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

[Jansen]

I think Tygre was equating liking the ZZZ characters with defending loli? Honestly, I feel like some of the responses in the thread to the loli post were more about that user being a ZZZ fan than the loli-ness of it all, but some absolutely honed in on the implications instead.



It definitely got weirdly personal. And then OP not actually responding to the attempts at discussion re:misinformation stirred it up further.



I'm not sure this is limited to Era, though. I know I've really pulled back on my social media usage in part to the intense negativity across various platforms. Twitter is nothing but fury (whether it's chuds or not). Threads feels like a lot of passive aggression with anger simmering right below the surface. Tumblr's gotten way smaller than it used to be, and Bluesky is the only one where things can feel ok, but it still has a lot of sniping from what I can see. Negativity and hyperbole have always been common—I remember being particularly sensitive to it even as far back as when Jason Schreier still worked at Kotaku—but it's just gotten worse and worse with how the algorithms prioritize hot takes and things like that (to say nothing of the state of the world lol).



I'm not sure how we can even begin to combat that.

That is correct. I was actually preparing to answer some questions in that thread and then I saw those and decided that it was not worth the effort. Didn't come back yesterday because I NEED TO BREATHE.







The things is. I used this name during the period when the story of said characters appeared. I chose it because it means any Google search would not be able to locate my real life identity. Its OPSEC in this increasingly dangerous internet.







This is true. I tried engaging the first few posters. Went to sleep because there is time difference (yes, I live on the other side of the world).



Then I woke up to a shit storm.



It was clear by that point there is a significant number of posters in the thread who are not willing to engage in the "article that I did research on" and instead prefer to talk about the ZZZ incident that should be the topic of another thread, or drive by post that are just variations of "AI bad" that has nothing to do with the article itself. It was just not worth it. I have a job and life. The article probably took me 3 hours to properly find all the sources alone. If further reply would just bring more of hate, what is the point?



I am glad I have anti-depressant with me when I saw the replies.

Spot on! It's not just what you say it's how you say it. More so on a text based medium like a forum. Like the saying goes you may be right but you're an arsehole. Work on the being less of an arsehole part. Take a moment before you post

But there wasnt really any discussion why people think its a terrible thread, but I feel 80% of that was dogpiling at one point instead of discussing why the GI.biz article is still correct / not wrong and the OP just put more nuances into it.



Its clear that quite a few people didnt want to engage with the actual OP and research/sources and just want to driveby "oof" or "Gacha bad" or "AI bad".

I want to make it clear that I'm not here to go "more dogpilling yay" but that I think in practical terms it's impossible to prevent other than by locking the thread.



Asking people to read every post in a x pages long thread to see if anybody has already made an argument that's similar to what you're about to say is not realistic. 50% of the people here don't even read the op lol



And at what point is it considered dogpilling. Let's say a mod comes in on page 5 and says okay folks, no more dogpilling. What does that mean in practice? I can't come in and say "I disagree with this?". Obviously not, but then at what point is it considered adding to the dogpille. Are we asking mods to judge some arbitrary level of quality from this point on? If I come in with a well thought out argument and OP just ignores it, well then what. Why should I bother next time? What about when the OP is already inflammatory. Like you know, calling something insane misinformation while never showing that misinformation or saying "but I guess people can't be bothered to read these days".



It's good to say "moderate dogpilling more" but putting that into actually enforceable rules is way harder.







That's fair but again, what are mods supposed to do here. I would actually disagree that 80% of the posters there did that but ignoring that, actual drive-by posts are already moderated and I'm not sure what else you can do.

I mean just looking at page 3.



"OP doesnt have any information" - It is a long OP with tons of information and 11 linked sources.

Next post is a response to the username and loli group just saying "THis aint it".

Next post is an image response to the same.

Next one is on topic.

Next one is on topic.

Next one is just another reaction image unsure what its about.

Next one another response to the loli post.

Next one on topic but just bsky posts.

After that how Mihoyo treated VAs (which btw. wasnt Mihoyo but Formosa and the actors strike)

Another response to the loli post.

Some driveby post about E33.

A response to the "OP doesnt have any information post".

A fry gif.



And so on. More loli responses, responses that makes it clear people didnt read the OP, just responses about the "thread backfire" etc.



Ceerious post is a great rebuttal to the thread and giving more information.



In the whole 50 posts, I would argue there are mostly just a fraction of posts, be it 7 or 8 posts actually rebutting the OP.  And the drive-by posts dont really seem to have been moderated (at least in that thread, not sure if anyone reported them though).

It may not be a realistic goal, but it's never been an excuse depending on the thread. It's just that normally it's not a big deal because the only time you really have to worry about consequences for it (beyond risking getting mocked anyways) is if it's a sensitive thread topic, or if a mod post was clearly made beforehand.



That said, you don't need to read through a thread fully to understand the universally good advice of "think before you post".

