Journal of Other Forum Analysis (Volume II, Issue 2)

[Taco Bell Tower]

Overcooked looks like the kind of game my wife might play. 

Please tell us more about how great it is to have a WIFE 

More like how about that wife join thebire and posts about it herself 

[Hap Shaughnessy]

Overcooked looks like the kind of game my wife might play. 

Please tell us more about how great it is to have a WIFE 

You could try six cats.
https://www.resetera.com/threads/jessie-buckley-and-paul-mescal-voluntarily-share-some-wild-things-about-their-feelings-on-cats.1452394/page-4#post-152124292

Pets are family. End of story.

[JoeBoy101]

Damn Ree are really triggered by that Scary Movie 6 trailer eh. I don't think I've seen their jimmies get rustled like this for a while. 

All over a light hearted pronoun joke.

the thing about being seen as equal and without discrimination. is that it comes with being made fun of just like everyone else. if you want it to be illegal for people to make fun of your special group, then you aren't looking for equality, but special treatment. 

That’s because they don’t want equality. They realized what you are describing and rebranded to ‘equity’. In other words, we want payback.

[benji]

Sam Reich and Dropout Inc are not your friend man. You can't just pull them to the side and ask them to rethink a really stupid business decision.

Money is the only thing that talks in 2026. This economy sucks shit and every penny counts, so why give money to people who you no longer agree with? If it helps them see they screwed up, maybe they can earn your dollars back.

Because you don't actually do this for everything (and even formulate excuses for it, "no ethical consumption", "Overwatch isn't really a Microsoft product") creating the likelihood that you'll do the most damage to allies who ever deviate slightly while also dramatically reducing your potential market power versus opposing demographics who then have all the say in whether Concord or Highguard succeed.

You're operating from a fundamental narcissistic assumption rather than how the market (and well, math) actually works, hence your creation of an ineffective method where you expect others to try to win your dollars back even as you've demonstrated they have to cater to you at all times or you'll stop being a customer. This would only be effective if you represent their customer base and you don't or else they'd already be trying to cater to you. Is it possible that this is the case and they made a grievous error? Yes, but is it plausible? We'll see. The problem is, as your excuses demonstrate, this is a problem of collective action because you withdrawing your dollars won't change what happens, it's dependent on way more people than just you. If you withdraw your dollars it transforms their customer base into people who would not withdraw their dollars over this, which works against your position becoming dominate in who matters to them.

In fact, this is ultimately your personal justification for being anti-capitalist/socialist, the illusion that then you'll be able to force everyone else to match your desires rather than being personally irrelevant to the market. 

The answer is to just purchase what you like, if a minor collaboration like this causes you to no longer like the rest of the product then stop purchasing it. You should not care at all whether or not this influences the product (let alone the entire industry or market) in your desired direction because that's not up to you especially because you're taking an extreme outlier position then desiring to hold the entire product hostage over it. Your issue is that it upsets you that everyone else won't make this choice and it's likely that Dropout can ignore you which is the greatest offense of all they can make: not caring about the center of the universe.

edit: Also, the "[blank] is not your friend" justification for harsh behavior is very transactional, especially for anyone who is advocating for the state enforcing an affirming supportive community. Very social darwinist in its construction, which I guess is appropriate since the original progressives were. I'd also note that Era often formulates advocacy against family in this same manner even if they don't word it as "[your family] is not your friend, so cut them off over any opinions they hold that you hate." They'd never advocate that you keep a friend who is a Nazi or uses AI or whatever, so it creates the expectation that a real friend never deviates from you in any way. Would it be acceptable for a friend to collaborate with "Copaganda"? Seems problematic if it would be. Factor in how poorly the members understand social situations (despite demanding others "read the room" constantly) and interacting with other humans in general and you can see why the whole mindset creates such an anti-social spiral into bitter isolation rather than a construction of supportive communities. And it's always always everyone else's fault.

[benji]

Money is the only thing that talks in 2026. This economy sucks shit and every penny counts, so why give money to people who you no longer agree with? If it helps them see they screwed up, maybe they can earn your dollars back.

Because you don't actually do this for everything (and even formulate excuses for it, "no ethical consumption", "Overwatch isn't really a Microsoft product") creating the likelihood that you'll do the most damage to allies who ever deviate slightly while also dramatically reducing your potential market power versus opposing demographics who then have all the say in whether Concord or Highguard succeed.

