Lurker > Tmaster148

PsychicHippo posted...

Yes. For context I'm gay and have several trans coworkers and acquaintances. But here's my thing - if you look deep enough into any business you're going to find money coming from or going to somebody you don't like, so just enjoy what you enjoy. All these people thinking they're sticking it to her by burning her books or boycotting the Hogwarts Legacy game and whatever are really just punishing themselves. Now, I'm not saying I'd sit down and have dinner with the woman, but objectively she is creative and brilliant and I enjoy spending time in the fictional universe she has created.

There's a mistake you are making. The people making a big stink over Harry Potter, don't like Harry Potter and are just looking for any reason to shame people for liking something they don't.

It has never been about trans rights. It has always been about feeling superior over others.

HornyLevel posted...

Also, I just fear it will never make it past season 2. A 7 season show seems like a highly ambitious endeavor in 2023.

Harry Potter makes money. It's a pretty safe gamble to greenlit 7 seasons for Harry Potter.

Philip027 posted...

You literally just said it was "basically all of them", so clearly you haven't found any option yourself. Methinks it's you that doesn't actually care.

Two can play the bs argument game, if you like.

Because unlike you I do my research. I get it, it's easy to not care about other people if it means you don't have to inconvenience yourself just a tiny bit.

AnsestralRecall posted...

Do you care?

Clearly more than you do.

Philip027 posted...

It's disingenuous.

You can't really compare the support for megacorps providing essential services for living with the support of a single person providing a non-essential entertainment service, like you're attempting to do here. And even if you did, there's still such a thing as limiting your impact, instead of just throwing up your arms and proclaiming "well, them repubs are everywhere anyway; guess there's no point in caring"

You clearly don't care enough to find other options. You'd rather support trans deaths than to be inconvenienced in your purchases.

DKJ posted...

Those same people are gonna boycott their HBO subs now right?

The people getting on others for watching Harry Potter don't actually care about not financially supporting people who want to kill trans people. It's all about patting themselves on the back for nothing.

A clear sign when someone can't defeat your argument is when they resort insults.

Again nothing disingenuous about it. The only disingenuous thing is getting on people for spending money that indirectly goes to people who support killing trans people while engaging in such yourself.

AnsestralRecall posted...

Miss me with this disingenuous bullshit.

Not disingenuous, You've made a conscious decision to support people who want to kill trans people.

AnsestralRecall posted...

Huge difference between the unavoidable support given to megacorps that control food, clothing, medical care, etc. and giving Joanne money for something knowing she has been actively spreading trans hate.

Financially supporting things that are against the best interests of the working class is unavoidable in a capitalist society since it has to be done to live.

It's the driving principle behind "no ethical consumption under capitalism."

This doesn't mean spend your leisure money backing people that want us dead is defensible.

Then I guess you don't really care about trans people being killed then.

AnsestralRecall posted...

At this point I just want to stop hearing about anything and everything Harry Potter or Rowling. It's fucking exhausting.

Supporting Rowling is supporting trans deaths. It's not open for debate.

If you're okay with that, trust me - your trans friends and family have noticed.

I hope for the sake of being consistent with your views, you don't support major corporations that fund republicans (which is basically all of them) for that is support trans deaths as well.

Because it's not a movie made for critics, but those who are fans of mario

A lot of adults grew up with Mario. Plenty of people want to go see things they've grown up with.

Gwynevere posted...

That's such a lackluster stand in for the much better method we had before

Especially with how many of these topics are going to flood the board

Then just don't come to the board if it will bother you so much.

Gwynevere posted...

Gamefaqs really needs that old feature from gamefox that let you filter topics by text. Would be useful to be able to filter this shit out once the show starts airing

You can just hide topics. It's an option on the first post.

andel posted...

that person is a genocide denier and tankie. arguing with them is like arguing with smal

Honestly the best thing was putting joel on ignore. Absolute waste of time interacting with him.