Let's go over it point by point.



1. It's not impossible to prevent other than by locking the thread. The community is formed by the people posting. Moderation influences how people post.

2. No one is asking people to read every post in an x pages long thread. But it's not difficult to at least read what you're reacting too, like OP or at least the current last page of a thread.

3. "I can't come in and say "I disagree with this?". --> No. Frankly, this random ass statement is worthless and nobody cares. It's a waste of my scroll wheel. How about trying "I disagree with this BECAUSE..." and add to the conversation.

4. "f I come in with a well thought out argument and OP just ignores it, well then what. Why should I bother next time?" If your argument is well thought out, it's a valuable post and others may react to it. Why would you bother posting "I disagree with this." if you even question you should post a well thought argument if the OP wouldn't react to it. Do you think they would react to "I disagree with this."? That's the definition of dogpiling.

5. "What about when the OP is already inflammatory." --> Report it.

honestly if people understood how much is reportable (and how it's like…not always trying to get people banned) and reported things or just ignored stuff instead of posting the vibe around here would be a lot better lol

It's easy to not personally partake in GenAI, and therefore easy to feel morally superior about, I suppose. Definitely agree that I don't see the same energy being directed at other immensely harmful industries here, probably because a lot of people here do participate in them and don't want to have to confront the fact that maybe they aren't paragons of virtue after all. Which is fine, none of us are, it's not really possible to go through life without being "harmful" in some ways to the planet and/or others, but having to confront anything problematic about oneself is just too much for some people, better off externalising it and finding problematic shit in other people instead.



And yeah, it's impossible to have serious discussions on how we as individuals can try to decrease our carbon footprint and such when we're too busy performatively trying to one up each other and find any tiny excuse possible to paint someone as a "bad" person so they can be mocked, shunned, have accusations thrown their way, etc. etc.





I think this is doubly true in our current global climate, where people are repressing pent up emotions just to get by day to day. There isn't really much we can do as individuals to affect things on a large scale, but we can misdirect our anger at other individuals and get a high on feeling some small sense of power, I guess.



We can't do anything about tech bros and corpos constantly pumping money into GenAI and shoving it in all our faces, but we can be a complete asshole to someone that isn't 100% against AI, or just takes a more nuanced/not entirely negative stance on it, and throw wild accusations at them and try to belittle them as much as possible.



I'm not going to pretend like I'm not guilty of being an asshole online (and offline) at times either, but having pleasant exchanges and discussions with people always feels a lot better overall, and is longer lasting, than the brief high of lashing out at someone, so while they may take more "effort" to seek out and engage with, they're always more worthwhile to do so.



Point is, we can all do with remembering to be a bit kinder to one another. We don't need any more dividing and conquering than we already have. That's not to say we should tolerate actual assholes or bigots obviously, but maybe we shouldn't assume the absolute worst of someone for having differing stances and opinions, or simply being factually wrong about something (since one too many occasions here where people will dogpile someone to correct them, even after they've already acknowledged and/or corrected their mistake/inaccurate info).





I'm glad to hear that, sub-communities and OTs here tend to be a lot less hostile in my experience.

1. I've been asking this entire time what people expect from moderation

2. Literally the person I was responding to brought that up as a suggestion

3. It is frankly entirely irrelevant what you personally consider to be a worthwhile post

4. No, writing something an OP won't react to is not the definition of dogpiling and it proves my point that you can't even define it what dogpiling is. Why do people bother posting what you consider "worthless posts"? Because it takes a second and because they want to. It's a forum about video games. Feel free to bemoan that people are wasting your precious scroll wheel all you want but 99% are here to casually talk about games and nothing more.

5. Report the posts you dislike then

TBH by the end of that thread, there was also a weird vibe of people encouraging each other to report the thread to get it locked and/or mocking OP by saying that they should request a lock for their own thread because it wasn't worth a serious discussion and it was their own fault they got piled on, even though OP didn't actually break any rules themselves.



There's a point where the dogpiling turned into willful sabotage while victim blaming the OP, and that thread definitely reached it.

I want to make a note here, we do actively ban people harshly for being dismissive of the crimes against humanity that Iran/China engage in.

There's been an AI OT for quite some time and I really don't understand why people cannot just continue to discuss the future and/or their positive viewpoints of AI there. The solution exists and the forum has functioned and can continue to function without "moderate" AI talking points, which is effectively just a trojan horse to get all AI discussion into everyday discussion. People have exactly what they want with the AI OT. We see people constantly trying to sneak AI discussion past the goalie on the gaming and general sides and then we see the opportunity to debate it pop up in the Community Discussion thread over and over.



All of that to say, once again, there's an AI OT that serves as a solution to this problem.

This idea that AI advocacy can sit alongside progressive politics is just plain horseshit. It's not a coincidence or some "hypocrisy", on the contrary, its the only logical conclusion from an entire school of politic centered around human rights.

