BruceVC

I have always admired Canada, they constantly seem to be on the right side of history

How evil for Obsidian to not magically be able to read his mind and preferences. The devils! Volo really highlights the issue, he is making assumptions similar to " why the limerick was changed " and how " offended Firedorn should be because of pressure from SJW " Yet Firedorn is actually fine with that, I'll repeat that "firedorn is fine with that " yet people keep presuming to say " what an outrage it was " Also why do some people keep using comparisons to the animal kingdom when it comes to dismissing homophobia. Humans are sentient beings who make there own decisions based on numerous factors like intellect and our conscience , we don't use benchmarks like " so what does my dog think about my investment in this stock market " Yet when it comes to homosexuality suddenly the animal kingdom becomes our way of gauging if its acceptable ? Weird what some people will do when justifying bigotry ( and Namutree this doesn't apply to you )

I mentioned earlier that I am in Cape Town for work, at the moment there is a movement going on at the Rhodes University for removal of the Cecil John Rhodes Statue which has now happened http://www.bbc.com/news/world-africa-32236922 Initially I had sympathy for the movement and students as I thought " these are bornfree's (people born outside of Apartheid )and they just want to create identity for themselves and these statues represent a colonial past " But yesterday after the statue was removed the students started chanting " one bullet one settler" which means in a South African context "death to white people " So the entire movement is just a grandstanding effort and basically a " white people must die and leave the country " ...so the movement has lost credibility and integrity for me Also what the students have been saying is considered hate speech from a legal South African perspective so some of the students will be charged ..which is good. This whole development has really annoyed me

Are you yelling at kids to get off your lawn as well?

Wowzers that sounds nice !!!!

Of course Cheese can only improve food...did I ever mention I am a hardcore Turophile ? http://www.merriam-webster.com/dictionary/turophile

Yeah that may be an issue for me, I'll confirm when I'm back in Joburg I also bought the Vanishing of Ethan Carter last week so I'll definitely play that game when I'm back

I can sympathize with both sides of the debate in this case but you really think such an intelligent man doing such a significant interview would have known better or at least had someone tell him how inappropriate that shirt was Bruce and any other people getting crazy about this T-Shirt... You probably should watch what a real woman has to say about this... https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=bFdsq96Aa98 EDIT: if for any reason, you can't see youtube videos, as I am unable to see them for any strange reason, here is the link... The thing is I do understand both sides about this argument ...my best friend was furious about this incident and all the criticism the guy received, to quote him in the verbatim he said to me when we discussed it " one of the greatest events in science and people are more concerned about his f****g shirt ....f***k these SJW " ....which was amusing because I support many SJ initiatives ... But that shirt....come on...that shirt... Anyway I will watch that video

http://www.pcgamer.com/gta-5s-pc-exclusive-video-editor-is-its-killer-feature/ Sooooooooooo.....GTAV is out in 4 days, who is planning on playing this much anticipated game

Dude Where do you get this photo's from ?

That's the "balance" they were going to hammer into the game regardless of consequences. Its a feature. Even though I haven't played PoE yet your I find your cynicism funny

