• 0 Posts
  • 25 Comments
Joined 1 year ago
cake
Cake day: October 4th, 2023

help-circle



  • I’ve just reinstalled Grim Dawn, having last played it some years ago, and am currently working my way through Act 2. I don’t frequently play ARPG’s, but I’ll try a new one when I get it in a bundle or somesuch. Mostly, they don’t hold my interest. Grim Dawn, vanilla and unmodded (I assume there’s some kind of modding scene; haven’t looked yet) still manages to scratch that itch for me. At some point I’ll pick up the DLC. Right now I just want to find something good enough to replace this crazy caster 2h sword I’m using, so that I can bring Albrecht’s Aether Ray back into the rotation!








  • Whataboutisms aside, if you’re going to claim an article is libelous, you ought to at least be able to refute one of the assertions made by it. You haven’t actually done that here. Jill Stein’s defense is that she’s naive to the point of idiocy. So she’s either a witting catspaw of Putin and the GOP, or an imbecile that has no business being president.

    Furthermore, I was unable to find any language in the senate intelligence committee’s report to indicate that she’d been cleared of wrongdoing— merely the absence of an indictment. Regardless of whether she’s committed any crimes, she is objectively a spoiler candidate. She could be as pure as the driven snow, and it wouldn’t change the fact that the only thing her campaign stands to accomplish is to elect donald trump.

    If she really wanted to further her purported agenda, she would use her candidacy to get concessions from Harris in exchange for dropping out and endorsing her. Stein could actually effect change that way. Instead, she parrots Russian talking points, exclusively attacks Democrats, and consequently is completely counterproductive with regard to her stated goals.





  • But your proposed course of action clearly doesn’t align with your stated goal, for reasons that have already been pointed out to you. I don’t see you engaging with that argument. This leads me to believe that you don’t actually care about what happens to Palestinians; you just want to feel like you’re taking a moral stand. People that actually give a shit tend to care about what the consequences of their actions will be.





  • barely a percentage point compared to the fossil fuel industry’s war on Green Energy

    That’s not really relevant in this context, though, is it? Maybe a better comparison would be 2024 election spending by foreign-connected PACS. According to opensecrets.org, the “nearly $10 million” allegedly distributed by RT employees is equivalent to the sum of all other foreign pac money donated to the GOP this cycle. It’s certainly not “dwarfed by any other country” as you spuriously claimed.

    Saudi sportswashing and other shenanigans are also cause for concern. That in no way lessens the severity of this problem.


  • I just think calling people bots and shills has no place in honest discourse and the brushstroke always tends to get bigger and bigger.

    Bots and shills have no place in honest discourse, but they obviously exist. Should we pretend they don’t—assume everyone is arguing in good faith, regardless of how blatantly dishonest and inconsistent they are? What would you suggest?

    I don’t disagree that there’s a slippery slope problem; there’s no shortage of fringe internet echo chambers that dismiss all dissenting opinions as coming from npc’s, cia shills, shitlibs, bloodmouths, breeders, <insert dehumanizing label>, etc.