You're operating from a fundamental narcissistic assumption rather than how the market (and well, math) actually works, hence your creation of an ineffective method where you expect others to try to win your dollars back even as you've demonstrated they have to cater to you at all times or you'll stop being a customer. This would only be effective if you represent their customer base and you don't or else they'd already be trying to cater to you. Is it possible that this is the case and they made a grievous error? Yes, but is it plausible? We'll see. The problem is, as your excuses demonstrate, this is a problem of collective action because you withdrawing your dollars won't change what happens, it's dependent on way more people than just you. If you withdraw your dollars it transforms their customer base into people who would not withdraw their dollars over this, which works against your position becoming dominate in who matters to them.

In fact, this is ultimately your personal justification for being anti-capitalist/socialist, the illusion that then you'll be able to force everyone else to match your desires rather than being personally irrelevant to the market. 

The answer is to just purchase what you like, if a minor collaboration like this causes you to no longer like the rest of the product then stop purchasing it. You should not care at all whether or not this influences the product (let alone the entire industry or market) in your desired direction because that's not up to you especially because you're taking an extreme outlier position then desiring to hold the entire product hostage over it. Your issue is that it upsets you that everyone else won't make this choice and it's likely that Dropout can ignore you which is the greatest offense of all they can make: not caring about the center of the universe.

collective action deez nuts, haha got em

[Uncle]

Overcooked looks like the kind of game my wife might play. 

Please tell us more about how great it is to have a WIFE 

More like how about that wife join thebire and posts about it herself 

we will find out that all along there has been a secret second bire for wives and they all know each other and talk about both us and era in a wifely way

[Hap Shaughnessy]

https://www.resetera.com/threads/marathons-latest-music-video-in-death-weve-just-begun-directed-by-ai-enthusiast-harmony-korine.1452946/#post-152133529

 User banned (2 months): Advocating violence

Ugh, being such a big AI bro is bad enough already, but being a Polanski supporter should be grounds for you to get shot on sight.

[Jonsey]

Another day, another harassment of a woman on Twitter along with some ageism:

That ex-MILF really fucked him over 

No wonder she left his ass

[Straight Edge]

Overcooked looks like the kind of game my wife might play. 

is this a good time to bring up that I too have a wife?

[benji]

Lot of people waving their "not a weird anti-social creep" privilege around in this thread right now and y'all call this a safe space. Sounds about white. I'm setting records with my side-eying all the sus posts. 

[Hap Shaughnessy]

https://www.resetera.com/threads/man-being-an-introvert-in-a-world-of-extroverts-is-fucking-tiresome.1452640/

Just, like, all the unnecessary attention some people give me just for being around them gets really old really fast.

Like, you know those people who are otherwise harmless but really like to lock-in on your introvertness and give you random bouts of attention just for some short kick of something? Sure, in the grand scheme of things, it's nothing genuinely malicious but over time it builds up into my odd brain structure as exhausting repetition and I can't help but to become slightly rude and defensive towards them.

Becomes worse if they have the bonus of sharing the "Same Joke TM" as a general socialization perk...

Sight, it's just all so tiresome...

[BIONIC]

Overcooked looks like the kind of game my wife might play. 

Please tell us more about how great it is to have a WIFE 

You could try six cats.
https://www.resetera.com/threads/jessie-buckley-and-paul-mescal-voluntarily-share-some-wild-things-about-their-feelings-on-cats.1452394/page-4#post-152124292

Pets are family. End of story.

Overcooked looks like the kind of game my wife might play. 

is this a good time to bring up that I too have a wife?

[Taco Bell Tower]

Another day, another harassment of a woman on Twitter along with some ageism:

That ex-MILF really fucked him over 

No wonder she left his ass

She likely left his ass after Jeff went apeshit with FACTUALLY INCORRECT on her son when he gave an opinion on MCU.

[Potato]

Please tell us more about how great it is to have a WIFE 

More like how about that wife join thebire and posts about it herself 

we will find out that all along there has been a secret second bire for wives and they all know each other and talk about both us and era in a wifely way

They getting jelqing tips right now...

