injurai

Reminds me how some people want to terraform Mars when we can't even manage our own habitat of Earth.

For the record. The claim was not that the US is a shining beacon, It was to contrast non corporal solutions which are far more effective. Kids still fall through the cracks, but you wouldn't use violent punishment to course correct them onto the limited path of success. Those issues have to be solved by other means.

The plus side is they can only chop up single player content so much. I know it sucks to make single player experiences EA, but thanks for toughing it out for us!

You don't deal with murderers and rapists ad hoc in the classroom kangaroo courts. You lock them up and use the full force of the law and due process. Only an idiot could think I implied that. I suggest that people with ulterior motives push policy that has an air of deniable plausibility, but has an intended disproportional target in mind. I call out the risks of giving schools that sort of power over students, I claim that racist teachers will act out those policies indiscriminately on their own volition. I use the term undesirable as seen in the eyes of the perpetrator of corporal punishment, which points out the broader scope of those disproportionately targeted by those who take up sadist tyrant mantel of judge jury and cane wielder.

I wonder why Bruce is so concerned in using corporal punishment as a form of "no kid left behind." I also can't help but think that once allowed, it would be deployed very differently towards black and white students. Even in America where that violence is not allowed, we see passive aggressive forms of interference by racist administrators towards black students. The will is out there, and allowing corporal punishment with the self-governing jurisdiction of schools makes it's usage a sadist tyranny, akin to martial law. Any such policy would be disproportionately directed at "undesirables." I cannot fathom why one can't just leave kids to learn life lessons directly by the consequences of their own actions. If they are truants let that bite them in the but. It's not only punishment enough, it teaches the lesson better. Beating kids who "really need it" tends to have the reverse affect of making them rebel even harder. It's the same thing with forcing down religion or other prudish values. Often it turns kids into rebels. If the kid is abusing others, well the policy against violence in school is perfect grounds for expulsion.

RIP

The video gives me hope the he is open to serving older fans, I don't particularly need that old interpretation of 2e. I much preferred what Pillars 1 did. I also think Larian will want to attract some of it's own fans as well. I'm hesitant at this stage, but my interest is still piqued. I believe the talent is there if only it's directed well.

TIL instilling a sense of fear to maintain boundaries (with physical pain) is not a looming threat. I also learned that it is the only way to maintain boundaries for some people, and no other solution or consideration has merit. Enjoy yourselves South Africa.

I tried to search, do you mean Hellrift but Fledgling Studios?

Seems like it was a bunch of suck and drain. They might figure out Starcraft Ghost one of these days. They should try to make a Halo killer.

Corporal punishment is ****ed. I much prefer the American system of detention -> suspension -> expulsion. Expulsion is only a problem for kids that are so unruly that they are a problem for other and the teachers. At that point the kid either drops out and makes their own way through life, or enrolls in some sort of corrective program before being placed in a different school for a fresh chance. Often time the issue is that the kid is better suited to some trade/vocational path once they are better placed they begin to succeed on the new path. Of course it's done even better than America were in other countries the kid as some autonomy of which tract to pursue, so they don't entertain a destructive anti-social phase as much. Honestly sounds like you just want an excuse to beat the problem people into submission, what exactly is it you want them to submit to that is so much more important than allowing them to pursue a path of their own. They'll either find success in the market or fill low skill jobs until they figure themselves out, not need to make them submit at threat of violence and pain.

One of my favorite games of all times, It's sequel too! Cannon wait for this!

Gromnir, you think you're calling a spade a spade but you're not. In this case a straw man. May I remind you I'm not refuting any of your points, I'm expounding upon my own position. You said you agree with my initial sentiment, then posed practical considerations and offered a question. Which I responded to. You introduced the aspects of a condition and I touched on examples of those aspect which I find salient. I'm detailing how my view would be applied to such an existential case. So I detail a condition by which I find claims of religious marginalization (especially in America) which I find to be farcical. It says nothing about disenfranchising minorities simply because they don't meet my secular humanist bar. I'm well aware that a democracy includes opening a nation to a pluralism that is often in tension. https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=D4vHnM8WPvU By using language in a manner that allows me to drill down to a definite scenario, I instantiate a case that is new from your more broad general scenario. Expanding the scope of a subject or introducing one's own exemplars is not setting up straw men, especially when I'm not even arguing against the points that you made. I don't see why you'd have any problem with someone taking the "spikey" approach unless you are either only interested in goo, so it seems you somehow misread the context of the response itself. You want to call my view a dogma fine, but it's not final, it's not held as irrevocably true, and it's not being passed down or ordained. It's simply being argued as the best way to organize the conflicting desires at the level of a shared democratically representative nation.

It's an existential situation. Not they only way a group, religious or otherwise, can be marginalized. You brought up having your identity inextricable intertwined with the faith, so unless you can put the goals aside that the faith endows you with fulfilling in relation to other humans, you need to leave them to their own freedoms and liberties. You mentioned true zealots, I'm articulating that situation back to you and saying why I don't think it's marginalization. Please knee jerk harder when someone answers your question.

@Gromnir If a theists/theocrats marginalization is a result from being unable to fulfill their ideation of an unchallenged examined and universalized instrumentation of their dogma, then they marginalize themselves in relation to having a need that is goes unfullfillable without the marginalizing others. It's not being done to them. What you secure in shared law and governance are rights that stem from a shared humanity. Some adopted/imbued perception of the world is not that, and if it borrows or derives from shared humanity it should be upheld in the properly abstracted secular terminology which doesn't venerate one theistic dogma above that of others. Further I object to your use of the world marginalized in the context of having a religious constituency which I remind has (or if we are talking ideals, should have) their right to private domains of life secured would somehow be marginalized because they don't dominate societal-wide legislation through the "democratic" ruse of never ceding the majority. I'd argue any government which isn't structured secularly is an aberration against common decency and shared humanity.

That's a pretty sharp sword you have there.

Leadership should lead secularly, regardless of what their personal beliefs might be. A leader has responsibility to all those who they lead. Identity shouldn't be leveraged by the leader, and thus the identity of the leader shouldn't matter as long as they are fulfilling their duties.

https://www.indiewire.com/2019/06/denis-villeneuve-dune-movie-comparisons-frank-herbert-book-1202146915/ I like what I hear. I'm not one for faith, but everything I hear of this film gives me reason.

And yet ST takes place in a more globally united world so the strange hybrid accent is also totally at home in such a setting. You can play these "it couldn't work" / "it could work" games all day long.

The never ending struggle to decide whether to: Represent the acting pool. Represent the subjects. Represent the viewers. Pick one, get lambasted for the other two. Still get lambasted for the one you picked because it's not good enough. If you only pick subjects that fill all criteria, all your media starts to converge. Pick something different than what's out there, and all of a sudden you are a target for picking a niche. Except people want niche stories that they aren't already privy to, so the people that complain only do so to self-serve and to try out how far their newest talking points can get them. It's like those complainers forget that the entertainment industry is already one of the most progressive industries out there, and they are still never satisfied if something filmed 6 months ago doesn't abide by the shibboleth of the day.

Shin Gozilla was fantastic. It didn't over-drum-up a bad human drama, but what was their was quite solid and built a cast of key players in combating godzilla. Plus the direction was fantastic. A++. If the new movie is more like that, and less like the 2014 version than I might see it...