play abducting children and abusing them, and this character is presented as heroic for doing so.

Now a fair reviewer might well note that the gameplay is admittedly fun, in the same way that modern film critics continue to hold up movies like The Birth of a Nation as examples of a strong understanding of the craft of filmmaking. But the experience that a person has playing this game is likely to make them supremely uncomfortable in a way that makes the game less enjoyable for them. Is it not fair for reviewers to dock this game points for the subject matter and/or trappings despite the fact that it is otherwise a well-made game?

I feel that reviewers should be not only allowed, but encouraged to reduce the scores of video games that make the experience of playing them less enjoyable even if the ways in which this negativity is expressed are not directly related to gameplay or due to bad craftsmanship. Because ultimately the goal of a review is to tell people whether or not they will enjoy something. And because no reviewer is ever going to give an objective or unbiased review, I think that the simple fact that something bothers them for moral or political reasons is all the justification needed for a negative review.

When are we not gonna talk about the Mamermate stuff?

>>394232
>Well, Polygon did take several points away from their ratings of Dragon's Crown and Bayonetta 2 because of perceived sexism in the games which had nothing to do with the gameplay

So what?

If it's part of the game, it's up for grabs to be criticized. I don't have a problem with either game (well, I actually think the character design in Dragon's Crown looks godawful, but this criticism of mine applies to the male designs as well--but this is aside the point: I don't find DC offensive, personally) and people should be able to speak their mind about how they feel about it.

Also, the idea that games are getting reviewed to fit some "agenda" is retarded beyond belief. I could also make the argument that people who reviewed Dragon's Crown well had an agenda. But I won't. Because that would be retarded.

In fact, I have issue with you calling this an agenda in the first place. MAYBE the people who wrote the review actually feel that way. And you know what? That's fine. They can feel how ever they want about the game.

>>394233
>And because no reviewer is ever going to give an objective or unbiased review, I think that the simple fact that something bothers them for moral or political reasons is all the justification needed for a negative review.

This is a good point. First off, it lets the person reading the review what they're getting into. Maybe they find the content objectionable. Well cool, now they don't have to play the game. And for people who don't find the content objectionable? Well, they can ignore that part of the review, knowing that they aren't personally bothered by the material and can play it without an issue. A "negative" serves two purposes here.

Like look at it this way, this time using gameplay features. Let's say someone writes a review for Resident Evil 1, and one of the negatives they list is that the game is only like 4-5 hours long for a casual playthrough. Now for a person expecting a 20-30 gargantuan adventure, yes, this is going to turn them off. For people like me, whoever, who enjoy short romps will be right on board with the game's length.

>>394234
Not too much longer, but this discussion is tame as hell.

>>394232
>Well, Polygon did take several points away from their ratings of Dragon's Crown and Bayonetta 2 because of perceived sexism in the games which had nothing to do with the gameplay.
Games are more than their gameplay.

Who cares if they took points from that.

Its a review.

Its opinion.

Not law.

>>394236
Also, hypothetically, if game A and game B had 10/10 gameplay but game A had a 10/10 story as opposed to game B's 6/10 story...I'm going to call game A the better game.

Also games have been docked points for non-gameplay reasons for years. And you know, that's not a bad thing either. Going off of my previous Resident Evil example, graphics matter. Do you think that series would be as popular and legendary is it is if the graphics looked like absolute shit?

I gotta say, it kind of hurts to read some of these comments you guys are making.

I mean, I get having dissenting opinions about a movement, and I think criticizing actions that are just plainly wrong is completely fine and should be encouraged if anything. Debate is a wonderful thing to me, and I think this is a matter that should be examined from every angle.

But it feels like there is no welcoming of discussion here. Anyone who feels that Gamergate isn't a misogynist fueled endeavor or who doesn't think it's a huge load of horseshit filled with idiots that comes here is asking to be ridiculed harshly. It would be different if so many users here didn't so often hold plus4 up as a bastion of intelligent and open discussion populated by a pretty chill userbase.

Or if I myself hadn't often thought of it that way.

I have never felt uninvited or unwanted in this place before now. I am honestly scared of even posting this for fear of mockery.

>>394238
>I have never felt uninvited or unwanted in this place before now. I am honestly scared of even posting this for fear of mockery.

lmao

If I'm going to mock you for anything, it's this post. Yeah, I called some things retarded (and if that truly hurt you, I'm sorry), but no one told you to GTFO or anything. Just because we disagree with something doesn't mean you aren't welcome.

And I hate that attitude, mostly because I've seen people try to call this place a hugbox, when it's anything but. Especially considering you're here.

>>394237
>>394236
>>394235
>>394233
>>394232
>>394230
>>394230
Honestly I don't think any of this would need to be an issue if they just got rid of things like Metacritic in the first place. That way, even people with conservative political views who deduct points from GTA because of the gore or for not being 'child-friendly", or Xenosaga for it's use of Christian themes, or Final Fantasy and Tales of games because of the androgynous designs, homoeroticism, and female combatants (yes I've seen people actually do that in the late 2000's) wouldn't have influence either.