What's the difference? "Should have more credibility" and "shouldn't get to weigh in?" I mean the last guy who posted, your response was "were any of those people transgender?" You obviously are providing them with bias and giving their stance more weight. Everything I said more or less still applies. The "men are oppressors" line is on point with what I said a couple posts back about how giving any perceived differences in STEM the title of "sexism" only serves to escalate any emotionally-charged responses that may occur. That snippet was posted by someone else....who conveniently disappeared (as my debate partners so often seem to do these past few pages) when I posed the question of why he insists on labeling men as oppressors and what purpose it serves. My point was and still is that I see no definitive reason to label it as sexism, nor do I see why the term or phrases like "men are the oppressors" should be used since they contribute absolutely nothing and only serve to devolve discussions into petty quarrels. The second part of your post is indentical in tone. What ****ing purpose is there in asking me if I think only white heterosexuals should be allowed to voice their opinions? You knew damned well how that statement came off and you know damned well what the answer to that question is, and yet you ask it as though it's relevant, topical, or does anything for the discussion. Once again Bruce, this is why you have this reputation of being passive aggressive. And in general I find your "it's to give it context" point flawed. I find the people who "use context" are the same people who skim newspapers and develop their political stances based on what the democrats or the republicans think, without actually bothering to consider the issue themselves and critically think if they approve or not. The only relevance I believe such a question to hold is if the overwhelming majority (I'm talking 95%+) of a community is in agreement on something. Even this, I would expect to be applied more to communities and cultures, not sex orientations or the like. I would be interested what the black community thinks of the local police force vs. what the white community thinks, I would not be so interested in how community X perceives a joke vs. community Y. I do not expect that myself and other disabled people will come to a full-stop concensus on disabled issues, I do not expect the gay community to come to a full-stop concensus on gay issues, I certainly don't expect transgender people to have a concensus on....a ****ing joke. A joke is a matter of a personality, how sensitive the person is, their brand of humor and how much they appreciate humor in general, not sex orientation. I really cannot make this point any more clearer, I am not saying that people outside minority groups cannot comment on issues pertaining to minority groups. I make comments all the time about perceived and real issues that minority groups grapple with. So I would be a hypocrite if I was saying this now I am saying the opinions of minority groups should carry more credibility when discussions come up around points like " is this offensive " . And saying something has more credibility definitely doesn't mean " no one else can weigh in ". I don't equivocate, if I wanted to say " no one else should weigh in about LGBT issues except for the LGBT community " I would have said that. But I retract my comment " Do you think the best people to decide if certain jokes\comments are offensive are white, heterosexual males ?" , this was inappropriate because to be fair I don't think you believe that. So I apologize for that And context is very important when people make certain points. Since this discussion is going backwards and forwards with people saying " I find it offensive " or " I didn't find it offensive " so when he said " my friends didn't find it offensive " it seemed perfectly natural to me to ask " are your friends from the transgender community " Perhaps I could have worded that question better but it was just an initial exploratory point to understand where his comment was coming from . I had no idea if his friends are members of the LGBT community but I wanted to know so there was no assumed bias from me

Does this matter? Do transgender people somehow magically have more valuable opinions than other people? I get where you're coming from, but this logic is ridiculous. It creates an environment where some people are listened to and others are not, AKA the exact sort of discrimination you claim to be fighting. Secondly, it also makes this very ignorant assumption that transgender people are somehow universally unified in their opinions on matters and are not unique human beings with unique perspectives and stances on things. Furthermore I can introduce you to a transgender person who couldn't give two ****s about this whole issue. He plays lobbies on TF2Center, a well known community for the game TF2. This might also surprise you, but he doesn't proceed to cry or go ballistic if people call him "he" or "she" or "magic pony" either. You don't think there is any relevance to a joke targeting a particular minority group and asking people from that minority if they find it offensive\hurtful Do you think the best people to decide if certain jokes\comments are offensive are white, heterosexual males ? And no that doesn't mean that other people can't comment but surly the actual minority group targeted has more credibility ? The second line of this is a blatant strawman and is exactly the kind of hysterical bull**** I'm talking about. There's no reason for this. I'll tell you what Bruce, I'll let you solve that mystery on your own since the answer to that question is apparently so difficult to figure out yourself. My point was that if we were to do things your way and only value transgender opinion, guess what would happen? A lot of valid opinions would be completely weeded out solely because the people who had them weren't allowed to voice those opinions. Meanwhile, the transgender community would likely be split on the issue just as much as the community as a whole is, because no group is unified in it's beliefs or opinions. Lastly, it creates a problem where theoretically a minority group could use it's complete and total power of opinion on a subject matter to get all sorts of things done. Not to imply that would realistically happen, but to highlight how flawed this manner of thinking is. If for example a state is electing a senator, one is transgender and the other is not, and the transgender community of that state is claiming the opponent is transphobic and no one is allowed to comment on the matter except for the transgender community, well then guess who has all the tools they need to become senator; hell **** that, they can run for president. A theoretical of course, but that doesn't make it any less flawed. Personally though, again I'm more interested in the needlessly inflammatory statements and accusations that are being insisted upon. There's no reason to make statements like "men are the oppressors," nor is there any reason to even ask if I think only white men should comment on things. And yet you do it. Tell me Bruce, are you an adult or are you a gossip queen in middle school? No, once again you fail to actually read and comprehend what I am saying. I never said " only the LGBT community opinions matters on this issue " As you well know I have many opinions on SJ issues like gender equality and gay rights and I am neither a women or a member of the LGBT community. I am white, heterosexual male So I would a complete hypocrite if I said only members of a minority group can comment on issues relating to that minority group. I said " And no that doesn't mean that other people can't comment but surly the actual minority group targeted has more credibility " So to explore this point a little further, if there are 10 African Americans in room and two white people and a joke is perceived to be racist towards the African Americans and the room is asked " is this joke racist " and the 10 African Americans say " no " I would find it strange if the two white guys still said the joke was racist. Thats why I said " the targeted minority group should have more credibility " ...thats not the same thing as saying " no one else can comment" So when someone says " my friends didn't find the limerick offensive " ...my next question would be "well are your friends members of the LGBT community " to understand context And please when did i say " men are oppressors " ...you are clearly confused, I said no such thing but I agree with the person who said that on most other things