Not this "bullying victim needs to stand up and explain their points" bullshit again please.

Every single online guide against hate speech recommend just blocking and move on, which is why I initially asked for account deletion. The fact that some people stalked me to this page justified my initial decision to use a handle that cannot be Googled.



Center for Countering Digital Hate:

https://counterhate.com/research/dont-feed-the-trolls/



Resist the urge to respond.

When a troll targets you for abuse, block them immediately; this will ensure that they cannot tweet at you ever again, and removes mentions of them from your notifications.



I am now blocking you for the good of my mental health.

The United Nations disagrees.

https://unric.org/en/building-an-accessible-future-for-all-ai-and-the-inclusion-of-persons-with-disabilities/



Heba Hagrass, the UN Special Rapporteur on the rights of persons with disabilities, underscored the importance of accessible innovation:







It is really disheartening to see people so uninformed about the topic, yet are so sure about their own superiority that they forgot about the underprivileged.



Somehow I am still trying to provide additional information and add context to the discussion, this is probably a mistake....

Yes, sorry, I didn't want to imply people don't get banned when they say something like "I don't care about the Uyghurs as long as I get my iPhone". Recently, there was someone claiming the latest Iran protests was a CIA-job and they got swiftly removed. That's not really what I was talking about.





I don't want to derail the conversation we're having to AI because this isn't about that. But the same can be said about any of my examples. It's easy to hide behind calling it whataboutism or the "oh so you partake in society" meme because then you don't need to engage but the fact remains that plenty of people on Era are fine with destructive behavior if it benefits them. There is infinitely more understanding on Era for people claiming they 'need' to eat meat every day or having a knockoff product made by modern slaves halfway across the world for 99 cents than there is for a poster who used an LLM to automate an Excel report they used to spend 2 hours per week on.



Maybe, and this is just a crazy idea, just maybe things would be more better here if we stopped measuring and judging each other's progressiveness on the random metric du jour, accept that we're all trying to do our best within the confines of our own existence and capabilities, and actually helped each other navigate the fucking minefield that is current society so that we can all do better. You know, actual progressivism.

This idea that AI advocacy can sit alongside progressive politics is just plain horseshit. It's not a coincidence or some "hypocrisy", on the contrary, its the only logical conclusion from an entire school of politic centered around human rights.

I know Bionic posted some of this but I've already quoted it all so fuck off

[Jansen]

Anywho point is they all went to bat for user that's going to do nothing but shill AI they're even so brazen as to do it in the community feedback thread 

[kaleidoscopium]

I also doubt the other side won because fucking Stephen Miller.

Not what I said 

[Jansen]

Spineduke takes up the mantle for today

This idea that AI advocacy can sit alongside progressive politics is just plain horseshit. It's not a coincidence or some "hypocrisy", on the contrary, its the only logical conclusion from an entire school of politic centered around human rights.

You can be against AI without being a asshole and going after your fellow community members. In the end no one of us here on this forum really has decision making power about whether AI establishes itself or not commercially.



It's not really that hard just have some basic manners and be respectful to each other. I have plenty of people on here that i fundamentally disagree with on certain topics but that's life.

100% this. Being mean to someone because you think you're right doesn't improve the world or fix issues in the real world. It just means you were mean to someone on a message board*



*I say this as someone who hypocritically has been recently guilty of this.

I have plenty of people on here that i fundamentally disagree with on certain topics but that's life.

I mean sure, but are we talking about pizza or genocides? We can't pretend that every point of view is welcomed here.



I don't condone what happened in that thread. I just wonder what exactly people are expecting when talking about AI. If I come in here waving Putin's talking points, I'm sure I will face similar heat and dogpiling. It's one thing to talk about pineapples, its another to eschew a narrative that threa
tens peoples lives.

I'm not trying to relitigate that thread and you'll have to take my word that I was browsing this thread already, tossing around how I'd contribute to discussion around criticisms of negativity here. But that thread does exemplify the culture that people were bringing up recently.



An aspect of that culture being, for better or for worse, it has generally been an unwritten rule that you are allowed to be a dick to someone if you are morally right. Not "if you feel" you are morally right, because moderation is usually good at cracking down on those who overstep over trivial shit, but if you do stand on the correct side of an issue.



That's why I'm not being facetious when I say "for better or for worse" because I have no empathy for someone being told to fuck off of they're downplaying genocide for example. But when you combine that with the community's love of overquoting a dumb post to death to get their dunk in, it can result in that thread from yesterday.



The other aspect I've noticed, and I don't really know where this stemmed from, is that there is a sort of low level hostility to thread creators. Almost as if they are on the backfoot for having the audacity to make a thread. I don't want to overstate it, it's not like venom is being spouted at everyone making threads, but if an opinion is bit out there, it usually takes a page or two of one-liners coming at the OP before the discussion starts.