>>394237

>hypothetically, if game A and game B had 10/10 gameplay but game A had a 10/10 story as opposed to game B's 6/10 story...I'm going to call game A the better game.
That irritates me. Not because a game having a strong story is a bad thing, but because of how gameplay is so often divorced from the story. That just tells me the appreciation for the mediums most original aspect is pointless in comparison with typical verse. Why bother with games as a medium all if the gameplay is just side fluff to get you to the next cut scene or exposition?

>>394238
>Debate is a wonderful thing to me
I'm sure its wonderful to all of us.

>Anyone who feels that Gamergate isn't a misogynist fueled endeavor or who doesn't think it's a huge load of horseshit filled with idiots that comes here is asking to be ridiculed harshly.
Thats because they have no idea what they're on about.

This keeps coming up.

Wanting journalistic transparency? Thats great.
But Namernate isnt about that. Someone a lot of people didn't like gave them a chance to harass, blackmail and abuse them. And they took it. The points of said debate haven't been at any point anything other than "Feminists and EssJayWoos" and how they've been trying to make a hostile environment for them for years.

>>394241
Ah dude like in GTA4. Remember that?
How the story was about this former Serbian soldier turned mobster wanted to find a life of success in the US, but was haunted by his inner demons and ghosts of his past?

...
And how the gameplay just ended up being shoot people go on dates with friends, drive irresponsibly?
As fun as it was *cough* that kept up until the very end of the game.

>>394240
I'm reminded of the Armond White debacle with Toy Story 3.

>>394240

I've heard of "Metacritic bonuses" that developers get if their game rates so high on MC, but I've never personally investigated this, so take it with a grain of salt.

My issue with reviews is the number. Not that they give the number, but because people put so much focus on that when a truly well written review will tell you if a game is for you through the text.

BACK to the Resident Evil example. Since I like it, let's say I give RE1 a 8/10. Those guys I was talking about earlier, the ones that wanted gargantuan 20-30 hour games? Well, they should actually read my text instead of just scrolling to the number, because what's a positive for me in a video game is not a positive for everyone else in a video game.

Another example is something like GTA. Some people love free roam games (I'm in this camp) whereas others do not. People who don't like third person shooting mechanics, driving, and open world freedom are not going to like GTA. These people may not review the game highly, while someone like me would.

Honestly, if anything all this seems to be good. The more experiences we get out there, the more dissenting opinions we get. The more dissenting opinions we get, the less things become echo chambers.

>>394238

You want to discuss corruption in gaming journalism? I have no problem with that. You want to discuss the nature of game reviews, objective vs. subjective, and other such issues? I welcome that discussion. You want to discuss the nature of games as art, the misogyny tossed towards women in the gaming industry, the way games tackle social issues, and all of that? Go right the hell ahead.

But Gamergate was born as a movement out of hatred for Zoe Quinn, Gamergate continues to demean the experiences of women being harassed by calling them liars (e.g. the "FALSE FLAG, NOTHING TO SEE HERE" response to the threats made against Anita Sarkeesian and USU), and Gamergate hasn't accomplished anything other than getting Intel to pull ads from Gamasutra and circlejerking each other about it. The Gamergate ‘brand’ is a poison, and the people pushing that brand have ensured it will remain a poison.

There is room for reasoned debate about all of the issues surrounding games, the videogame industry, and videogame journalism that Gamergate supporters have brought up.

It’s just a shame that GG seems more interested in demeaning/ignoring women, circlejerking themselves, and acting like they're in a goddamn war with the world than in actually debating/doing something about those issues.

>>394241
>>394243

I'm torn by this kinda thing because I love GTA. I love both the narrative and the freedom of the series.

It made no sense for me to have Franklin drive around town in a hot pink/neon green car, while he wore nothing but his underwear and a luchador mask. But dammit...I could do it.

>>394247

That's absolutely okay that you love GTA for that. It plays to your tastes. That's awesome.

But not everyone likes GTA, and that doesn't mean they should be given the Internet equivalent of a curbstomp for giving GTAV a 9/10 instead of a 10/10.

>>394248
>But not everyone likes GTA, and that doesn't mean they should be given the Internet equivalent of a curbstomp for giving GTAV a 9/10 instead of a 10/10.

Indeed.

That reminds me that Carolyn Petit gave GTAV a 9/10 apparently because some of the content made it uncomfortable. People *still* got mad in spite of the fact that she really enjoyed the game and gave it a damn good score. Then again, I shouldn't be surprised about this. 8.8 wasn't all that long ago...

And while I didn't find anything majorly problematic with GTAV's content, I can respect the fact that she did. I mean, I could have my reservations for a GTA game's content sometime in the future. I don't have to experience uncomfort myself to understand why maybe someone else did.

>>394249
The Gerstmann incident was tied to some unambiguous corporate corruption though, compared to Petit's review which was purely a matter of opinion. She did literally nothing wrong here. There was no breach of ethics involved. Now if she went so far as to rate it a 1/10 for that, I would probably be skeptical of her reviews in the future. But it's not the same kind of issue.

Now there will be people who will give games straight 0/10 or 10/10 reviews over a single minor element in the game regardless of the overall quality of everything else. I seem to remember there being one such guy on G4, think it was Tommy Tallarico who was particularly full of this brand of stupidity. Like, he once reduced the score of Resident Evil 4 a whole bunch because it prompts you whether you want to collect bullets or not (even though the game would be objectively worse off if it didn't because of how the attache case works). There should be some way of filtering out such opinions, but not in a conviction by popular opinion way.

