It seems that you're using an outdated browser. Some things may not work as they should (or don't work at all).
We suggest you upgrade newer and better browser like: Chrome, Firefox, Internet Explorer or Opera

×
avatar
Bookwyrm627: Then is it acceptable for you to have to pay for my habitual pain medications, taken even though I don't need them? :P
avatar
richlind33: I have a better question: is it acceptable to promote destructive behavior?
I don't generally consider it acceptable, no.

Whether it is promoted or not is avoiding the question of whether it is acceptable to engage in such behavior if it causes damage(s) to other people. I only started this line of questioning based on ""Personal responsibility" is only one of many abject excuses that shield the sick underlying narrative that a person's worth is the money he makes."

The implication that I get from that statement is that one is entitled to free health care regardless of whether one is deliberately taking self-harming actions that don't serve some positive purpose.
low rated
avatar
MajicMan: Is this a joke?
avatar
richlind33: As for the Armenian genocide, are we to then refer to the German attempt at extermination as an example of jihad, because the only thing that separates the two is the degree to which they were successful?

You understand little of the history of Europe if you think it's less barbaric than Islam -- not least that it is the victors who write the "official" histories, which serve only to contaminate our understanding of the past.
Yeah, that is exactly what we teach about Hitler.and the Nazi's.

It was not Germans, it was the Nazi's (who made up less than 30 percent of the population). We don't call it "jihad" we call it "The Holocaust." Most of us, except left-wing loons, don't deny it. We call it what it is "Holocaust". We never accepted it. It is why people were tried and convicted of war crimes. The evil of Hitler and the Nazi's is why we went to war to end it.

The Nazi's and the Holocaust.
We did not accept it.
We did not condone it.
We did not justify it.
We F*cking Destroyed it!

So your desire to accept, excuse and justify muslims, and what they are, and what they do, because of Hitler is beyond ridiculous.


I understand the history of Europe just fine. It is why we refer groups as "Barbarians" (Hint: This is not a compliment), when Rome fell we call it the "Dark Ages" because we acknowledge that things went to crap and we regressed and lost knowledge. Then we had the"Renaissance" and the "Age of Enlightenment" and continued to move forward and get better.

Again, trying to excuse, condone and justify muslims because "1,400 years ago during the dark ages..." is just ridiculous.
low rated
avatar
Bookwyrm627: To help keep costs down for non-young people, all young people pay more because young people are more likely to incur payouts..
I consider this to be age discrimination and, in my opinion, should be illegal (a,long with other forms of discrimination) when it comes to insurance.

avatar
MajicMan: Most of us, except right-wing loons, don't deny it.
There. Fixed it for you. (It is the extreme right, not the extreme left, that contains Holocaust deniers.)
Post edited March 26, 2017 by dtgreene
low rated
I know almost nothing about the parties involved in this discussion except what has been posted here, but
IT IS AN ATTACK ON JONTRONIC'S FREEDOM OF SPEECH THAT PLAYTONIC EXERCISED THEIR FREEDOM OF SPEECH BY REMOVING HIM FROM THEIR GAME BECAUSE THEY DIDN'T LIKE WHAT HE SAID! I'M GOING TO ADDRESS THIS TRAVESTY BY USING MY FREEDOM OF SPEECH TO CENSOR THEM BY WITHDRAWING MY HYPOTHETICAL SUPPORT OF THEIR GAME!

Is possibly the most multi-layered irony I've ever seen...
Post edited March 26, 2017 by babark
avatar
Bookwyrm627: To help keep costs down for non-young people, all young people pay more because young people are more likely to incur payouts..
avatar
dtgreene: I consider this to be age discrimination and, in my opinion, should be illegal (a,long with other forms of discrimination) when it comes to insurance.
Is your preferred solution that everyone have higher costs because young people tend to be in more accidents? Or do you have a different preferred solution?
low rated
avatar
babark: I know almost nothing about the parties involved in this discussion except what has been posted here, but
IT IS AN ATTACK ON JONTRONIC'S FREEDOM OF SPEECH THAT PLAYTONIC EXERCISED THEIR FREEDOM OF SPEECH BY REMOVING HIM FROM THEIR GAME BECAUSE THEY DIDN'T LIKE WHAT HE SAID! I'M GOING TO ADDRESS THIS TRAVESTY BY USING MY FREEDOM OF SPEECH TO CENSOR THEM BY WITHDRAWING MY HYPOTHETICAL SUPPORT OF THEIR GAME!

Is possibly the most multi-layered irony I've ever seen...
I would like to exercise my freedom of speech of to complain about your post.
Post edited March 26, 2017 by Breja
avatar
richlind33: I have a better question: is it acceptable to promote destructive behavior?
avatar
Bookwyrm627: I don't generally consider it acceptable, no.

