Serdan
-
Posts
216 -
Joined
-
Last visited
Content Type
Profiles
Forums
Blogs
Posts posted by Serdan
-
-
Ohhhh... One of those "only the dictionary matters" people. How adorable.The dictionary defines racism as:
1: a belief that ]race is the primary determinant of human traits and capacities and that racial differences produce an inherent superiority of a particular race
2: racial ]prejudice or discrimination
Sauce: http://www.merriam-webster.com/dictionary/racism
There is nothing in there about "power" being a requirement.
I think doctors and various other specialists will be disappointed to know that all that useful jargon they've created is actually meaningless babble.
People redefine words all the time. The inability of some people to accept this, but only when it's something they disagree with, is very amusing.
So you don't actually have an argument. Can't say I'm surprised.
Cute.
Social justice advocates often use definitions of racism that include power in some fashion.
What is there to argue?
-
The dictionary defines racism as:
1: a belief that race is the primary determinant of human traits and capacities and that racial differences produce an inherent superiority of a particular race2: racial prejudice or discriminationThere is nothing in there about "power" being a requirement.Ohhhh... One of those "only the dictionary matters" people. How adorable.
I think doctors and various other specialists will be disappointed to know that all that useful jargon they've created is actually meaningless babble.
People redefine words all the time. The inability of some people to accept this, but only when it's something they disagree with, is very amusing.
-
1
-
-
Awwwww, I'm sowwy I hurted your feeluhngs. Want a cookie and a tissue for your bruised feelings? Some grape soda and some cat vids will surely make you feel better. You know what they say, if you can't hack the logic, accuse them of you not understanding and run away citing productiveness.The fact that you haven't even mastered basic English is really none of my concern.
It's okay, dearie. I already know that you're delusional, you don't have to prove it.
When all else fails; sling mud? All too predictable. You'd rather be petty than to face your own issues, like virtually all SJW:s.
Your complete lack of self-awareness is hilarious.
-
Awwwww, I'm sowwy I hurted your feeluhngs. Want a cookie and a tissue for your bruised feelings? Some grape soda and some cat vids will surely make you feel better. You know what they say, if you can't hack the logic, accuse them of you not understanding and run away citing productiveness.The fact that you haven't even mastered basic English is really none of my concern.
It's okay, dearie. I already know that you're delusional, you don't have to prove it.
-
lolz
Why don't you just shoot it?
-
Luckmann, you're barely coherent and you demonstrated no understanding of the subject.
I think I'll go do something more productive, like watching cat vids on youtube.
-
First, racism. Saying that white people can't be subjected to racism or will casually dismiss it is racism in itself.
You'd have a point if racism was defined simply as discrimination based on race. Most social justice advocates don't define it that way, so you're either ignorant of what the conversation is actually about or you're arguing in bad faith.
-
It doesn't. It resets to half of max focus when out of combat I believe, which is still plenty of course.
-
3
-
-
I'm running the beta patch and I still get long load/save times, though whether they've implemented the optimisations in the beta I couldn't say.
Anyway, someone mentioned that the save files are just zips, so I went and had a look. The save files contain state files for every area you've visited (obviously), so I went ahead and deleted those, which cut save times in half (I didn't test load). It seems to me that the game mucks about with area data that isn't immediately relevant.
-
I think the original lyric was, technically, hate speech from someone who had absolutely zero ill intent. Which is actually quite common. Promoting an unfair view of other people accidentally is a relatively simple error, we've probably all done it at some point... actual bigotry is far less common.
What I do but think is unfair is any accusation that the original limerick had ill intent, or that either the backer or Obsidian are transphobic. Saying a transphobic thing naively does not a bigot make. It's ad hominem fallacy, pure and simple.
Has anyone actually accused either Firedorn or Obs of being transphobic?
I haven't done so and I haven't seen anyone else do it either, so I'm genuinely curious as to what prompted your post.
As to ill intent, I'll just point out that Firedorn has explicitly stated that he knew the limerick was offensive (though for other reasons) and that he expected it to be rejected in the vetting process. Whether that should be labelled as "ill intent"...
-
I was wondering about this, too. I started enchanting during Act II, with the consequence that many of my enchanted items had better stats than the special items I could find or buy later on. It bothers me a little bit, because the enchanted items don't have cool names or lore. I can't decide whether it's nice to be able to enchant things right away, or it's a bummer that by the time you save up for that awesome bow, it's not so awesome anymore.
You can further enchant unique items...
-
About point 3 : I completely disagree, micro-management is the core of IE games. Also, you can hotkey spells with F1-F? keys
I agree on most of the other stuff though
You can hotkey abilities with pretty much any key that isn't already bound.
You can't hotkey weapon sets.
-
confused- attacs randomly, charmed automaticaly attacks enemy without player control, dominated-allows full control of dominated char by the player (dont know whats the dfiference between charmed and dominated when cast by enemies)
Charmed characters get a debuff. Dominated don't.
-
Sorry to burst your bubble, but that is not how the world works. That's how politics works. In the real world, you will be hurt and offended. You either deal with it, or you cry to mommy and have mommy do something about it. You're a victim, and you teach others how to be victims. You should be teaching people how to deal with the real world. I'm under the impression that the internet, social media, and message boards is as real as your world gets. In which case, I can see how you'd think crying to someone to get what you want is the best course. You know who else does that? Babies.
You heard it here first! Politics aren't part of the real world!
I guess the homosexuals in Indiana have nothing to worry about then.
-
2
-
-
Why was it removed? Because it certainly wasn't homophobic.