Right-wingers are terrified of any opinion that they disagree with. That's why they're always so desperate to silence opposing voices, whether by insults like "feminazi" or just by going straight to rape and death threats. Basically they're scared that people will find the opinions persuasive. e.g. someone says that "The Limerick" was in really poor taste; Obsidian think about this, agree, and decide to remove it from the game. How to avoid this? Shout down the people you disagree with before anyone can find them persuasive. The right wing has always been pro-censorship, pro-blind-obedience, anti any dissenting voice, and #gamergaters etc. are just another manifestation of this. Wow Really? I am the only conservative among my immediate friends, and they all thought that the poem itself was NOT offensive and icequeen had severe psychological issues. We all believe that the poem shouldn't be changed. Other than myself one of my friends was a backer and he also felt "betrayed" that josh sawyer and obsidian caved so easily and sacrificed the integrity of their artistic freedom for more money. Do NOT fall into the trap of lumping one entire group in one category due to the behavior of so called leaders. Are your friends from the Transgender community ? I got plenty of gay and bi friends who said it was fine and there have been plenty of transgen who have said it was fine on forums. Do they count? Oh yea, they are against the narrative so they don't count as much as one random crazy person who has no problem with saying things like KILLALLMEN (oh, lets ignore and forget about that sexist little detail huh)? For me as long as your friends are from the LGBT community then thats important and relevant if they say the joke wasn't offensive, so yes they do count

Does this matter? Do transgender people somehow magically have more valuable opinions than other people? I get where you're coming from, but this logic is ridiculous. It creates an environment where some people are listened to and others are not, AKA the exact sort of discrimination you claim to be fighting. Secondly, it also makes this very ignorant assumption that transgender people are somehow universally unified in their opinions on matters and are not unique human beings with unique perspectives and stances on things. Furthermore I can introduce you to a transgender person who couldn't give two ****s about this whole issue. He plays lobbies on TF2Center, a well known community for the game TF2. This might also surprise you, but he doesn't proceed to cry or go ballistic if people call him "he" or "she" or "magic pony" either. You don't think there is any relevance to a joke targeting a particular minority group and asking people from that minority if they find it offensive\hurtful Do you think the best people to decide if certain jokes\comments are offensive are white, heterosexual males ? And no that doesn't mean that other people can't comment but surly the actual minority group targeted has more credibility ?