[JoeBoy101]

Overcooked looks like the kind of game my wife might play. 

Please tell us more about how great it is to have a WIFE 

You could try six cats.
https://www.resetera.com/threads/jessie-buckley-and-paul-mescal-voluntarily-share-some-wild-things-about-their-feelings-on-cats.1452394/page-4#post-152124292

Pets are family. End of story.

Only pussy Jeff’s getting, that’s for sure.

[JoeBoy101]

https://www.resetera.com/threads/man-being-an-introvert-in-a-world-of-extroverts-is-fucking-tiresome.1452640/

Just, like, all the unnecessary attention some people give me just for being around them gets really old really fast.

Like, you know those people who are otherwise harmless but really like to lock-in on your introvertness and give you random bouts of attention just for some short kick of something? Sure, in the grand scheme of things, it's nothing genuinely malicious but over time it builds up into my odd brain structure as exhausting repetition and I can't help but to become slightly rude and defensive towards them.

Becomes worse if they have the bonus of sharing the "Same Joke TM" as a general socialization perk...

Sight, it's just all so tiresome...

Dafuq at this misanthropic bullshit? ‘Random bouts of attention’? Which of course are ‘nothing genuinely malicious’, but provide a ‘short kick of something’.



Jesus Christ, is it so hard to even fake being a normal goddamn human being? I’m a goddamn introvert extraordinaire but I at least can socialize enough to not come off like a Venusian who is trying to find where they parked their UFO.

[Jansen]

More Constructive 

It literally derailed the thread.

It added valuable information and context. The ones derailing were the ones mocking people for mentioning it.

Imo, it's fine and actually good to have a post or two to raise awareness, but when the thread becomes about sniping back and forth about cancelling whoever, the threads spiral into uselessness. Which I guess is the kind of hecklers veto that people want in lieu of mod action

See, it's stuff like this. People think they're doing us some kind of grand service by pointing out WELL ACTUALLY DID YOU KNOW..



And it isn't. You're not adding anything valuable to the conversation. You are starting an entirely new conversation about a prior controversy. That is derailing.



They're gotcha posts. It literally started with someone just posting a gif and a picture. What context does that add to someone's lifetime achievement award speech? What value does it bring other than to serve other than to serve the self-satisfaction of the gotcha gangsters?

Really? I didn't know and I learned something. Sorry, but I want to know when celebs are Trumpers. I want to know when celebrities are abusers, or bigots who hate queer people (especially given that I'm queer). And yes, I want to know when people like that support child rapists.

It should be fine to point out that someone is problematic, so long as it isn't trying to go beyond the subject in order to broad brush users in the thread from the jump (eg anyone who says their voting Dems in election threads is bloodthirsty for genocide, rather than just calling out the party/candidate for their bipartisan support of genocide).



That aspect and kinda the attitude that everyone should already know every issue where it's like pulling teeth to get the proper context or anything at all where it's some bizarre gatekeeping, is where the "informed" messengers can be grating. Where it often does feel like the point is to be combative with everyone here rather than informative about the issue. That wasn't the case for the Ford thread, but it is common place enough that I can understand some of the frustration.



But the response in the thread was way out of proportion to the post(s) bringing it up/responding negatively about Ford, and really sent things into a spiral. The one user who said anything about anyone liking that Ford received the award was never even quoted directly, but instead people just casting wide nets in turn and putting that on themselves in a bizarre fashion.

Pointing out the that thread subject is shitty/has shitty views/does shit like support pedophile is not, and will never be, thread derailing.



Plus, a lot of people here are actually grateful for the call outs, because this forum has thousands of people on it and some of the stories related to what the OP is about can often fly under the radar.



You can be the world's biggest Harrison Ford fan, but that doesn't change that he's actively cheered on a pedophile. People, companies, whatever, are never flawless and a lot of people would like to know these kinds of things to decide whether or not to continue supporting the thing or person in question.



Being able to look at something (or someone), flaws and all, and make your own judgment call, is the right path here.







It's not derailing though. It's pointing out that the person being celebrated also once stood and called for a pedophile.



Harrison Ford will be fine, he'll still have fans cape for him and he still sleeps on millions of dollars every night.







The solution there is to ban anyone who tries to downplay the shit getting called out and also ban anyone that tries to equate that liking a thing makes you a shitty person.