It was removed because it offended a trans woman who asked for it to be removed.
That's easily the dumbest reason to remove something.
"It made me butthurt."
"REMOVE IT!"
Not really, this is actually a valid reason for changes in many things in civil society like politicians retracting comments or misplaced marketing campaigns that are considered offensive to certain groups
People say or do things, sometimes these things are then criticized. Then there is an assessment of the issue and a change is made and sometimes an apology
This is the way the world works
But but but... That's so reasonable.
-
Indiana allowing discrimination is homophobia.
Queer logic does indeed drive me to hysterics. You guys need to grow the **** up, it isn't the 1980s anymore. Your orientation isn't strange or taboo, but your crusade against anything hetero is starting to grind some gears. Ease the **** off already.
Tell me again, why is it we should ease up?
-
I wasn't going to point this out but I am also neither gay or trans ..I just wanted to hear him going on how " you get to stick it to straight guys again "
You see for someone like Faustian its inexplicable that straight people could be agreeing that the limerick was inappropriate so if you support the removal of the limerick you must be pushing some overt or surreptious gay agenda.... as a gay person of course
Of course.
It couldn't be that you just empathise with the blight of others.
-
Queer logic does indeed drive me to hysterics. You guys need to grow the **** up, it isn't the 1980s anymore. Your orientation isn't strange or taboo, but your crusade against anything hetero is starting to grind some gears. Ease the **** off already.
Are you really that clueless? Are you completely unaware of what's going on around the globe?
... Of course you are.
-
So me being a heterosexual male, and not wanting to be with a trans woman even after surgery, I'm homophobic?
Transphobic
Genetically male, to me, is still male.
Genetics are completely and utterly irrelevant to any meaningful relationship, with the sole exception of wanting children, which is an easily surmountable problem.
You've made this limerick about something it's not. It was a harmless joke, it didn't have to be an ordeal. The backer who went ahead and let it be changed (if thats indeed how it happened) obviously didn't want to get into the **** hole of an argument.
There wouldn't have been a ****storm if the freeze peach brigade hadn't gotten involved.
No it wouldn't. Remember, just because you're butthurt doesnt make you right. Just because a fat ugly woman gets her feelings hurt, doesn't make someone a misogynist.
Again with this?
There's a difference between hurting a single person and perpetuating harmful stereotypes. I do not expect you to understand this, of course.
The ****in limerick wasn't meant to be taken literal, but all the gung-ho queers have certainly taken it that way and have in effect censored a backers words. Furthermore none of you even care about it, you're just glad you get to stick it to the straight guys again, because you can't get them to "Stick it" to you.
I'm neither gay nor trans. The assumptions you've made are very telling.
Firedorn has not been censored. You linked to the mod yourself. He is evidently completely free to express himself without any legal repercussions.
Censorship is a red herring. It displays either plain dishonesty or a profound ignorance of the legal and historical context.
-
The limerick isn't homophobic. Would it be misogynistic if it were about waking up next to an ugly fat woman instead of a transvestite?
Yes. Not that I expect you to understand that.
-
I am satisfied with Obsidian's response because the limerick perpetuated harmful stereotypes about a much maligned minority. The reason I care about that is because I possess empathy. I also possess the faculties to recognise that the talk of free speech is a red herring.
It is, of course, highly amusing that you bring up sexuality when the subject has to do with trans* issues. It is a lovely demonstration of how little you know.
-
1
-
-
I think they're trying to say that your sexual orientation is not a shield from critique. Also, the limerick wasn't even close to hate speech. You're just an ass.
Nice framing. Completely wrong-headed of course, but very lovely indeed.
Who has claimed that sexual orientation is a shield from critique?
Who has claimed that the limerick was hate speech?
I've certainly made neither claim, which seems to be what you're implying.
Of course I don't expect you to acknowledge your mistake and apologise. That would require a modicum of self-awareness.
-
Converting 10% hits to crits isn't that great of an ability.
It all adds up.
With Dirty Fighting and Vicious Fighting you can increase it to +30%
With Bloody Slaughter it's +50% against low endurance enemies. (whatever low endurance means)
Crit dam is a x1.5 multiplier (x2 with Bloody Slaughter)
Improved Sneak Attack is another x2 multiplier.
Backstab is yet another x2 multiplier.
..
And now I have to make an orlan crit rogue.
-
I am against all censorship, regardless of content or reasoning.
As a free-willed human being, you have the right to walk away, and the right to ignore.
You also have the right to criticize.
But you don't have the right to force someone else to not express themselves.
The second you do, you give up that right yourself.
To put it simply, in my mind:
A murderer has no right to life.
An invader has no right to privacy.
A critic had no right to a lack of criticism,
A censor had no right to free speech.
It seems like a good philosophy. If you don't want to be treated a certain way, don't do it to others. (Kind of like the inverse of the Golden Rule.) As such, I will always stand against the people trying to silence others, no matter how much I agree on principle with them, and disagree with the one I stand beside.
"I disapprove of what you say, but I will defend to the death your right to say it." - Evelyn Beatrice Hall, summarizing her friend, Voltaire.
That's very lovely and all, but could you explain the relevance?
Should discussion about The Poem be ... censored?
in Pillars of Eternity: General Discussion (NO SPOILERS)
Posted
Teabaggers don't bother with actually defining socialism because the people they pander to already equate it with evil.
Comparing that to the extensive writings on the subject of centuries of institutionalised racial inequality ("racism" for short) betrays your ignorance.