My one pet peeve with the game is just not knowing the stats of the guns.

Cool. This will be a fun thing to watch with my girlfriend.

scar_the_1 posted...

In theory, yeah. But often times I feel like consumer influence is extremely overstated.

People aren't boycotting Universal Studios over here comments and thats likely one of the revenue streams contributing the most.

But even if she was making no money, she's worth almost a billion. You really can't go broke at that level of wealth.

Plus there's actual laws being passed against trans people and we're focusing on a single person not directly involved with that. Feels like too much energy is getting put into outrage over her statements vs actual threats.

bigblu89 posted...

I don't get the subtweet of "wait till she hears about the dollar"?

crypto idiots being crypto idiots.

They don't understand that the USD is backed by the US government.

Crimsoness posted...

If Elon's against it it must be a good thing

Here's the thing, Elon can certainly be right about halting AI training. He might not be right for the proper reasons or even understand why he's right about it, but he can still be right. Just like how a broken clock is technically correct twice a day.

Mike_Stanton posted...

Why is it different for dogs and cats?

I'm not too familiar with the exact details, but dogs can develop behavior problems from playing with a laser pointer.

manhookcardoor posted...

Why would it be abuse lol.

For dogs, you can mess the dog up. It's better to find other toys the dog can actually catch. It's generally safe for cats, but overuse can be bad.

Unfornately the poll options are too vague.

How I'd personally rate the Duel Trial decks:

Best: Venomous Turnover
While it's easier to brick on this deck than the other two, it's also the least popular deck in my experience. Both Exodia and Destiny Board don't have any real wincons besides the very slow collect the pieces on the board so wasting a few turns until you have the perfect set up is not that difficult. And neither deck can actually deal with vennominaga once it hits the board.

Worst: Condemned Message
Destiny Board is way easier to interrupt than Exodia. Often Condemned Message just feels like it's better to focus on the lvl 8 monsters, but Exodia and Snakes both can deal with them so they aren't much of a threat.

Right now I'm just trying to get my Exodia wins for the secret message with the loaner deck, but man it takes so long because I'm either in a mirror match or a match vs Condemned Message.

I like the snake deck from the event, but man it feels way more bricky than the other 2 decks.

I saw a tweet comparing trans suicides to the holocaust.

My warlock does not. Though he does perform a ritual to give souls to his patron.

Giving up implies they were ever trying to

hockeybub89 posted...

How is killing a school shooter after they kill people and are arrested going to stop school shootings?

Because it's not about stopping school shootings?

There's been 86 days so far of the current year. There's been 129 mass shootings in the year of 2023 here in the US.

Yeah gun control is needed.

This happened

_____Cait posted...

Arent apple music and itunes the same thing

Apple music is the subscription service for streaming.

GATTJT posted...

How can this bill be stopped? Can Biden do something about it?

Well it would have to pass the senate which is unlikely given the dem majority. If that fails then Biden can veto. Then congress could overide that veto with a 2/3rd majority, but this last bit seems unlikely if it gets that far.

Wow he's detailing the republican play book of instilling fear in their voters.

A_Good_Boy posted...

Guess we'll all just be waiting until October when everything surrounding this case gets unsealed.

It'll be interesting to see what evidence there was. I'm willing to change from judgement on him depending on what evidence there was as I could see it a situation where the evidence wasn't enough for a conviction by jury.

Still there's far more than enough other stuff he's done that whether or not he's domestic abuser won't change much.

synklare posted...

The dismissal of Roiland's case specifically does not mean he has been found innocent.

You don't find people innocent. People are considered innocent by default and you go through a process to determine if they are guilty. That's why courts use the term "Not Guilty" and not innocent.

The case being dropped does mean Roiland is innocent and given the lack of public evidence against him for this specific charge, there's not anything for the public to view him as guilty for domestic violence either.