It's not really that complicated.



You can grow up a fan of something, find out it's problematic, acknowledge it's problematic, but still find some good in that thing and/or have a complicated relationship with that thing. It's fine. Almost everyone has at least one thing in their life like that.

Agreed.



There are toxic extremes at both ends, and I think people are reacting to those, rather than what is actually being said.



As far as I could see (though I haven't revisited the thread lately) only one person crossed the line into "and you too are a paedo supporter if you like his movies".



But that sentiment I think then got attached to anyone who just wanted to highlight Ford's previous links to Polanski, and that's why some of the pushback went way over the line.



We see this cycle all the time with corporations. There's a giant sticky attached to every Xbox thread. It's okay to say "fuck Microsoft". It's not okay to say 'if you play on Xbox you support genocide". It's also not okay to say "stop bringing it up".



Stamping down on both extremes is really the only thing to do in such situations.

I think the major problem is, it has gone on for so long with both extremes going ham on each other that alot of people on this site are now in a constant state of defense ready to go for the jugular at the drop of a hat due to being so on edge. Things can start off innocent enough but then like what was just said someone takes it too far and every thing does not just spiral it full on explodes into a multi page topic with everyone at each others throats.

Yup.



I also think it's one thing to be a fan of something because you were ignorant/didn't know about the downside/bad parts/etc vs. knowing that something is actively harmful and giving that person more money.



But even in those specific cases, what the person does is still up to them. If you want to give money to a company that is actively supporting a genocide (as an example), you are well within your rights to do so as a consumer. I wouldn't recommend bragging about it after (which is rare, but we have seen that happen) or proudly declare that I did that in a thread about said company supporting genocide (which we've also seen).



But yea, consumerism and fandom doesn't come with a rule that everyone must close their eyes and just consume. We can be critical of the things are are fans of and I would argue we should all be more critical of the things that fall into that category: that's how we grow, that's how issues are fixed and that's how we create works that take the good elements of those things we like and make new stuff that fixes the mistakes, or reflects them.



We don't get Lovecraft Country or Bloodborne without acknowledging and calling out the virulent racism behind the Cthulhu mythos, as an example.

I'm in agreement with this, especially the second half. I've seen quite a few posters who do this and all it does is start fights. People don't and shouldn't have to put up with being told they're shitty, told that they're okay with pedophilia or "getting a side-eye" if they happen to like someone who did something problematic in the past.



Mods, what is the best way to describe the posts who do what Minthara is suggesting when reporting them?

Yup, ultimately we all like things that the whole "if you like this, you're part of the problem" could apply to. Point out what Ford did, criticize him. There's no need to criticize everyone that is talking positively about a speech or his career as that's multiple steps removed from Polanski at that point.

Fully agreed.

Personally, I use the Kevin Chang yearbook meme as the line that separates platform fans from platform warriors.







If you like a specific platform, celebrate its successes and criticize its failings, you are not a platform warrior.



If you hate other platforms, celebrate their failings and downplay their successes, you are a platform warrior.

Its more, this third party game is a success, how can I credit my platform for it's success, pitch my platform as the definitive version and wonder why they even bothered making it for this other platform.

I think my rule covers that. The posters who behave in such a way are pretty easy to spot but not as easy to moderate as they've learned to go about their platform warring in a way that allows them to fly under the radar.

I'll just say, for the record, I am anti child-rape and am in no way trying to diminish any support of that.



It is somewhat bizarre I feel that I have to express that.

Heavily disagreed. I didn't know about Ford's link to Polanski and only learned that through that thread. Pointing out extremely problematic behavior like being friends with and supporting a pedo should always be pointed out. There's not a reason whatsoever to separate such important context from the discussion. The very reason why Ford had to deliver the Oscar and Polanski couldn't receive it himself is because he fled the country for being wanted for raping a child.



The derailing in that thread wasn't people rightfully calling out Ford. It was all the people who got uncomfortable seeing their favorite celebrity having done shitty things, and then started mocking and making jokes of people calling out Ford. I'm sorry, but it is incredibly shitty behavior to try to downplay Ford's actions and to try and quarantine discussion about that. Just as it is completely fair game to mention in a thread that a celebrity is MAGA or transphobic or whatever, it should be fair game to mention that they support a pedo friend of theirs.