Right-wingers are terrified of any opinion that they disagree with. That's why they're always so desperate to silence opposing voices, whether by insults like "feminazi" or just by going straight to rape and death threats. Basically they're scared that people will find the opinions persuasive. e.g. someone says that "The Limerick" was in really poor taste; Obsidian think about this, agree, and decide to remove it from the game. How to avoid this? Shout down the people you disagree with before anyone can find them persuasive. The right wing has always been pro-censorship, pro-blind-obedience, anti any dissenting voice, and #gamergaters etc. are just another manifestation of this. Wow Really? I am the only conservative among my immediate friends, and they all thought that the poem itself was NOT offensive and icequeen had severe psychological issues. We all believe that the poem shouldn't be changed. Other than myself one of my friends was a backer and he also felt "betrayed" that josh sawyer and obsidian caved so easily and sacrificed the integrity of their artistic freedom for more money. Do NOT fall into the trap of lumping one entire group in one category due to the behavior of so called leaders. Are your friends from the Transgender community ?

Nope you aren't the only one..I have the same view. I find people have different perspectives, what would be the real point of using an Alt anyway?

... which entirely ignores gender-based preferences of the research field based on their interests. Seriously, I'm a mechanical engineer. In the first semester of ME, only 5% of the students were female. How are you going to put more females in STEM positions if they literally don't exist in the first place? A 50:50 quota for females in mechanical engineering would mean that 90% of graduate male engineers would be unemployed. You can't just compare the male-to-female worker ratio in academic positions without comparing it to the number of students in the first place. Okay well that is an interesting point about the reality around the 5 % example In South Africa we face similar issues, due to Apartheid we have strict Affirmative Action (AA) laws but you still see many positions that are reserved for AA candidates in the corporate world that are just not fulled. And the reality is there just aren't enough suitably qualified candidates. Yet there are some accusations that " white people are holding onto jobs and refuse to allow Black people to progress in the workplace " ...I dispute this for the reasons mentioned So I can identify with what you are saying

Thanks Bruce, this post was nice and meaningless. I'd highly recommend people skip over it. I also wanna point out the bitter irony in that the entire reason I felt voicing that opinion neccesary is because we had people on the GG side claiming that Obsidian locking these threads is proof they're against free speech and pro-censorship all the way, which simply isn't true. It's a failure to recognize the facts, such as how Obsidian has actively allowed and run a GG thread in the off-topic forums for months, or how the threads devolve into childish mudslinging. Still you seem to gloss over that fact and present it all as if I'm some snobby douche who goes into ALL threads going "SCOFF SCOFF SCOFF YOU ALL DON'T DEBATE AS GOOD AS ME." Hell no this is an online discussion and I'm here to chill and partake in discussions I enjoy. I screw up a lot too cause I'm relaxed. Right now I'm having a very difficult time trying not to call you out on your **** even more than I currently am (be ironic if this thread got locked cause of you and me). I pointed out what I pointed out because it was relevant to the discussion. Claiming the threads are locked on the grounds of Obsidian liking censorship is in blatant denial of all the back and forth personal jabs that went on that accomplish nothing. And of course, big surprise, you did not respond to any of the things I asked you to respond to. GG Bruce, I wonder why a lot of people have a strict policy of not bothering to respond to you. It's like you can't actually defend your stances when called out on them or something...Pretty weird, right? Nah sorry, didn't mean it as arguing, was just clarifying one last time. Sorry if it came off that way. Sorry LK but outside of GG people respond to me all time and contribute to threads I make in a meaningful and interesting way, lets just accept you and I don't agree on most things and we will avoid debating with each other because we obviously don't understand each other And thats fine, no worries from my side