>>394251
Its called credibility.
If somebody does that, you just don't believe their next Opinion Piece.

That is literally the basis of many Journalists' entire careers and it amazes me that Gay Mermen don't understand that concept.

>>394251
>The Gerstmann incident was tied to some unambiguous corporate corruption though

No, that's two different situations.

Giving Kane and Lynch a mediocre review is what got him fired. Giving Twilight Princess an 8.8 didn't get him fired, but it had a lot of Zelda fans (none of which who even played TP at the time of the review) calling for his blood.

>>394252
I seriously don't understand why people even give a shit about what Slowtaku thinks. For years they've been publishing moronic clickbait about how Transformers Dark Side of the Moon is the Dark Souls of cinema. But suddenly if their 're publishing articles with a feminist bent (which are usually also incredibly stupid, petty, and juvenile, but not necessarily more so than anything else they've written in the past), suddenly that's too much. Now Kotaku now needs to be held to the same journalistic standards as other "respectable" publications. It's like holding Sankaku Complex's feet to the fire because they aren't of the same caliber as the Washington Post.

>>394238
Only a complete idiot would actually believe that /v/'s general stance on anything even remotely social justice related would suddenly take a 180° turn. How fucking blind does one have to be to read "we want more diversity" from /v/ and not realize the implied "as long as they agree with everything we do"? How short must your memory be when you apparently forget that the default response to any hint of a poster being female is "ironic" (it's not ironic if you actually believe it) shitposting since the belief that "female gamer => attention whore" never gets challenged on 4chan? You don't recall /v/ hyping random nobody Sarkeesian into some über-radical "feminazi" devil out to destroy videogames?
If it weren't for the ridiculous responses of the "anti-GG" side, /v/ would've gone right back to throwing /pol/-isms at you for not disagreeing with 'progressive' opinions in vidya context.

Go read the "secret raid channel" log (outsiders in charge of knowing anything about 4chan lol); you really think it's coincidence that they maintained a thread in /pol/ and regularly used /pol/ lingo? They were also perfectly fine with doxxing. They also don't consider compiling people's personal info for easy acces to crazies any problem at all. They also consider spam a valid way of getting a message across - not "keep a thread up at all times" but "flood /v/ with copypasted threads".

The entire "denounce anti-SJW as shills" tactic was added later when they realized (too late) they might be more effective that way since no one except /pol/ takes /pol/ seriously. It's called politics.

It was documented with screencaps that Vivian James was constructed as a weapon, but of course #GullibleGaters IGNORED REALITY and just told themselves that /v/ is totally progressive n shit.

>but #GoofTroop evolved beyond its roots

The well is poisoned but you insist on drinking from it, encouraging others to have a taste too and pissing in the faces of anyone refusing to step in line. You don't get to simply ignore /pol/ when your platform has "made in /pol/" engraved on it.

You honestly believe people don't fucking notice that #UsefulIdiots' response to any attacks on their enemy is to attempt to discredit the target?

You don't think there's anything to it that right-wingers who otherwise consider videogames society-destroying garbage suddenyl side with you?

#VidyaRedpill keeps claiming that this is about "journalistic integrity", yet they cannot ever shut up about "SJW" and everyone who does not let them run wild must obviously be a feminazi kike slave who is part of the indie/journo/SJW/zionist conspiracy network.

There is no "discussion" to be had with political extremists. #GamerGate is /pol/'s unwitting shield, basically wearing a "place knife here" sign on its back. It's a frontline base on the political battlefield of "social justice", to be discarded once its usefulness expires. I know the context, unlike all those bandwagoners who have no clue about present-day 4chan "culture".


"Truth" and "objectivity" always somehow magically align with the personal beliefs of their loudest 'defenders' - disagreement equals lies and oppression. Same pattern as usual.

>>394246
Honestly I see this as symptomatic of growing pains for the relatively new gaming medium. Of course you're going to have nasty "OG" tribalists who are terrified that people different from them are starting to enjoy the privilege of enjoying the medium they used to have a perceived exclusive dominion over on one side (being a minority female who's been regularly playing "hardcore" games for over 20 years since I was 8, that's a delusional belief to have and if they got a problem with that those oversensitive twats can go fuck themselves) and the overzealous moral guardians on the outside who do want there to be restrictive standards imposed on the content of the medium a la the Hays Code on the other, and everybody in between. Then you're going to have newer perspectives like those who have different ideas on how to expand the medium; some people are willing to sacrifice gameplay for accessibility, other more heady types purists who want the medium to slowly win converts through the evolution of its mechanics. Great. Openness of ideas is a great thing.

None of this has to be a zero sum game. There is no rational reason to fear these supposed SJWs (As a side note, people need to stop using that term. All it does is give the actual SJWs who have extremist views and who have done things like doxxing and threats of their own a sense of validation and perpetuate a cycle of trolling). Ideally, once the furor dies down, the industry should be able to expand the overall number of goods being offered through the entry of new suppliers (indies and what not) who can cater to the newer audiences, while the old suppliers should be able to continue providing for people who want more traditional fare. After all, popular literature grew to accommodate people who liked things like Twilight, Left Behind, or even yeti sex. It also grew to accommodate people who asked or sometimes made rude demands for more books featuring strong female characters or nonwhite perspectives, while people who prefer to read things in the vein of Irving, Tolkien, or Palahniuk get to keep their books.