[LFAQs-redacted-quote]


It's very clear you never had any interest for an actual discussion on this and it's a shame you decided to pick domestic violence as the topic you wanted to pretend care about.

[LFAQs-redacted-quote]


This topic is about Justin Roiland and his case being dropped. This is what the discussion is around.

It's not trolling to discuss what the topic is about in the topic.

KarsaToblakai posted...

No, no they aren't. That's only in the courtroom.

Then you are guilty of domestic violence. You can't claim innocence, because you've stated that only matters in the court room.

[LFAQs-redacted-quote]


The only one deflecting here is you. You refuse to elaborate why we should still consider him a domestic abuser outside of the fact he was charged with it.

You have nothing to show that his domestic abuse could have occured. The case was dropped, because they couldn't get a guilty verdict from it. We don't even know who made the claim, because they've remained anon.

You simply just want to crucify him, because he was charged with domestic violence. Fun fact, people can be charged with a crime they didn't do.

[LFAQs-redacted-quote]


What evidence do you have that this domestic abuse occured? The charge was 2 years ago and we know nothing.

There's no reason to condemn Roiland over this compared to the other stuff that we know he's done.

[LFAQs-redacted-quote]


You're clearly only interesting in seeing what you want to see considering that you left off the rest of the post.

Just because someone can be guilty due to a charge being dropped does not mean that this is the case every single time. Nor is there any reason to Roiland is guilty of the charge when any information about the charge and evidence has remained anon. Focus on the thing we can certiable prove he's done that is bad. Let's not get caught up in that he may be a domestic abuser when we have no way to prove it.

[LFAQs-redacted-quote]


Sure. Someone can still be guilty even if the charges were dropped. But insisting that Roiland is still guilty despite the absolute lack of evidence that the claims of Domestic Violence has ever occurred is weird, especially when we have evidence of him being a creep and an awful person to work with.

There still has to be some reasonable reason to believe he's still a domestic abuser and there really isn't any.

[LFAQs-redacted-quote]


Until evidence has been shown that this attempted murder could have happened. It's nothing more than "he said, she said".

The fact you think that simply stating someone tried to kill you is valid enough to consider a person a murderer means you want to live in a society where all it takes is the single words of a single person to ruin someone's life.

[LFAQs-redacted-quote]


So we should crucify anyone who has ever had a negative claim made against them without any evidence posted to show that the events have happened?

Simply posting that someone choked you to the point of passing out is not evidence that such an event happen. There's a reason we don't just arrest and lock people up over claims of wrongdoing and why police investigate and evidence is brought up to a court to determine the outcome.

It would be a fucked up world if all anybody needed to do to ruin someone's life was to make a singular claim that they did something bad to them without any evidence.

The charges were dropped and there's no public record of the evidence. It's been 2 years since the intitial felony charge. At some point there's bigger fish to fry.

[LFAQs-redacted-quote]


You really aren't. If someone were to strangle you to the point that you fell unconscious, there would be marks on your neck. If you were to make the claim then show that pictures of marks on your neck indicating that someone was putting force on it. It would be a believable claim.

Society shouldn't condemn people to being guilty over a charge that was never determined guilty when no evidence has been presented to the public. Especially when in the case of Roiland, there's actual stuff we can point at besides this Domestic Violence charge.

[LFAQs-redacted-quote]


I mean, you are simply stating something and there's no evidence to show that this ever happened. I'd initially believe your claims, but if after sometime and nothing has ever come up that ever shows it happened then I would doubt it.
Justin was charged with domestic violence back in 2020 and 2 years later the public still knows nothing about the claims that was happened and the case was dropped. There's not much to go on in regards to Justin and Domestic Violence as there is for Justin and being a creep towards underage girls.

It would be different if the case was dropped despite there being some evidence of wrongdoing. But that isn't the case.

We shouldn't forever paint people as guilty for something that there is no evidence of ever happening. It's just as bad as never believing the claims of victims, because it's possible some people may lie about it.