Like, on the topic of thread creation recently, I remembered that a few years ago I was put off ever making threads after I made one celebrating a game I loved that was on sale. There was just enough people shitting on me for not linking to their preferred store, one even saying they'd never check it out now, that I decided to not bother again.



I'm also not saying dunks don't have their place when it comes to relatively minor shit. Something like the guy fighting the 20 year old war on Gamecube being more powerful than the PS2 was hugely entertaining. Sometimes also, a thread's premise is so absurdly beyond the pale, like "Is Apple a morally superior company?" that I'll say it, it warrants some hefty mockery. In both of those cases though, the OP stuck around and I think had their minds changed by the end.



So yeah, I know the position I've laid out of "being rude and / or dogpiling is allowed… sometimes" isn't exactly an easily enforceable rule for mods but just my observations.



All of that being said, and again I'm not trying to attack but [USER=241783]AngelsOfDelusion[/USER] , you did come in very hot with your OP. The several page long dunking was over the line but the thread would have also gone differently without your loaded assertions that weren't necessarily needed to make your overall point.



You just said the thread looked like something out of gamergate but the posters flooding in weren't the ones starting out making heftly claims about bad games journalism with no back up. I'm not trying to be nasty and I hope you can take that in the constructive spirit I mean. I had my own two liner in that thread and I genuinely meant it as advice.

I got labeled here "as not thinking of the underprivileged" in my criticisms. The entire south of my country has been razed thanks to AI technology posturing as a humane method of warfare. I am far more empathetic when people do the basic acknowledgements rather than sweeping all this shit under the rug and pretending technology exists in a vacuum.

Believe me, I am trying to be as nice as possible in the context of this particular thread. I have some very not-nice things to say in response to what they laid out.



But I'm taking some mental breaths with "constructiveeeee" as my mantra lol

 

[Snoopy]

Gay

[who is ted danson?]

[BIONIC]

This idea that AI advocacy can sit alongside progressive politics is just plain horseshit. It's not a coincidence or some "hypocrisy", on the contrary, its the only logical conclusion from an entire school of politic centered around human rights.

User banned (1 month): inflammatory accusations against other users, threadbanned for breaking thread rules, account in junior phase

The United Nations disagrees.
https://unric.org/en/building-an-accessible-future-for-all-ai-and-the-inclusion-of-persons-with-disabilities/

Heba Hagrass, the UN Special Rapporteur on the rights of persons with disabilities, underscored the importance of accessible innovation:

"One of the urgent matters is how artificial intelligence will change our world. The world for everybody. When computers came in and then the Internet, people did not notice that having computers and the Internet instead of creating a haven for everybody has built lots of obstacles and unbeatable barriers for many disabilities. It took us at least from 10 to 15 years to combat this. The problem is to convince people who are providing such programs to make them accessible."
Gerard Quinn, the former UN Special Rapporteur on the rights of persons with disabilities, explains that AI-enabled systems offer new opportunities for disability inclusion. They can address specific individual needs and expand possibilities for persons with disabilities to live independently

It is really disheartening to see people so uninformed about the topic, yet are so sure about their own superiority that they forgot about the underprivileged.

Somehow I am still trying to provide additional information and add context to the discussion, this is probably a mistake....

Suck my dick Jansen

[Jansen]

This idea that AI advocacy can sit alongside progressive politics is just plain horseshit. It's not a coincidence or some "hypocrisy", on the contrary, its the only logical conclusion from an entire school of politic centered around human rights.

User banned (1 month): inflammatory accusations against other users, threadbanned for breaking thread rules, account in junior phase

The United Nations disagrees.
https://unric.org/en/building-an-accessible-future-for-all-ai-and-the-inclusion-of-persons-with-disabilities/

Heba Hagrass, the UN Special Rapporteur on the rights of persons with disabilities, underscored the importance of accessible innovation:

"One of the urgent matters is how artificial intelligence will change our world. The world for everybody. When computers came in and then the Internet, people did not notice that having computers and the Internet instead of creating a haven for everybody has built lots of obstacles and unbeatable barriers for many disabilities. It took us at least from 10 to 15 years to combat this. The problem is to convince people who are providing such programs to make them accessible."
Gerard Quinn, the former UN Special Rapporteur on the rights of persons with disabilities, explains that AI-enabled systems offer new opportunities for disability inclusion. They can address specific individual needs and expand possibilities for persons with disabilities to live independently

It is really disheartening to see people so uninformed about the topic, yet are so sure about their own superiority that they forgot about the underprivileged.

Somehow I am still trying to provide additional information and add context to the discussion, this is probably a mistake....

Suck my dick Jansen

You better hope he has plenty of antidepressants on✋

[Boredfrom]

This idea that AI advocacy can sit alongside progressive politics is just plain horseshit. It's not a coincidence or some "hypocrisy", on the contrary, its the only logical conclusion from an entire school of politic centered around human rights.