Yknow, I think we're taking #JonAndGatePlusEight a bit too seriously in the sense that we're considering them more than a hate group.

#FrostedFlakesAreMoreThanGoodThey'reGate isn't about anything other than shitting on a small group of people, and doing so anonymously. Who else sets up a mass shooting/bombing on school grounds plus women's support groups when a media analyst is gonna give a talk. In the name of said #Cereal.

What I have to admit kills me is all these Gators saying "but essjaywoos are harrassing #GameGrumpers too!" and I know one that's actually gotten doxxed. THE PART THAT KILLS ME is the fact that they think that makes it an equal ground - given one is a responce to widespread aggression and the other, funnily enough he got targeted for speaking out against someone for being transphobic.

All this said, can we lay off the topic a bit?
For starters, its pretty much all I get on any website these days.
._.

>>394259
Look, I can't stand GamerGate either but your #SoFunnayNames shit is getting pretty tiring. Also while I think they're barking up a losing tree I wouldn't consider Erik Kain or John Bain to be hatemongers.

>>394259

>All this said, can we lay off the topic a bit?

Fair enough.

TOPIC SWITCH: I dunno who’s DDoSing all the furry websites this week, but they can burn in hell.

>>394261
Oh hey I was talking to Chalo earlier this week!
Are you two acquainted? I think he's mentioned you.

>>394260
They google sites for mentions.

>>394262

I drop into his streams every so often, and my Sage Freehaven character's had a few cameos in several Las Lindas side strips. We're not close Internet pals or anything, though.

>>394263
Ah thats cool thats cool.
I did a multistream with him and Kenno Arkan some time back.
Cool peeps, cool peeps.

...
Man I have not checkec out Las Lindas since I was, like... 16.
I was quite the fan for obvious reasons.

Sucks that furry is getting DDoS'd this week.

However, it's good that e621 was up the last time I looked at it today. Not that I go there or anything.

Is it odd I find massage videos relaxing?
Seriously, my stress just went poof during this

//youtube.com/watch?v=-h51qPo7Q4A

>>394266

At least five major furry/furry-oriented sites got slammed with DDoSes: FA, Weasyl, Inkbunny, e621, and F-list. (I think SoFurry got hit as well, but I’m not sure on that.)

Weasyl and Inkbunny had protections like Cloudflare in place, so they suffered no major downtime. e621 and F-list got their shit together yesterday. FA is still down as of the time I make this post, much to the detriment of pretty much every artist who relies on FA to conduct business.

>>394267

I listen to certain types of ASMR videos every once in a while. They give me the associated "tingles" every so often, but they tend to relax the hell out of me more than anything.

>>394268
Where would you recommend finding info or news on the attack? I think it must have been a well-planned effort, since it not only took down over 5 sites, but also took down FA for over two days, as well as it's CDN (Content Delivery Network, where it's images are stored [facdn.net]). It's probably either a really big group of people, an aftershock fan-attack or a really slow and shitty recovery effort.

Place your bets now: Was it a 1337 haXxoR with over 9000 zombie PC's, or a large group of people from a bunch of *chans (or /i/)? How long until /b/ is blamed? Was the attack prolonged by desperate artist and kids constantly refreshing? Or was it an attack by the GNAA or WBC?

>>394270

Believe it or not, there's a furry news site out there. Here is its official story on the DDoSes (which confirms that SoFurry got hit as well):

http://www.flayrah.com/5888/furry-websites-face-broad-denial-service-attacks

The DDoS seems to be done, yet FA remains down (big shock there I know).

>>394238
I think it's been an overall wonderful discussion. In comparison with what I usually get online.

It's let me further examine my own views and helped me understand the views of others.

>>394271
Dragoneer or whoever is doing an AMA in reddit about the DDOS reddit.com/r/furry

>>394271
I will never for the life of me understand why FA remains popular. Inkbunny, Sofurry, and Weasel do everything it does and with mods who may actually know what they're doing

>>394280
If I had to guess, it would be the same reason so many other sites, services, products fail to overthrow the old inferior. Their size and pre constructed popularity compounds on itself. From what I understand, it's where a lot of artists contact the vast majority of their clients, so they generally stick there. With all the artists on that site all the clients will go there. It feeds on itself. A slippery slope.

So after 14 years since I hit puberty, without any major changes in lifestyle for much of the time in between, my periods have finally reached some sort of regularity at intervals of approximately 5-6 weeks for the last year. Whereas throughout high school and college they would frequently skip months or be within 2-3 weeks of each other, or sometimes one followed immediately by the other. It used to be impossible for me to predict when my next period was, now I can usually pinpoint it on my calendars within five days' precision.

I generally eat well, I'm on the flabby side but otherwise of average weight, I generally eat well, don't exercise a ton but go on frequent walks, and I'm not on any sort of medication. Only truly unhealthy habit I can think of is frequent lack of sleep but if anything my period becoming regular happened right around the point in my life where I started to pull all-nighters the most frequently. I asked my doctor and she didn't seem to think anything was up, but any physiologyfags able to explain? I'm a little ashamed I can't answer that for myself considering my PhD is in biochemistry but hey that's why I'm >Anonymous.