I don't think anyone accused you of that. You're in the clear, no worries. It's not about you in particular, but about the general sentiment. If a celebrity has a problematic past it should be mentioned. People can then decided if they want to support said celebrity or not. But I also agree with some of the other comments here that going "you like Empire Strikes Back, you're a pedo supporter!" by proxy or something is obviously shitty, should be reported and hopefully actioned as well. We are not these celebrities. Criticizing them should not be seen as an attack on their fans. Similarly, someone engaging with content that includes problematic figures (or situations like Xbox/Microsoft and the Gaza genocide) should not have to deal with being accused of supporting heinous crimes.

Thank you for saying so, I appreciate it. i don't know what a solution is. I'm just burned out man.

Just to be clear, I didn't post about Ford and Polanski in that thread as a gotcha. I wasn't trying to make anyone feel bad for liking Harrison Ford, his movies or his speech.

Nor was I trying to imply that anyone who likes him is a pedophile defender.



I posted about it because the thread was about a celebration and recognition of Fords life work and I regard his support of Polanski as relevant to that.







I don't think you are pro-child rape. Your points clearly have nothing to do with defending child rape.

I've been thinking about this since that Harrison Ford thread and I really don't agree the pointing out someone is problematic = "gotcha" and gotcha = bad. People should be able to point out when someone is problematic, and I don't get this urge to shield them from criticism. Why is it more important to you to be able to freely discuss folks like that without any criticism than it is that they did something wrong? It's not derailing the thread if it's about the subject at hand. The derail is when people come in pointing fingers at folks accusing them of "gotcha" replies. I want to know when celebs and creators are problematic so I appreciate when people point it out

I think it's always fair game to point out problematic relationships and behavior in a thread about a celebrity, and I agree that the derail in this particular case is on the people complaining about the observation of Ford's relationship with Polanski. That said, I can also sympathize with the desire to allow a thread about an innocuous feel-good moment to just remain that. We're all starving for moments to escape the anxiety and dread of the times we're living in.



I don't think anyone is really in the wrong here. There isn't a great solution, all you can do is be selective about when you engage with a post, as others have stated. Half the problem is the dogpiling; if the discussion around the post hadn't completely consumed the thread it would probably still be open. If one or two people have already complained about the appropriateness of a post, for any reason, that's probably enough. If it's still bothering you, just report the post and move on.

I think there's a point at which an intrusive fact should just become its own thread, though. Obviously context matters. But let's say if someone was doing some sort of high profile charity work coming in and sniping the thread with a "remember this guy did something distasteful 20 years ago?" And it's before half of the posters were born is a bit much... 



There's a point where it's like… Make another thread. This thread is about this thing. If every thread is like this, it makes things more miserable whether or not it's justified to bring up horrible shit all of the time.



There just my thought about it. It's been an issue for what feels like 10+ years now so maybe there's no point in thinking about another outcome lol

I just go with the metric that there is a possibility of any one thing or person that you like having potentially done something terrible that you don't know about, and perhaps, may not ever know.



Because no one is perfect.



But, there is an overwhelming amount of negativity becoming the first gut reaction here, so I can understand people getting tired of it.

That gets extended as a defence for every controversial or problematic person, though. Take Daniel Vavra for example, controversial creative director (potentially now ex?) at Warhorse studios behind Kingdom Come: Deliverance.



Most threads on either of those games were part people fawning over the games and part people chiming in with Vavra's problematic history and ties to GamerGate.



Taking your suggestion, people who just wanted to talk about the game could tell the others to shuffle off to their own thread so they can enjoy their positive chat about the game in peace without having to deal with any of the truths about one of its primary creators.



This is a social space, and the general position of the site's moderation seems to have been "people can highlight issues with people/games/things in threads about them, but they can't criticise people for liking person/game/thing" and "people can't complain about people highlighting potentially problematic elements of person/game/thing".



They just have to exist in an uncomfortable parallel alongside one another in the thread. It's up to us which kinds of posts and posters we decide to engage with.

You could always just ignore people. With the ignore option or simply by scrolling past their posts. The derail wouldn't have happened if more people did that. I'm not against people educating others, but the posts I think should be actioned are when the person thinks they remember maybe possibly hearing that the person might have maybe done something wrong at some point. Those posts suck.