User banned (1 month): inflammatory accusations against other users, threadbanned for breaking thread rules, account in junior phase

The United Nations disagrees.
https://unric.org/en/building-an-accessible-future-for-all-ai-and-the-inclusion-of-persons-with-disabilities/

Heba Hagrass, the UN Special Rapporteur on the rights of persons with disabilities, underscored the importance of accessible innovation:

"One of the urgent matters is how artificial intelligence will change our world. The world for everybody. When computers came in and then the Internet, people did not notice that having computers and the Internet instead of creating a haven for everybody has built lots of obstacles and unbeatable barriers for many disabilities. It took us at least from 10 to 15 years to combat this. The problem is to convince people who are providing such programs to make them accessible."
Gerard Quinn, the former UN Special Rapporteur on the rights of persons with disabilities, explains that AI-enabled systems offer new opportunities for disability inclusion. They can address specific individual needs and expand possibilities for persons with disabilities to live independently

It is really disheartening to see people so uninformed about the topic, yet are so sure about their own superiority that they forgot about the underprivileged.

Somehow I am still trying to provide additional information and add context to the discussion, this is probably a mistake....

Spineduke probably got so butthurt that spammed the report button to oblivion.

[BIONIC]

https://www.resetera.com/threads/obsession-beats-mandalorian-grogu-at-the-box-office.1533442/page-3#post-155570305

Mando was never going to be on the level of a mainline movie (hence the lower-for-the-series budget) so this says much more about Obsession than it does Mando.

This is absurd rationalization. And I like Star Wars.

No, it's not.

Its budget was like $160 million, not including marketing. So... roughly $250 million or so, at a guess. Its still not cheap. Meanwhile Obsession was close to 1 million. That is some David Vs Goliath stuff we got going here. This says a lot about both.

No big IP blockbuster is cheap. But $160m is noticeable for a Star Wars film and helps to line up expectations.

Nice sneak preview for when another big disney property underperforms come december

lol

See you then!

What do you consider "underpeforming?" Because no one, including Disney, is expecting Endgame numbers.

The industry is different now so expectations need to be in line with that.

The way it's going it will do worse than Solo, the film that essentially caused them to put all SW films on hiatus. I would assume Disney's expectations were to give it a lower budget to improve margins and thus even on a middling BO to make some money - the way it's heading it will still not make anything at all due to terrible performance. Don't really know how or why you'd do damage control for what is an abject failure on every front.

It is not an abject failure on every front. That is hyperbole at its best.

Nor am I doing damage control. Simply providing level-headed logic in the midst of people who want the move to be a failure. Never said it was a blockbuster hit.

Solo also had a ridiculous $280m budget and the box office industry is very different than it was eight years ago. Context matters.

I see it as absurdly expensive, desperate, and is very likely it can hit a high number and be seen as underperforming by disney execs

I see we're still doing this nonsense.

Oh yeah dude they didn't break a bunch of emergency glasses cause a few under performers and some outright flops spooked them.

Anyway, back on topic. I'm happy to see young filmmakers have breakthrough hits with this and what's looking like backrooms if tracking holds. Happy to see original films break through.

[Jansen]

Gonna start by saying this: accusing people of being against helping people with disabilities just because they don't like AI is just no. There's a real discussion to be had about how people treat each other in discussions on heated issues and that is an example of why these discussions often get out of hand. Someone makes an crazy accusation like that, one that makes no real sense, and everything just completely spirals out of control from there as everyone else reacts to the insanity.

Here's the thing though, it's something we can and do ban, and people should report it. In this case, I did, we talked it over real fast, and we took care of it. So, please do report stuff like that. It's these sorts of posts that make threads go from perfectly fine to total dumpstefires and nobody wants stuff like that to happen. You guys don't like dumpsterfire threads, we don't like dumpsterfire threads, lurkers don't like dumpsterfire threads, nobody likes them except for trolls. So report that stuff and help us out.

I'm cutting this out of your larger response to try and get the discussion back to a useful point, people need to realize that making a thread is not supposed to be this big huge thing. Yes, we ask for a modicum of effort, but that's just so that the thread isn't literally just "Thread title + nothing in the OP." Threads don't need to be essays or have these huge amounts of effort behind them, it's ok if they're simple or silly or whatever.

That said, if someone is attacking you for making a thread, please let us know so we can take care of it. We want people to make threads, we don't want them to feel like they shouldn't.