>>394282
I would've figured an ouroboros or some other circular metaphor would've been more apt.

>>394283
My understanding is that a woman's cycle often doesn't become regular until about the age you're saying you are--early to mid twenties, I think, if I'm doing my math right? The fact that you were doing all-nighters at the same time is probably just a coincidence.

>>394282

Pretty much this, yeah. FA wasn't even the absolute best site when I joined (2006…wow), but it’s since become the biggest and most-well-known furry artdump site. Every challenger to the throne has been sliced down as a result of the site’s popularity—even the ones that are objectively better than FA in every way. Only DA can really stand up to FA, and that’s because DA’s bigger than (and has a broader focus than) FA.

I would love to see Weasyl take the throne (it has a better design and more intuitive tools for art uploads/comments), but that ain't ever gonna happen.

>>394280
You see, this is how people view Internet Explorer as well.

I don't hang around there much, but I think it's because that's the site they already understand and because of the existing population, it draws in even more people as other sites have less. It just compounds until something big happens.

It kind of hit me today that I really am a "bottom-of-the-barrel" type of person.

I'm not really sad about it though. The thought kind of just brought a sense of clarity. If anything I'm a little bit happy because my life and who I am make a lot more sense with this realization.

Mr. Stone, this is my contractually obligated occasional post asking you to sell me your Bayonetta gun prob you won a few years ago.

Cheers.

>>394299

As soon as I can find a way to do so, I promise that I shall.

>>394301
What was standing in the way again? I've forgotten your original reasoning.

>>394313

No way to accept money online/pay for shipping the thing. Still don't have either one yet.

Oh gawd, now SJW friend is complaining that LGBT allies are the devil and and that LGBT people ought to distance themselves from anybody straight and/or cis. Also every ally only pretends to care about these issues because they're all just secretly using their LGBT friends as props to feel good about themselves. Because clearly straight and LGBT people can never be friends because they actually like each other for reasons that don't have to do with sexuality. Also LGBT rights are obviously zero-sum and straight cis people never have an unselfish reason to support people who aren't like them, durrrrr. And continuing to be friends with straight and cis people while talking about how much they suck isn't being totally hypocritical, durrrr.

Sage for more whining.

>>394339
>Oh gawd, now SJW friend is complaining that LGBT allies are the devil

Then said person isn't much of a "SJW"

Also why don't you just stop talking to her.

>>394342
How isn't that being a SJW? I always figured SJW, not in the sense GG is using it but in the way people on this board have been , using it for years, is the anti-/pol/ where said people are so "anti-racist" they become racist from the opposite side, or people looking for an excuse to complain about problems that don't actually exist for the sake of being offended or because they think there's a conspiracy in the media to keep them down. I mean, the old Avatar board here was full of posts complaining about SJWs who accused the show of having pro-rape messages or being racist because the two guys who made it were white folks and I wouldn't disagree with them that it's shitty behavior that deserves mocking.

As for the asshole friend thing isn't there a way to block them on Facebook?

>>394344

The "SJW" stereotype is better expressed through a different term: Social Revenge Warrior.

Anyone fighting for actual social justice wouldn't be looking to make other people's lives miserable, since actual social justice isn't a zero-sum game.

>>394344
>How isn't that being a SJW?

I was under the impression that they'd want others amongst their ranks instead of culling the herd.

>>394344
>As for the asshole friend thing isn't there a way to block them on Facebook?


Also, yes. You can either defriend the person or make it so their updates don't show up on your feed by selecting a drop down list on one of their posts. Well, it worked like this like a year or so ago. I don't know what it's like now. The last guy I had to block was from around that time, and I did so because he was constantly whining about not having a girlfriend.

>>394347
You'd be surprised at all the Jacobin-wannabes who go on ideological purity crusades and attack their own friends and allies for not having political opinions extreme enough or for getting upset with the verbal abuse. I've seen way too many people throwing around "white-identifier"/"truscum"/"useful idiot" or other similar check your privilege-style insults because people pointed out that no, the Saami are not all brown PoC people, so liking Frozen doesn't make you a horrible whitewasher. I've been called a sexist pig before because I had the nerve to disagree with someone who called Jonathan Joestar misogynist trash for protecting his future girlfriend from bullies when the focus was clearly about his sense of social responsibility and not about her being a girl, even though I post pro-feminism stuff all the time.

Also I don't know whether this really falls under social revenge warrior because these people don't exhibit the sheer amounts of viciousness other people are talking about but it fucking drives me up the wall when I see so many people claiming X character must be trans and if you disagree you're a transphobe simply because they have something non-gender conforming about them. It really bothers me because all it does is perpetuate stereotypes about the sexes that really, really should be dead and buried by now but keep getting revived by these fauxgressive types. obe.

>>394353
Considering how shitty the Frozen fandom can be I wouldn't be surprised if people are wary anyway. But yeah, it doesn't make you racist any more than liking Tyler Perry's shit makes you a racial super-progressive.

>>394353

>I don't know whether this really falls under social revenge warrior because these people don't exhibit the sheer amounts of viciousness other people are talking about but it fucking drives me up the wall when I see so many people claiming X character must be trans and if you disagree you're a transphobe simply because they have something non-gender conforming about them.