Again, context of course matters and at the end of the day it's whatever the mods want to allow. But that doesn't change the overall feel or what I observe about the whole process.



If you are just talking about a game and then someone comes in and drops a bomb for some reason that throws off the discussion i think its just rude and at worst it could be some sort of upgraded version of "concern trolling" that is veiled with valid concerns about the author or what have you. I don't know a better way to handle it other than to make a companion thread, but maybe that's considered a reaction thread and is worse. But if the games not banned, it can have one thread where people just talk about the game.







And it's hard to simply ignore when 10 other people react and now the thread is about that (again). I
t was the same exact process with politics during the elections. Something about Biden forgiving student loans veered off into something about Israel (again), like the other 10 times that happened wasn't enough, we needed an 11th thread to talk about the same thing. It was finally tamped down on, but it's not like it doesn't carry over to just about any other topic. So it gets tiresome

[Taco Bell Tower]

https://www.resetera.com/threads/bloomberg-sony-pulls-back-from-playstation-games-on-pc-ghost-of-yotei-port-and-other-internally-developed-games-scrapped.1452817/#post-152127736
Red Kong XIX

Damn. But as I said before, when you actually look at their earnings report, this decision is understandable.

[Jansen]

carlsojo, 

I'll just say, for the record, I am anti child-rape and am in no way trying to diminish any support of that

[Bootsthecat]

I've never seen a forum, or any online/irl place for that matter, mention pedophilia and related terms so often.

Seems a tad odd, no? Almost like an obsession

[HaughtyFrank]

Guys, you don't understand. If I don't mention that Harrison Ford supported Polanski whatever many years ago I will literally die

[benji]

https://www.resetera.com/threads/man-being-an-introvert-in-a-world-of-extroverts-is-fucking-tiresome.1452640/

Just, like, all the unnecessary attention some people give me just for being around them gets really old really fast.

Like, you know those people who are otherwise harmless but really like to lock-in on your introvertness and give you random bouts of attention just for some short kick of something? Sure, in the grand scheme of things, it's nothing genuinely malicious but over time it builds up into my odd brain structure as exhausting repetition and I can't help but to become slightly rude and defensive towards them.

Becomes worse if they have the bonus of sharing the "Same Joke TM" as a general socialization perk...

Sight, it's just all so tiresome...

Dafuq at this misanthropic bullshit? ‘Random bouts of attention’? Which of course are ‘nothing genuinely malicious’, but provide a ‘short kick of something’.



Jesus Christ, is it so hard to even fake being a normal goddamn human being? I’m a goddamn introvert extraordinaire but I at least can socialize enough to not come off like a Venusian who is trying to find where they parked their UFO.

Like "empathy" they really understand what an "introvert" is.

Yup.

I also think it's one thing to be a fan of something because you were ignorant/didn't know about the downside/bad parts/etc vs. knowing that something is actively harmful and giving that person more money.

But even in those specific cases, what the person does is still up to them. If you want to give money to a company that is actively supporting a genocide (as an example), you are well within your rights to do so as a consumer. I wouldn't recommend bragging about it after (which is rare, but we have seen that happen) or proudly declare that I did that in a thread about said company supporting genocide (which we've also seen).

But yea, consumerism and fandom doesn't come with a rule that everyone must close their eyes and just consume. We can be critical of the things are are fans of and I would argue we should all be more critical of the things that fall into that category: that's how we grow, that's how issues are fixed and that's how we create works that take the good elements of those things we like and make new stuff that fixes the mistakes, or reflects them.

We don't get Lovecraft Country or Bloodborne without acknowledging and calling out the virulent racism behind the Cthulhu mythos, as an example.

Unironically said on a forum that had a sticky about how their consoles all the other threads are about are made with slave labor and another about how one of the major publishers is funding genocide that even the staff couldn't boycott over. With three other companies (CDPR, THQNordic, Warner Bros.) having their products singled out for relating to transphobia, because a fired employee tweeted a joke about game journalists or because a single employee posted PR on 8chan. How about all the Smash Bros. and Nintendo threads to this day even though Sakurai openly mocks Black people fighting for their rights? Then he goes and uses an example from a company that's ableist and refuses to modify its games to be more accessible, that was also published by a company that engages in slave labor, silenced its employees speaking up for their rights and cancelled Concord to help advance fascism. Sure looks like a lot of bragging about giving money to problematic actively harmful people.