[Jansen]

Waiting for the inmates to realize that the person they were stanning for just got banned. Going to have to wade into the gacha threads and constructive 🤦

You just can't make this shit up



👀

[Boredfrom]

Gonna start by saying this: accusing people of being against helping people with disabilities just because they don't like Al is just no. There's a real discussion to be had about how people treat each other in discussions on heated issues and that is an example of why these discussions often get out of hand. Someone makes an crazy accusation like that, one that makes no real sense, and everything just completely spirals out of control

from there as everyone else reacts to the insanity. Here's the thing though, it's something we can and do ban, and people should report it. In this case, I did, we talked it over real fast, and we took care of it. So, please do report stuff like that. It's these sorts of posts that make threads go from perfectly fine to total dumpstefire and nobody wants stuff like that to happen. You guys don't like dumpsterfire threads, we don't like dumpsterfire threads, lurkers don't like dumpsterfire threads, nobody
likes them except for trolls. So report that stuff and help us out.

Spineduke was comparing the other dude of being a rusky CHUD because his way of thinking doesn’t conform an hypothetical progressive line. Spineduke has justified and defended more awful shit than saying  “AI may help the disabled” and the fact that he went to say “AI is bombing my country”  just to justify his stance is also deplorable.

Why do you keep targeting the wrong people and defend the ones making your forum an awful place?

[HaughtyFrank]

I want to make a note here, we do actively ban people harshly for being dismissive of the crimes against humanity that Iran/China engage in.

Fucking piece of shit. Just a few days ago you had a guy who claimed that all the killed protesters in Iran were mossad agents and you gave him merely 2 weeks. That's not "harshly". That's less than people get for saying that Cammy's ass looks good.

https://www.resetera.com/threads/nyt-iran-has-agreed-to-mou-and-israel-has-been-sidelined-no-hormuz-tolls-no-fighting-in-lebanon-25-bil-unfrozen-nuclear-talks-in-30-60-days.1528651/post-155342116

[Boredfrom]

Lord Flash ban was overturned and he decided to post shit like this:

There is a strong demand amongst the electorate to at least distance from Israel or outright condemn it. And if you dont provide them with candidates who can do it in a sane manner, they will find candidates who do it in any manner. There is an easy, rational and moral solution to this.

Or you can keep yelling at the people who vote for them. Wont change a thing.

https://www.resetera.com/threads/house-candidate-maureen-galindo-pledges-to-send-‘american-zionists’-to-internment-camp-house-democrats-condemn-rhetoric.1525342/page-2

[HeavenIsAPlaceOnEarth]

I know Bionic posted some of this but I've already quoted it all so fuck off

Don't worry, Uncle will milk you first.

[BananaBlast]

The increasing appeal to "But ____ woman likes it is probably the worst part. Seems like every time theres now some Vtuber ( I'm assuming it's because many female Vtuber avatars are attractive??) people like to point to to back up their opinion. And I'm like??? yeah, thats like 1 opinion of a living human and also missing the entire point of the criticism????

The thing that so many men are disingenuously ignoring with those kinds of arguments, is that women dressing up because they enjoy it and find it affirming, is very different from because they want attention from weird men gawking at them.

My style is often pretty androgynous leaning (baggy jeans, t-shirts etc.), and I still get started at and eyeball fucked by half the dudes I see out on the street every day. I have little interest in dressing more femme or revealingly in large part because I do not fucking want any more of that shit in my life. (Plus, I'm a lesbian, I do not give a fuck about guys and do not find unwanted attention "flattering.")

Also, a vtuber is a terrible point of comparison. It's a totally different situation because generally speaking, the person using it is going to have control over moderating their audience... you can instaban someone for being a creep on Twitch, you can't do it IRL.

Dudes who talk like this are the same kinds of predatory assholes who think consent is something you can bully out of a woman, or that they are "asking for it." It's a massive red flag someone is an abuser, or worse.

Yup, because """Eyeball fucking""" is TOTALLY the reason a bunch of dudes would stare at some rambling, grumbling, androgynous MtF transgender in baggy male clothes 

[BananaBlast]

Also, I'm a tad late, but the Boys became absolute dogshit. Season 4 and 5 were absolute dogshit, and the finale was so godawful not even Era could make excuses for it.

Anthony Starr carried the entire show, even if the writers completely mangled and nerfed Homelander by the end.

[simiansmarts]

The thing that so many men are disingenuously ignoring with those kinds of arguments, is that women dressing up because they enjoy it and find it affirming, is very different from because they want attention from weird men gawking at them.

My style is often pretty androgynous leaning (baggy jeans, t-shirts etc.), and I still get started at and eyeball fucked by half the dudes I see out on the street every day. I have little interest in dressing more femme or revealingly in large part because I do not fucking want any more of that shit in my life. (Plus, I'm a lesbian, I do not give a fuck about guys and do not find unwanted attention "flattering.")

Also, a vtuber is a terrible point of comparison. It's a totally different situation because generally speaking, the person using it is going to have control over moderating their audience... you can instaban someone for being a creep on Twitch, you can't do it IRL.

Dudes who talk like this are the same kinds of predatory assholes who think consent is something you can bully out of a woman, or that they are "asking for it." It's a massive red flag someone is an abuser, or worse.