If they're looking to make you feel worse and themselves feel better—likely at your expense—they're after Social Revenge. Social justice would theoretically be inclusive and try to make things better for everyone, not try to make things better for one group at the expense of another (see: any definition of feminism that isn't centered around "GRRRR HAET MEN").

>>394353
Back to politically correct I guess? True it's a rather loaded term with bad history but despite that I think there are times where it is genuinely applicable and people accidentally marginalize (or maybe not and they're just too callous to care) other groups by trying too hard to be progressive.

>>394361

Political correctness is for politicians. For everyone else, it’s called ‘not being a dick to other people’.

>>394361
>>394362
They're not actual politicians or academics eager to buy into a particular political narrative for self-gain, which is where the term political correctness came from before conservatives used it to mean "anyone to the left of me".

While what these guys do is kinda similar (shallowly pledging support to whatever minority it's considered "cool" to stick up for at the moment regardless of whatever minorities or social progress they trample on to do so), but it's too ultimately too petty to be anything than slacktivism or a weird form of mob mentality taken to the extreme.

>>394361
>True it's a rather loaded term with bad history but despite that I think there are times where it is genuinely applicable and people accidentally marginalize (or maybe not and they're just too callous to care) other groups by trying too hard to be progressive.
"Politically correct" is probably the right term to use for exactly that reason--because bitching and moaning about "political correctness gone mad" is exactly what the anti-SJW movement is. The number of SJWs who actually fit the definition that the 4chan side of the internet use and are actually worth wasting time thinking about in your day to day life is pretty damned close to zero. The reason the sentiment is so pervasive in the nerd community is the same reason the sentiment has always been so pervasive in the communities of old white men--because they are afraid of change and they are afraid of "otherness" and it is unacceptable socially to say so, so instead they act as concern trolls, saying "I'm not against acceptance of GROUP X, I just hate those darned SJWs/this darned political correctness! It's a freedom of speech issue / a basic courtesy issue / etc, not a 'I don't want to have to adapt to a changing culture' issue!"

>>394365
>The number of SJWs who actually fit the definition that the 4chan side of the internet use and are actually worth wasting time thinking about in your day to day life is pretty damned close to zero
Eh, while it's definitely true that people exaggerate how much influence they have, going the other way and pretending they're not really a problem doesn't help either. It's commonplace enough that even my own friends and their other friends are starting to use that kind of lingo and say some inflammatory stuff sometimes that makes me feel uncomfortable as a fellow not-so-privileged person. I don't think people need to hate on others to feel good about themselves. I agree with Mr Stone that changing the name to something more accurate is better than just ignoring it because if the Avatar fandom bitching threads are any indication, they're way too common for that.

Same with those people who think autism or transsexuality is a totally cute condition to apply to everyone or self-diagnose with. Technically they're not attacking people but it's still fucking reprehensible behavior that makes it look like a toy and pisses off people who are that in real life. Taking issue with it doesn't always make you a butthurt conservative afraid of change or anything, it just means you're someone with common sense who thinks these matters deserve to be treated with some respect rather than being a kawaii accessory to use as snowflaky decoration.

>>394367
>Same with those people who think autism or transsexuality is a totally cute condition to apply to everyone or self-diagnose with. Technically they're not attacking people but it's still fucking reprehensible behavior that makes it look like a toy and pisses off people who are that in real life. Taking issue with it doesn't always make you a butthurt conservative afraid of change or anything, it just means you're someone with common sense who thinks these matters deserve to be treated with some respect rather than being a kawaii accessory to use as snowflaky decoration.

Congratulations.
You're officially, by many MANY people's definition, an SJW.

What was that about "A group is as good as the best and as bad as the worst."?

Can we please go back to the time where easily offended people were just called soccer moms and everybody ignored them instead of going out of their way to start a shitstorm and harass them?

I already got all of my christmas gifts. This is certainly a first. Feels kinda weird. Also kinda good. No stress during the holidays.

>>394370
A group you willingly choose to associate with and wouldn't otherwise, yeah.

>>394369
I see way more people who call themselves anti-SJW over this precisely because they have the same opinion as OP actually, or for general "I am a liberal but these people make us look bad so I'm going to try to self-police against them" type feelings.

>>394375
I see so many more people call themselves anti-SJW because they truly believe that is the norm.
Also because they really can't tell the difference between a parody tumblr about coffee-kin and a person who thinks women should be paid the same for equal work.

>>394376
Also "sjw" is actually supposed to be derogatory since its like "UGH THEYRE ALWAYS AFTER SOCIAL JUSTICE, THEYRE LIKE SOCIAL JUSTICE WARRIORS ALWAYS WANTING SHIT"

Sorta like "White Knight."

>>394379
That's a perfectly legit reaction, but the alteration or corruption of a characters personality probably falls into the realm of their specific fetish. (Sexual or otherwise)

What if this person behaved this way, or what if they where a little more bold/meek/whatever. A lot of the time it's probably not even a conscientious decision, but an underlying desire to have that person be a little something else. From my observation, it's the same principle that would make someone change a characters body type.

I don't get Marvel stuff. I don't get the hype, the movies never really wowed me, and I just don't find the heroes very interesting.
What are other people seeing that I am not?

>>394381
I go to those movies with enthusiasm and wonder and excitement.