[benji]

That entire conversation is ignoring that people aren't coming into threads trying to make others aware of more information that's essential to anything at all. They come into threads based solely on the title, drop a TRUTH BOMB with as little information as possible, never in the context of the thread and then it's followed by a bunch of FUCK THIS PEDOPHILE LOVER AND FUCK EVERYONE WHOS EVER TALKED TO HIM posts.

Not a single person came into that Harrison Ford thread and said "one of the greatest actors of all time, just a shame he had a blind spot for Polanski." (Same as nobody goes into a thread and says "this guy makes great YouTube videos, it's too bad he went to JonTron's wedding" or "this guy makes great games, unfortunately he wore a deliberately provocative shirt one time.") Instead they reduced his entire career down to that offense and others ran with it as if it was all Ford's ever done in his life. A bunch of the posts were just images of him with Polanski. Those people aren't trying to inform anyone, aren't trying to discuss anything or do anything with any nuance, they're trying to scream this dude is bad and you're bad for liking him. They're trying to signal how much better than everyone else they are. Then they're completely dishonest and go "I wasn't calling anyone out for liking him" as if there was any other reason to do it. That's toxic and derailing and hostile. And I know that it is because of how much better I am than them.

[HaughtyFrank]

A guy in the Iran thread made the benign claim that the US probably didn't hit the school in Iran intentionally 

I'm talking about the school being struck intentionally.

https://www.resetera.com/threads/february-28-2026-us-and-israel-launches-strike-on-iran-khamenei-killed.1449391/post-152152054

What followed was an insane barrage by Hamas era concluding with Hecht banning him as alt account and saying people shouldn't take the bait
Cool forum b-dubs

[benji]

The hit on Khamenei was obviously just cover for hitting the actual target: a random school in Iran. The cruelty is the point.

[Jansen]

https://www.resetera.com/threads/nagoshi-asks-yakuza-lad-fans-to-stop-using-his-name-to-attack-rgg-deletes-post.1453234/page-2#post-152155165



x 1000000

[Jansen]

A guy in the Iran thread made the benign claim that the US probably didn't hit the school in Iran intentionally 

I'm talking about the school being struck intentionally.

https://www.resetera.com/threads/february-28-2026-us-and-israel-launches-strike-on-iran-khamenei-killed.1449391/post-152152054

What followed was an insane barrage by Hamas era concluding with Hecht banning him as alt account and saying people shouldn't take the bait
Cool forum b-dubs

Banned for being an alt account 🤔

Don't recognize their posting style. Makes me wonder what happened to valkria or whatever their name(s) were

https://thebire.com/forum/showthread.php?tid=336&pid=119392#pid119392

This one.

[benji]

https://www.resetera.com/threads/february-28-2026-us-and-israel-launches-strike-on-iran-khamenei-killed.1449391/post-152152054

Dr Andreas Kreig went on a podcast recently and had a very good breakdown on how things got to where they are, and the military strategy both will be employing. (Ie. Iran's local network strategy that operate mostly independently)

He also thought the recent Washington Post article pinning this on Saudi Arabia to not be credible at all. (There seem to be media leaks portraying the war as one initiated by a broader coalition which does not seem to be the case)

Ah, yes, yes, Dr. Kreig, everyone knows who that is. Let me check his Twitter to see who the fuck he is:

Spoiler:  (click to show)(click to hide)

Don't worry you can trust his retweets that seem to be the source of all his "instant analysis" (that just happens to be what he's said in all his books) too:

[benji]

lmao all this dude does is write shitty fanfic:

Oops:

Spoiler: linkedin CV (click to show)(click to hide)

[DavidCroquet]

Please tell us more about how great it is to have a WIFE 

More like how about that wife join thebire and posts about it herself 

we will find out that all along there has been a secret second bire for wives and they all know each other and talk about both us and era in a wifely way

If my experience is anything to go by, any wifely conversations about era and the bire would just be a repeated chorus of "...and you enjoy going on these websites?"