 

coffeecat is not beating the trans incel allegation. he's hardcore projecting the "i'm a nice guy unlike chad!" spiel

i bet coffeecat is a 6'2" gigahon who dresses like the skater tomboy who didn't date him in high school

[Boredfrom]

Also, I'm a tad late, but the Boys is absolute dogshit. Season 4 and 5 were absolute dogshit, and the finale was so godawful not even Era could make excuses for it.

Anthony Starr carried the entire show, even if the writers completely mangled and nerfed Homelander by the end.

Nah, for all its faults of the season, Homelander’s death is peak.

[benji]

The thing that so many men are disingenuously ignoring with those kinds of arguments, is that women dressing up because they enjoy it and find it affirming, is very different from because they want attention from weird men gawking at them.

My style is often pretty androgynous leaning (baggy jeans, t-shirts etc.), and I still get started at and eyeball fucked by half the dudes I see out on the street every day. I have little interest in dressing more femme or revealingly in large part because I do not fucking want any more of that shit in my life. (Plus, I'm a lesbian, I do not give a fuck about guys and do not find unwanted attention "flattering.")

Also, a vtuber is a terrible point of comparison. It's a totally different situation because generally speaking, the person using it is going to have control over moderating their audience... you can instaban someone for being a creep on Twitch, you can't do it IRL.

Dudes who talk like this are the same kinds of predatory assholes who think consent is something you can bully out of a woman, or that they are "asking for it." It's a massive red flag someone is an abuser, or worse.

coffeecat is not beating the trans incel allegation. he's hardcore projecting the "i'm a nice guy unlike chad!" spiel

i bet coffeecat is a 6'2" gigahon who dresses like the skater tomboy who didn't date him in high school

Interesting account. Signed up in 2018. Never posted until 2024 and first posted in the burka thread: https://www.resetera.com/threads/why-women-criticise-sexualised-character-designs-ot3-make-her-look-more-corpulent-more-stuffed-where-the-eyes-cant-escape.275780/page-377#post-122167329

Almost 2/3rds of its posts are either in that thread, in the Gamergate 2.0 thread or are making the same kind of posts in other related threads. They also post a lot of hidden posts, more than any other user I've seen.

The problem is men. It's men. It's always men.

It is like fucking impossible for men to ever treat women (and girls) as anything but inherently sexual objects.

This doesn't apply to coffeecat because they simply identify as otherwise.  

And they're not just trans:

You're debating this point with a visibly trans and queer individual who gets street harassed weekly and stared or glared at near constantly when fae's outside. I am well aware of what it feels like to be othered on a daily basis or be at least a bit worried about what basically every single man with a certain look I come across might be thinking. I don't know anything about you, but I suspect we're on the same page as far as feeling marginalized by these folks goes.

[Jansen]

Essentially. I'm 50/50 on the issue. I know the problems surrounding AI and whatnot. I'm a creative; it comes with the territory. I don't actively participate in the AI-OT at all because it's not anything I'm fully vested in discussing wholesale to begin with. I don't really need to.



At the same time, I'm encouraged to use it in my job too. I've had to use it sparingly in certain touch-and-go cases. Pretty sure if I made that into some kind of its own discussion thread, the end result would be a bunch of drive-bys coming in, calling me an apologist or telling me to find a new job. And reality does not work in that bubble.

I mean, I don't find this particularly surprising/wrong?



I think we all understand that it's something a lot of us are going to be forced to interact with in our day-to-day lives, I've been forced to use it at work as well, I've still not once tried to go "well it was kinda useful for X", because how useful it is doesn't mean anything to the concern people have with it.



If I then went and created a thread talking about how useful it is for my job (I mean, it isn't and I've fought it at every opportunity, but hypothetically), I'd rightfully get a bunch of s
hit for it.

Wow not ON my reeee. QUIT YOUR JOB AND FACE FINANCIAL RUIN OR BURN in HELL

I hope when people say "let's be more respectful towards AI" they take into consideration that there's already a ton of people out there that have lost their jobs to AI or are worried about it every day. Cool if that isn't part of your life or if you're above that, not everybody is.

[HeavenIsAPlaceOnEarth]

coffeecat is not beating the trans incel allegation. he's hardcore projecting the "i'm a nice guy unlike chad!" spiel

The "Ugh, I can't stand being so hot that every guy I encounter wants to fuck me. And I'm not even trying to be hot. Ugh." attitude certainly isn't helping.

That's not happening my dude, the calls are coming from inside the house.

[HeavenIsAPlaceOnEarth]

worried about what basically every single man with a certain look I come across might be thinking

It's "gross".

Hope this helps!

[Boredfrom]

1780073616[/url]']

Essentially. I'm 50/50 on the issue. I know the problems surrounding AI and whatnot. I'm a creative; it comes with the territory. I don't actively participate in the AI-OT at all because it's not anything I'm fully vested in discussing wholesale to begin with. I don't really need to.