I really do make an effort to turn off cynisism with movies these days. Maybe thats why I like em.

>>394381
If you're already familiar with the characters, you are probably aware of a deep canon and history surrounding them. The movies have only two hours to convey a very tiny portion of that, so you go in and see the movie, which has a heavier focus on flashy effects and explosions, with a watered down story and it just doesn't "feel" right.

Or you just don't like capes, which is fine.

>>394380
No joke, I was going to write a line about how changing a personality was almost like changing body type: it's usually done because of personal preference or fetishism.
What you said all makes sense and I agree. I've just always been a bit particular about artists staying true to characters.

>>394381

Sometimes it's the characters. Sometimes it's the stories. Sometimes it's the visuals. Sometimes it's a combination of all three.

I dig the whole thing Marvel's trying to do with the MCU—and the fact that they have a solid roster of characters to work with. They pretty much had to give up trying to get back their two biggest franchises, but they got something better in return: a cinematic "universe" where they don't need Spider-Man or Wolverine. That opens up a shitload of doors for characters like Iron Man, Thor, and the motherfuckin' Guardians of the Galaxy to get a starring role when they may never have had that chance if Spider-Man or the X-Men were dominating the MCU.

The movies themselves are all relatively good, too. Even the worst of the MCU bunch (Iron Man 2 and the two Thor films) aren't wholly unwatchable, nor do they inspire the kind of palm-to-face reaction as, say, Man of Steel. There's an effort to tie in all the films to the larger world, but by and large, you don't need to see all of that larger world to enjoy MCU films. (That can change in the future as the crossovers get more dependent on continuity and all, of course. And the less said about Agents of SHIELD, the better.)

But the real appeal is that Marvel movies are so much goddamn fun. There's serious storylines and moments, yeah, but they're all lumped in with cleverly-timed jokes and witty banter (sometimes a bit too much; lookin' at you Avengers) and amazing action sequences that give you a full range of emotional experiences throughout a film. Contrast that with the approach of Man of Steel (which is apparently the approach DC’s shooting for with the DCCU from here on out): it lacks that broader range of emotion, that sense of fun and wonder that we associate with superheroes/cape comics. The only moment in that movie that was anywhere near as emotionally satisfying as a Marvel film’s best moments was Superman’s first flight, and the film went right back to soul-sucking ‘gritty’ emptiness immediately after.

Now keep in mind that this is only about the movies. I don’t keep up with the comics (too many restarts/reboots/recontinuities/re-whatever for my tastes). I would be interested in knowing what appeals to you, though—not just regarding comics, but films (and action films, specifically) as well. Doubly so if you prefer DC's stuff to Marvel.

America just couldn't let itself be shown up by Canada, of all countries.

http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2014/10/24/marysville-pilchuck-high-school-shooting_n_6043382.html?ncid=fcbklnkushpmg00000063

FOOD POISONING IS THE WORST

>>394393
It is. But at least it's over very quickly. Unless your doctor prescribes you wrong medicine and you get insanely constipated ontop of it.

>>394394
THIS IS HOW I MEET MY END sick get btw

>>394393
Shit, I hope it passes soon. Food poisoning is total shit with a side of aches and vomit.

In other news, I read your name as a really stupid version of the Bat-mobile.

It's been months since I've tried sticking to a to-do list, mostly because they keep sprawling into lists of everything that catches my interest. Might try it again, but now I've had the idea of setting a weekly schedule where I focus on a different general interest each day. Hopefully that'll stay under control, and when I go to make to-do lists maybe I can make separate lists for things that fall under one of the once-a-week categories. Going to bed now, will try to start the following schedule in the morning:

Sunday: Game Coding
Monaday: Article Writing
Tuesday: AI and IA Coding
Wednesday: Reading
Thursday: Video Games
Friday: Fiction Writing
Saturday: Drawing

Might replace video games with language learning if Duolingo seems nice once I actually try it out, but my video game backlog is in pretty serious need of work.

>>394407
I remember web developers saying faster speeds would let them unlock a world of exciting new things.
Turns out they mostly just meant a world of the exact same functionality, but but made lazily at the expense of reliability and performance.

>>394411
I dunno how much shipping usually is, but that price is usually shipping and handling, which includes the price of the box, packing material, etc. I tend to find out how much it would cost to ship an item by weight, making it a bit heavier than expected, and round up to 50 cent increments. If the actual shipping turns out to be more than a dollar less (rare, but I've had it happen) I'll refund them each full dollar.

The only exception is when the shipping amount is quite high (>$6), and then I'll put down the exact shipping charge.

So as long as the shipping wouldn't normally be, say, £1, I'd say you're fine. You should be looking to make money off the item and not the shipping.

>>394411
In all fairness, I wanted £30 for 5 Wii Games (including Wii Sports), 2 DS games (including Tingle's Rupeeland) and Paper Mario 2. That's a pretty amazing bargain, imo, and I don't see how I'm the one being stingy here.

I wish I could sit around all day doing whatever I want instead of going to work and supporting myself

I wish I could go to work and support myself so I could do things that don't consist of sitting around.

>>394420
>so I could do things that don't consist of sitting around.
I only sort of remember what it's like to want that.

>>394413
That sounds like a pretty good deal, but it does depend on what the Wii and DS games are.