Whether it is promoted or not is avoiding the question of whether it is acceptable to engage in such behavior if it causes damage(s) to other people. I only started this line of questioning based on ""Personal responsibility" is only one of many abject excuses that shield the sick underlying narrative that a person's worth is the money he makes."

The implication that I get from that statement is that one is entitled to free health care regardless of whether one is deliberately taking self-harming actions that don't serve some positive purpose.
You do understand that modern advertising is a hair's breadth from psychological warfare, do you not?

If you doubt me, go to your nearest uni library and read some advertising journals for an afternoon.

So how many of the most common health detriments haven't been heavily promoted by industries that have profited enormously? Do you think it's coincidence that America is plagued by obesity, diabetes, lung and heart disease, and cancer?
low rated
avatar
dtgreene: I consider this to be age discrimination and, in my opinion, should be illegal (a,long with other forms of discrimination) when it comes to insurance.
avatar
Bookwyrm627: Is your preferred solution that everyone have higher costs because young people tend to be in more accidents? Or do you have a different preferred solution?
Yes, with the exception that people who can't afford said costs (that is, the poor) get a discount or get it for free.

Another way of doing the same thing: Everyone gets free healthcare, and income taxes (particularly on the higher tax brackets) go up to pay for it. (Or, alternatively, take money away from other areas, like the defense budget.)
low rated
avatar
richlind33: As for the Armenian genocide, are we to then refer to the German attempt at extermination as an example of jihad, because the only thing that separates the two is the degree to which they were successful?

You understand little of the history of Europe if you think it's less barbaric than Islam -- not least that it is the victors who write the "official" histories, which serve only to contaminate our understanding of the past.
avatar
MajicMan: Yeah, that is exactly what we teach about Hitler.and the Nazi's.

It was not Germans, it was the Nazi's (who made up less than 30 percent of the population). We don't call it "jihad" we call it "The Holocaust." Most of us, except left-wing loons, don't deny it. We call it what it is "Holocaust". We never accepted it. It is why people were tried and convicted of war crimes. The evil of Hitler and the Nazi's is why we went to war to end it.

The Nazi's and the Holocaust.
We did not accept it.
We did not condone it.
We did not justify it.
We F*cking Destroyed it!

So your desire to accept, excuse and justify muslims, and what they are, and what they do, because of Hitler is beyond ridiculous.
I am not speaking to the matter of acceptability, I am telling you that there is virtually no difference between what the Ottoman's did and what the Nazi's did, aside from the degree to which they were successful -- which puts the lie to your meritless claim that Islam is especially egregious when it comes to acts of barbarism.

The people who commonly perpetrate this sort of garbage, IMO, are far more deserving of such a description.

avatar
MajicMan: I understand the history of Europe just fine. It is why we refer groups as "Barbarians" (Hint: This is not a compliment), when Rome fell we call it the "Dark Ages" because we acknowledge that things went to crap and we regressed and lost knowledge. Then we had the"Renaissance" and the "Age of Enlightenment" and continued to move forward and get better.

Again, trying to excuse, condone and justify muslims because "1,400 years ago during the dark ages..." is just ridiculous.
So who's been financing the wars on this planet for the last 400 years or so?

Were the 22 Israeli neocons that planned and orchestrated the war on Iraq, crypto-Muslims?

Are you an asshelmet with a twinkie for a brain?
Post edited March 26, 2017 by richlind33
high rated
Assimilate to the public PC views or be ostracized into non-existence.
avatar
richlind33: You do understand that modern advertising is a hair's breadth from psychological warfare, do you not?

If you doubt me, go to your nearest uni library and read some advertising journals for an afternoon.

So how many of the most common health detriments haven't been heavily promoted by industries that have profited enormously? Do you think it's coincidence that America is plagued by obesity, diabetes, lung and heart disease, and cancer?
And?

Are you saying that people can't help but use products simply because the products are advertised? Are you saying that there are no counter-information campaigns out there (such as against smoking)?

If this is intended as a refutation of my point, then I'm afraid you'll need to spell out the connection a little better. If I try to sell you self-immolation products, and you buy them and use them, then it seems to me that you're the one making a bad decision. Self-immolation does have some anti-viral effects, so it does have at least one upside after all.
avatar
babark: Is possibly the most multi-layered irony I've ever seen...
No, it isn't really. Of course Playtonic has the right to free speech. Of course the Neogaf mob that went after Playtonic for featuring Jon has free speech. No one is upset that they have the freedom to express their opinions.

The problem lies in that Neogaf orchestrated a witch hunt, and Playtonic took it upon themselves to virtually hang Jon and use their game as leverage to bolster their political view. The backers of Playtonic's kickstarter game didn't pay for a game to be used as a political tool, and neither did we preorder one. There are kickstarter backers who disagree with what Playtonic now officially stands for politically, who are now going to have their name within a game they no longer want to be associated with. That's a little more complicated than "le freedom of speech."