Bruce, have you considered that I, with my law studies, might be well versed and practiced in what makes a productive discussion/debate when I need to be, and that you might be speaking from a place of ignorance? I don't mean this to sound snobby, but what I mean is that if you wanted, I could very well explain to you things that others are doing wrong if our interest is in actually having a serious discussion. Or have you considered that it may be proof I have a point when the entire thread seemingly shuts down the moment I start providing what I call a productive debate while calling out what I refer to do-nothing posts? Don't you think if I were just talking out my ass, there'd be more people agreeing with you instead of posts such as PrimeJunta's where he admits that he's posting nothing serious at this point cause he sees no reason to? So the ball is in your court: explain to me how I'm wrong about limericks taking jabs at one another, smug senses of superiority, exaggerations, strawmans and overreactions are not childish and can infact bring about productive debate and discussion. Or are you going to make a meaningless, empty statement about how there is no objectively superior way to discuss things and "muh feels" (or rather your feels) are just as meaningful and important? Once again its irrelevant if person x or person y doesn't want to post in this thread or feels its pointless There are people who are posting in good faith and are enjoying the debate and the perspectives. I have no idea what are all the motivations for the various limericks but for some it could just be to lesson the mood and seriousness But none of that changes the fact its annoying to have you lecture people about what is childish or productive , this is your subjective view of this debate and once again I don't think anyone cares what you think is acceptable Don't comment in this thread if you don't want to...its not hard to understand this principle. You are not a Moderator and even then I have never known a Moderator to say things like " this thread is childish and so are the comments " Anyway I understand you are trying to improve the general posting etiquette so I apologize for being so critical of your views but as I said I do find it annoying

Bruce if you wonder why half the forum community gets this weird passive-aggressive vibe from you and why my post about how you're "like that guy who's all pleasant and polite and invites you over to his perfect house with his perfect family to have a perfect dinner, and then when you accidently use the salad fork on your main entree, he pulls a gun on you for ruining his perfect life" got upvoted, this is it. I claim discussion in these threads gets childish because it does. Empty statements that point the finger and smugly regard the opposing side as idiots, without highlighting any points at all. Flip back through the pages and the threads and you'll clearly see this. No worries, my claim that conversations with a person are a complete waste of time will remain exclusive to you, as that's not a claim I throw about lightly. I doubt anyone cares if you think our discussions are childish, its irrelevant and irritating to have you lecture people You have no idea how many times i have wanted to comment how childish some of your posts in the GG thread are..but I don't So try to extend to people the same respect that they give to you when you constantly bring to our attention " corruption in the gaming industry" And I'm not being passive-aggressive...I am displaying unequivocal annoyance because that's exactly how I feel

Please stop telling people what you consider to be childish or lacking intellectually You keep doing this yet you comment yourself, once again ...no is forcing you to participate in this discussion Considering how much you post in the GG thread which most of us think is utterly pointless any lectures from you about what is productive just seems moot and inconsequential

...wow. That sentence there gave me the willies. Unified for what? Unified under what criteria? And make people conform to it under threat of violence? Sounds a lot like fascism. Look, I understand that you take great pride in and identify with the accomplishments of people randomly born at an arbitrary distance from you who happen to speak the same language or not. I respect your right to join with whomever and do things you deem great but about which I don't give a toss. Just let me ****ing opt-out, and don't threaten me with imprisonment or death if I don't want to participate, ok? Nope sorry you can't op to leave civil society, you need to continue to pay your taxes and receive the benefits of living in civilized and progressive country. Or you need to go off the grid and reject all the comforts that you receive I always find it hypocritical and humorous to hear people say things like " I don't want to be part of the system...I don't want to participate " while they sit behind there keyboards with there smartphones lamenting " how terrible things are" My advice is if you are so opposed to the system go live in rural Africa for 1-2 years...understand what is really means to not be part of the system. Then you will be back begging to participate I can guarantee you that

If they actually cared one way or another about the little war you are trying to instigate here, they would lock this thread. They locked like 5 of these threads if not more, if anything they realized its kind of pointless by now. So yes, of course they care or at least cared. THey will lock this one eventually too. I disagree, my experience has been the Mods have only closed down or consolidated repetitive threads around this topic And they closed down threads if a Op asked it to be done

...than the ones already provided? So you don't believe that governments have a valid purpose and the reasons given for the role of governments you dismiss So how do you suggest the world and countries should be managed ?