At the same time, I'm encouraged to use it in my job too. I've had to use it sparingly in certain touch-and-go cases. Pretty sure if I made that into some kind of its own discussion thread, the end result would be a bunch of drive-bys coming in, calling me an apologist or telling me to find a new job. And reality does not work in that bubble.

I mean, I don't find this particularly surprising/wrong?



I think we all understand that it's something a lot of us are going to be forced to interact with in our day-to-day lives, I've been forced to use it at work as well, I've still not once tried to go "well it was kinda useful for X", because how useful it is doesn't mean anything to the concern people have with it.



If I then went and created a thread talking about how useful it is for my job (I mean, it isn't and I've fought it at every opportunity, but hypothetically), I'd rightfully get a bunch of s
hit for it.

Wow not ON my reeee. QUIT YOUR JOB AND FACE FINANCIAL RUIN OR BURN in HELL

Being fair, there is a moment when your bosses say “you are using too much AI.”

https://www.resetera.com/threads/amazon-scraps-ai-leaderboard-to-stop-workers-chasing-usage-scores-please-dont-use-ai-just-for-the-sake-of-using-ai.1533079/

[Boredfrom]

Oh bless Jeff Bezos heart for thinking about the environment. Thank God you used Amazon to try and make a point.

You are welcome.

[Jansen]

Nobody is saying to respect AI. It's to just not be obnoxious or assholish to anyone that might use it or isn't fully against it. Gen AI is complete trash, but attacking random users online about it doesn't do anything, save it for the corpos or celebrities/large creators. There isn't anything gained from relentleasly coming down on a random poster on resetera.com over ai other than self satisfaction.

[Greatness Gone]

Waiting for the inmates to realize that the person they were stanning for just got banned. Going to have to wade into the gacha threads and constructive 🤦

You just can't make this shit up

[img].[/img]

👀

We don't talk enough about how Lotus is one of the worst posters on the site.

[Jansen]

With like 150k posts to boot

[BIONIC]

Folks gonna try to explain to you how Mando is actually a really good film and already made its budget back to cope. But I can promise this is not what Disney wanted.

The only thing this could be applied to is the pivot to Doom from Kang, due to things both in their control (Quantumania) and out of their control (Majors' legal issues).

The use of X-Men, the return of RDJ and Chris Evans, the multiverse story? That was always going to happen.

Also, the only outright flop was The Marvels, so this is again a lot of hyperbole or just misinformation on a topic.

I also feel justified in think Mando was never good. Aimless and uninspired. Like the rest of Disney Star Wars content.

What did they want?

I agree they wanted more but it's hard to know what their expectations were. We can assume it wasn't a billion dollars, obviously.

Andor being uninspired is certainly a new one.

Sorry Andor is the exception.

It's not though. Maul just aired and it was very good, as was Bad Batch. Skeleton Crew was great and a breath of fresh air for the franchise. And obviously, it would be insane to call The Last Jedi "uninspired" even if it didn't work for you.

You keep bringing up the budget, context and expectations. OK. Do you think Disney expected that, despite the lower budget (still high at 165 million) and coming off a 7 year hiatus of SW films that it still wouldn't make any money or be a success? And the broader context is it has come out in a year where actually, box office performance is way up and the strongest its been for years? You mean that context?

Lol

Whelp, I disagree.

Yes, actually. A spin-off based on a TV show coming 7 years after everyone hated the last mainline movie is important context. Exactly.

Right? This is viewers directly telling studios don’t feed us slop. People are craving original movies and horror has been delivering that for the past decade. It’s gaining momentum.

You think Skelton Crew and Bad Batch were bad and that The Last Jedi was uninspired?

Scream 7 just became the most successful in the entire franchise.

Rode off the backs of 5 and 6 being so well received/hyper nostalgia baiting.

Oh, I agree. I'm just pushing back on the blanket idea of "audiences are pushing back on slop" when a FAR worse movie than Mando made bank.

Wouldn't a 7 year theatrical hiatus lead to better results not worse?

You think Disney released a tightly budgeted film with the expectation of making a loss?

You suddenly forgot about your initial point where the context of its poor performance was there being a weak theatrical market (now its been pointed out that this has been the best year for the BO for quite a few years)?

What a fun and totally worthwhile discussion this is.

No. Not if the last film left a bad taste in audiences' mouths. Trust needs to be built up again.



How can I forget a point i never made in the first place? I absolutely never said that.



I mean, you could... stop having it? You're in this topic choosing to post.

You at the very least heavily implied it here

You can obfuscate your arguments all you want but eventually it’s just going to sound like white noise

No, I didn't. "Different" doesn't mean "weak."

Lots of factors from streaming to audience taste have changed since Solo released 8 years ago. The box office is very different post-COVID in a number of factors, which makes direct comparisons to 8-year-old films not the best.