Namutree

For your first point: You are right. The riots are more them emotionally lashing out than a logical attempt at anything positive. Why are they being pick on by law enforcement? (It's not just white cops, it's all cops; even black cops) I have already explained that. They have a financial interest in arresting people. Black people are the easiest to arrest because they are poor.

They are. It's just a self-fulling prophecy. Thanks to the drug war they do target black people. Those black people go to jail where they are introduced into a hardcore criminal culture; while also being branded for life as a criminal. They get out of jail; now that they can't succeed in normal life, and are comfortable with criminal culture; they unsurprisingly become criminals for life. That leads to more crime in black communities; which in turn leads to more attention from law-enforcement. Then it repeats perpetually. It's a vicious cycle, and it needs to be broken.

While I believe drugs should all be legal; you wouldn't need to legalize them to end the Drug War. If the government took an approach of treatment rather than punishment; it would go a long way to fixing the problem caused by the Drug War. The Drug War isn't just being against drug abuse; it's about trying to scare people into staying away from them. It doesn't work, and is incredibly destructive to society. Treatment would be cheaper, more effective, and less harmful to society.

There was no mirage of vertical mobility. Most of America's richest people started off as poor immigrants until progressives introduced a bunch of government protectionism. Then of course it became much more difficult to achieve upward mobility. It's still possible though; I was born into poverty, but now I'm lower-middle class. In Michigan that really counts as middle-class since there are so many poor people around here that prices are unusually low.

I agree that part of this is a symptomatic problem created by mistrust and perception from certain sectors within minority communities But I don't get the whole drug war aspect and why its so relevant ? You mentioned this before, can you explain what you mean when you say " end the drug war" ? The Drug War is a government campaign to eliminate recreational drug use in America through law enforcement. It has several problems. 1) It includes laws that give local law enforcement more funding if they achieve more drug abuse convictions. This means that cops WANT to arrest people. Because of this they scour black neighborhoods looking to arrest people for even the smallest offence. The reason that black neighborhoods are targeted is because they are more poor than other communities, and thus can't afford decent legal representation. This is why even though white and black people use drugs at the same rate; blacks are 4 times more likely to be arrested for drug possession. 2) The drug war allows law enforcement to confiscate any property that was used in a given drug offence. If you drive a nice car and are caught with pot in the vehicle; they can steal your car. This is something they like to do. Again, convicting black people is usually easier than other citizens; so once again law enforcement will give special attention to black people for convictions. This creates an incredibly hostile relationship between the police and the black community. If the campaign were dropped; law enforcement's incentives to harass the black community (thus sabotaging it) would diminish greatly. EDIT: This is not even close to describing how bad the Drug War is, but these are the elements that are especially bad for blacks.

I want establish something. The riots are NOT about the Ferguson case. That is just the ignition. The riots are the result of long standing mistreatment of the black community by law enforcement. Anything would have set them off. The government creates an incredibly unstable situation; then the black community predictably erupts. If the government wanted to end the terrible relations between the black community and law enforcement; they'd end the drug war. As long as it exists, you can bet America will get more and more unstable until it finally collapses.

Why is the Untimely Gamer calling herself/himself a gamer? I thought the anti-GG side thought gamers were dead; they clearly established that anyone referring to themselves as a gamer is a white, male, misogynist. Seeing as the Untimely Gamer is anti-GG; doesn't that imply that by using the term "gamer" one is effectively admitting to being a white, male, misogynist? Not to mention that anti-GG has clearly established that boycotting a product is harassment; so isn't the Untimely Gamer harassing female game developers?

This is the last time I'm going to comment on the issue of, "Nipsen thinks the community is why poe is so messed up": 1) This is not a community designed game. Literally none of the fans suggestions on attributes were implemented. NONE. Every change was thanks to Josh. Not the community. Stop suggesting that this is a community designed game when it isn't. Josh went out of his way to establish that he planned to get rid of interrupt and add action speed increases BEFORE he ever read Sensuki's and Matts ideas. They are not to blame for the change, nor is the community. Please accept this. 2) The old system was not great. Resolve was near useless for back row classes like the Priest or Ranger, and the attributes made almost no impact on your characters at all. Not to mention percentages are harder to comprehend than integers. Stop pretending the old system was brilliant. It wasn't terrible, but it was far from brilliant. Again, the new system is flawed as well; thanks to the flawed ideas from Josh Sawyer like getting rid of interrupt. EDIT: Sorry Gifted1; I'm done on this now though.

There's one big reason you left out: The drug war. Back in the 70's it was a small effort, but today it's a huge government sabotage of society; one that affects the black community more than the rest of society. Thanks progressives for all the pain and misery you've caused the black community! (For those who don't know; prohibition was a progressive cause)

Strange that he mentioned you and Matt, but completely ignored the fact that OE didn't implement your ideas. The decision to get rid of interrupt came from Josh; not you.

Maybe he cares, but wants to wait and see if the game is worth buying.

Why do you hate being around people who drink alcohol ? Bad experiences I assume You should hang around with me when I drink, we will have loads of fun Bad experiences would be correct.

I hate alcohol. I hate drinking it, and I hate being around people who are drinking it. I stay far away from it. Best of luck with your business investment though.

This post is awesome and your profile pic is awesome. FE7 for the win!

That was a raccoon.

They can give Gamesutra credit for gamergate's accomplishments if they like. As long as the corruption goes away it doesn't bother me.

Then just don't pick it up. You don't have to carry it.

I think banning him is a little harsh. He should get a stern warning though, and a promise he will be banned if he does it again.

I don't even drink water. I survive on condensation alone.

Now that's a change that would have been worth doing.

I know. The idea to introduce increased action speed came from Josh while he was at lunch. Not to mention that the system OE has went with so far doesn't at all reflect your system. If I recall correctly you never suggested taking out interrupt. Neither did I or PrimeJunta. I wonder who he's talking about. Nipsen, who did OE get these ideas from? The biggest complaint against the old system I can recall from the IE fans was that attributes didn't have enough impact. Not that the system needed to be scrambled as it has been. That, and that percentages were more annoying to deal with than integers. Integers were never introduced however. It seems like this new system didn't come from the beta testers, but Josh Sawyer.

About what? How a tiny group of internet noisers managed to push Obsidian to blunt a really good system, It wasn't a really good system. Granted the new system isn't good either.

I love references to monopoly. Fun fact about monopoly; nearly everyone plays the game wrong by leaving out auctions.

Too late for that. I got you though. Jab infers you were trying to undermine the argument by bringing up a point that had nothing to do with it. You weren't doing that. Poor choice of words on my part. Talking on the internet makes misunderstandings so easy.

Yes I am aware of the view many of them had of God. It has nothing what so ever to do with the point I was making. But you got your little jab in so it's all good I guess. I didn't mean it as a jab. It's just that a lot of people get what that phrase means wrong; so I just wanted to be sure you didn't misunderstand. I especially didn't want the non-Americans on the forum to get the wrong idea about the founders.