A long time ago I had a girlfriend. We were both members of a small community and I didn't want to date her anymore, but I was afraid if I broke up with her everyone else would side with her and I'd have to leave. So I got a little creative:

She was clingy and suffered from depression, PTSD, and a bunch of other bullshit. I took advantage of that and fucked with her until she exploded a few weeks later, where she had a huge meltdown and tried to kill herself. After that, I broke up with her and she went completely batshit crazy, so I used that to frame her as an insane, abusive, manipulative stalker to push her away from any mutual friends. Nearly everyone in the community sided with me and they all cut ties with her.

In the end, I kept my friends and I don't have to deal with her presence making me uncomfortable, since I'm not the type of person who wants to ever be around an ex.

She never really recovered from it and is a complete wreck to this day. I think I might have broken her and ruined her life.

It makes me feel a little guilty and it keeps me up at night. I'm definitely a horrible person, but I got a close-knit group of friends out of it, and nobody ever suspected a thing.

>>394430
...

...Thats some serious scumbag-tier shit, anon. What the hell.

What kind of age do we live in where telling a woman you like her/that she's beautiful is considered creepy? 10 years ago it was a compliment.

>>394430

That is God-tier scumbag bullshit, son. I'm an asshole and even I'm not that much of an asshole.

>>394428
Well I want to be working on stuff like http://www.sparkbangbuzz.com/ http://www.atomicshrimp.com/st/content/projects/ http://www.tatjavanvark.nl/projects.html http://www.itee.uq.edu.au/lingodroids/home etc, and I don't think having a job is going to stop that. Not to say you need to want something other than laying around, but I don't expect my future self to follow your own path of development.

>>394430
I'm pretty sure you could have looked for a way to break up with her that didn't involve acting like it's some kind psychological kill-or-be-killed scenario. And you didn't really get your friends out of it anyway, since you had them before and still would have if you kept an annoying girlfriend? That was really a sort of thing you should have talked to someone about instead of just doing whatever seemed safest at the time out of fear.

>>394428
Wii Sports & Play, Geometry Wars: Galaxies, Eledees and Lego Star Wars: The Complete Collection
Tingle's Rosy Rupeeland and some shovelware puzzle game (crosswords and shit)
Paper Mario 2

These games cost me almost a hundred times what this whiny shit has paid (£15 - I decided I'd get SOMETHING out of all this, even if it's a few pennies after postage) but according to my parents I'm not allowed to make a profit on this, because apparently I'm only supposed to use it "to get rid of stuff" and I'm ripping people off for trying to make some money. I just hate that I was so easily guilted into this.

In the buyer's defence, I couldn't find the postage details when I looked on the listing, but that might just be eBay being stupid.

>>394430
Hey, buddy.

I just wanted to let you know that you're a worthless piece of shit.

>>394433
I need context for these statements.

>>394430
Wow.

>>394437
Your parents are dumb. If the point was to get rid of it, you would just donate it to a thrift store.

>>394420
>implying work isn't just sitting around all day just without the ability to do whatever you want

>>394430
This might be the worst thing I've read on an imageboard and I accidentally read part of that Bart castration fanfiction once

>>394433
If you just out of nowhere see a random girl and tell her she's beautiful its always creepy.

Alternatively, Being Considerate(tm) is actually more a thing now than it was before.

>>394433
Telling a woman she is pretty or that you like her are not creepy. If you are being told you are creepy, it is not for the fact that you are doing those things, it is for the way you are doing it.

>>394430
This is the kind of thing I'd normally only expect to see on regular 4chan.

And by the way, you're right. You are a horrible person.

>>394443

>Telling a woman she is pretty or that you like her are not creepy.

If a woman asks for your opinion on her looks and you tell her she's pretty, it's not creepy. If a woman is just walking down the street and you walk up to her and tell her she's pretty, it's pretty goddamn creepy.

As with most social interactions, context and timing are important.

Food poisoning is gone, I think, but 3-4 days of pooping myself to death has given some pretty srs hemorrhoids. I should probably see a doctor when I have more than $1.50 in my bank account.
>>394446
>If a woman is just walking down the street and you walk up to her and tell her she's pretty, it's pretty goddamn creepy
Depends on how you phrase it/present yourself/etc.

>>394446
That goes without saying to most people. =P

>>394453
>Depends on how you phrase it/present yourself/etc.
Nnnnnnnnno, just walking up to a random woman and comment on her appearance is creepy, dude.

>>394457
Not if you're very attractive.

>>394458
how much people experience do you have

>>394458

So it's not creepy to walk up to some person you don't even know and talk only about how attractive they are if you yourself are attractive?

…how high are you and what the fuck did you smoke in the first place

>>394462
Context and attitude matter. If a woman is clearly dressed in such a way that her goal is to look good at this moment, it's certainly not rude to tell her she has succeeded at it--if you go to a convention and see a woman in a piece of cosplay that clearly took a lot of work and tell her "Wow, you look great," without any attempt to, like, insert yourself into her life beyond the compliment, that's not particularly creepy.

There are no RULES in social interaction. Everything comes down to empathy for the person you're talking with and understanding of the situation you're in. Creepiness is less about individual actions and more about crossing people's boundaries either due to lack of empathy for their situation or lack of understanding of the situation you're in.