Imagine the tables turned (or altered, or given another example, don't know how to word this :p) and any sympathy towards Islam is considered being "literally terrorists", and you lose your jobs/benefits/etc over the beliefs you have. Speaking out about what you believe has you crucified by mobs, all of your affiliates cut their ties with you and publicly shame you on their website. How would this make you feel? These companies and the people who want to see you miserable are "in the right" because laws but are they just? We don't have freedom of speech so that we can talk about the weather, we have free speech so that we can talk about very controversial topics without being prosecuted. The witch hunts, and the companies who take it upon themselves to punish people for their beliefs, is legalized censorship.
Post edited March 26, 2017 by Pupcakes
avatar
Bookwyrm627: Is your preferred solution that everyone have higher costs because young people tend to be in more accidents? Or do you have a different preferred solution?
avatar
dtgreene: Yes, with the exception that people who can't afford said costs (that is, the poor) get a discount or get it for free.

Another way of doing the same thing: Everyone gets free healthcare, and income taxes (particularly on the higher tax brackets) go up to pay for it. (Or, alternatively, take money away from other areas, like the defense budget.)
So your solution is that people who have more money pay the way for those who don't have much money. Those who are broke can therefore afford to be significantly more careless about their car/health because they aren't the ones paying for it.

Some people will be good stewards of what they have. What is your suggested solution to encourage the rest to be a good steward as well, to take steps to avoid problems?
low rated
avatar
richlind33: You do understand that modern advertising is a hair's breadth from psychological warfare, do you not?

If you doubt me, go to your nearest uni library and read some advertising journals for an afternoon.

So how many of the most common health detriments haven't been heavily promoted by industries that have profited enormously? Do you think it's coincidence that America is plagued by obesity, diabetes, lung and heart disease, and cancer?
avatar
Bookwyrm627: And?

Are you saying that people can't help but use products simply because the products are advertised? Are you saying that there are no counter-information campaigns out there (such as against smoking)?

If this is intended as a refutation of my point, then I'm afraid you'll need to spell out the connection a little better. If I try to sell you self-immolation products, and you buy them and use them, then it seems to me that you're the one making a bad decision. Self-immolation does have some anti-viral effects, so it does have at least one upside after all.
It's only recently that the tobacco industry has been reigned in, long after it should have been, IMO. Now, after decades of silence -- which is complicity, IMO -- the medical industry is finally getting around to acknowledging that the average daily intake of sugar in America is poisonous. With friends like that...

PSA's are a drop in the ocean compared to corporate marketing campaigns.
low rated
avatar
Pupcakes: Playtonic took it upon themselves to virtually hang Jon and use their game as leverage to bolster their political view.
"virtually hang"?!?

"We recently became aware of comments made by voice artist JonTron after development on Yooka-Laylee had been completed. JonTron is a talented video presenter who we were initially, two years ago, happy to include as a voice contributor in our game. However, in light of his recent personal viewpoints we have made the decision to remove JonTron's inclusion in the game via a forthcoming content update. We would like to make absolutely clear that we do not endorse or support JonTron's personal viewpoints and that, as an external fan contributor, he does not represent Playtonic in any capacity. Playtonic is a studio that celebrates diversity in all forms and strives to make games that everyone can enjoy. As such, we deeply regret any implied association that could make players feel anything but 100% comfortable in our game worlds, or distract from the incredible goodwill and love shown by our fans and Kickstarter backers."
That's all.

They're letting the guy off the hook pretty easily. Personally, I would have claimed reputation damages and revoked JT's paycheck for the shit he's pulled. Instead, they're suffering additional costs to substitute voice acting.

It's pretty absurd to point at Playtronic now going "their political view, their political view". Their political view is that JohnTron repeatedly verbally vomited a lot of utterly racist crap and absurd white supremacist conspiracy theories to people over two hours, and that they don't want the guy in their game any more. Anything wrong with that? I really don't think so. The relevance, of course, lies with JonTron's political views. Not Playtronic's. And no amount of unhingedly desperate finger pointing will change that.

And stop pointing at the whiners in the Kickstarter comments as well. If that was my game, no one, absolutely no one would get to dictate I leave traces of that guy in my own game. I mean, how would that look.

"Hey, yo, black people, he may have insinuated you're born criminals for two hours and didn't even revoke his racist remarks in his apology that wasn't an apology, but here's JonTron speaking rubbish in our game for you".

"Yo, people of color in the US, this guy may have said you're not to be considered American, just like your children, and very falsely stated that none of you folks built the country he's living in but, hear ye, his voice is pretty funny!"

"Hey everyone, we're celebrating diversity with this game, so just ignore for a few hours that one of our voice actors thinks there's no discrimination

I don't even
Post edited March 26, 2017 by Vainamoinen