Quboid wrote on Jul 12, 2024, 17:51:

Eldaron Imotholin wrote on Jul 12, 2024, 04:31:
The argument that I'm the one not arguing in good faith is so incredibly fucking ironic. I'll leave it to the silent majority to decide who are the bad faith actors here. Let's move on.

You.
Yes this means I'm not silent any more, shuddup :-)

It is cute how he thinks there's a majority here who back him. That's just precious.

Eldaron Imotholin wrote on Jul 12, 2024, 04:31:
The argument that I'm the one not arguing in good faith is so incredibly fucking ironic. I'll leave it to the silent majority to decide who are the bad faith actors here. Let's move on.

You. Yes this means I'm not silent any more, shuddup :-)

Beamer wrote on Jul 12, 2024, 07:21:

Eldaron Imotholin wrote on Jul 12, 2024, 04:31:
The argument that I'm the one not arguing in good faith is so incredibly fucking ironic. I'll leave it to the silent majority to decide who are the bad faith actors here. Let's move on.

Buddy, your first post here was you lecturing everybody else about how some strawman lectures everybody else.

You're probably not here in bad faith, you're just full of condescension, uneducated about the topics you start the discussion about, unwilling to learn, and lacking the ability to see or comprehend experiences other than your own.

We've had 30 of you. You start pretending to be nice but full of weasel words that prove otherwise, but constantly hide behind "why am I being attacked?!" Look at our first interaction, where you were furious I made presumptions about your opinions that you felt you didn't state, but I was right.

No one wants to argue with your ignorant and condescending bullshit. We've done that. Go to r/kotakuinaction. You can get fired up over m&ms not being sexy. The rest of us don't give a shit and aren't obligated to either teach you or engage with the absolutely bonkers things keeping you up at night due to your perceived slights from anonymous lecturers found elsewhere.

Your comment is almost exactly the same as your last one. Your responses have been superficial and filled with unclear accusations rather than engaging with the actual points I raised. This has made it impossible to have a constructive dialogue with you, Beamer. You refer to my first interaction with you in this thread and how I was "furious". Does the below comment you refer to read as furious to you?

"I just think there's an extreme desynchronization between "the enlightened ones", "the peacekeepers" and "everyone else". It wouldn't be difficult to find a bit of common ground if we tried, I think, while we can disagree hard on some aspects like forced DEI. It's what I'm trying to accomplish, lol. Refrain from putting words in my mouth like I'm outraged, man. Very annoyed yes. Outraged, no. How about you try to genuinely steelman my argument and we go from there? Are you open to try this?"

For the sake of the forum's atmosphere and out of respect for all participants, please just ignore me if you cannot have a constructive discussion with me. Let's just agree to disagree without all the personal attacks and move on.

Eldaron Imotholin wrote on Jul 12, 2024, 04:31:
The argument that I'm the one not arguing in good faith is so incredibly fucking ironic. I'll leave it to the silent majority to decide who are the bad faith actors here. Let's move on.

Buddy, your first post here was you lecturing everybody else about how some strawman lectures everybody else.

You're probably not here in bad faith, you're just full of condescension, uneducated about the topics you start the discussion about, unwilling to learn, and lacking the ability to see or comprehend experiences other than your own.

We've had 30 of you. You start pretending to be nice but full of weasel words that prove otherwise, but constantly hide behind "why am I being attacked?!" Look at our first interaction, where you were furious I made presumptions about your opinions that you felt you didn't state, but I was right.

No one wants to argue with your ignorant and condescending bullshit. We've done that. Go to r/kotakuinaction. You can get fired up over m&ms not being sexy. The rest of us don't give a shit and aren't obligated to either teach you or engage with the absolutely bonkers things keeping you up at night due to your perceived slights from anonymous lecturers found elsewhere.

The argument that I'm the one not arguing in good faith is so incredibly fucking ironic. I'll leave it to the silent majority to decide who are the bad faith actors here. Let's move on.

Eldaron Imotholin wrote on Jul 11, 2024, 18:06:

DarkCntry wrote on Jul 11, 2024, 14:59:

Eldaron Imotholin wrote on Jul 11, 2024, 09:35:
"Maybe it's time to just calm the fuck down. The incredible fear for Trump is a sign of brainrot or some severe case of brainwashing, I swear to god." Context: Double standards (common theme). Let's slow down, be less affected by social media algorithms, stop wtih the hyperbole fearmongering.
"Maybe it's time to just calm the fuck down. The incredible fear for Trump is a sign of brainrot or some severe case of brainwashing, I swear to god. If it was Trump who would have pulled the soldiers out of Afghanistan the way Biden did, leading to countless innocent deaths -- many of them women -- and causing women to be pulled out of schools and back into the enslavement of men, we wouldn't have heard the end of it every single day for four fucking years.

If I could press a button that would remove social media and all the mainstream propaganda bullshit, I'd press it in a heartbeat. Let's bring the newspaper back."

The only 'context' I'll point out here is that you're literally not understanding that it *was* Trump who created the situation in the Afghanistan departure. Your 'context' only shows that you are purposefully misrepresenting the situation simply because you want to be contrarian.

You're not reading what I'm actually saying. I've already explained this in the other thread. Regardless of where the domino's started falling, if Trump was president during the ACTUAL extraction, my argument is that we wouldn't have heard the end of it on mainstream media. Instead, Biden was able to say it was a very successful extraction, walk that comment back after some backlash and that was really the end of it.

But that's a different subject; a different thread. I've made pretty clear in that thread and maybe also others that I'm not pro-Trump, so cancel the witch-hunt. I've clarified the context of my comment. Move on ffs.

It has little to do with who you are pro or not for, I don't really care...it has everything to do with the fact that you're misrepresenting factual statements while subtly attempting to cover your actions via a whole load of inaccuracies and half-truths. Everything that I've seen shows me that you don't want to discuss things in good faith and attempt to throw out victim card after victim card using the guise of "out-of-context".

Simply put, the outcry over this game is asinine at best.

DarkCntry wrote on Jul 11, 2024, 14:59:
The only 'context' I'll point out here is that you're literally not understanding that it *was* Trump who created the situation in the Afghanistan departure. Your 'context' only shows that you are purposefully misrepresenting the situation simply because you want to be contrarian.

DarkCntry, you’re wasting your time. Eldaron has already proven with several statements and whataboutism’s that he worships the twice impeached insurrectionist in chief.

I mean, someone already provided the actual facts of the situation, it might’ve been you, but that doesn’t matter to someone like this dude.

Edit
Correction: it wasn’t you, it was MeanJim.

DarkCntry wrote on Jul 11, 2024, 14:59:

Eldaron Imotholin wrote on Jul 11, 2024, 09:35:
"Maybe it's time to just calm the fuck down. The incredible fear for Trump is a sign of brainrot or some severe case of brainwashing, I swear to god." Context: Double standards (common theme). Let's slow down, be less affected by social media algorithms, stop wtih the hyperbole fearmongering.
"Maybe it's time to just calm the fuck down. The incredible fear for Trump is a sign of brainrot or some severe case of brainwashing, I swear to god. If it was Trump who would have pulled the soldiers out of Afghanistan the way Biden did, leading to countless innocent deaths -- many of them women -- and causing women to be pulled out of schools and back into the enslavement of men, we wouldn't have heard the end of it every single day for four fucking years.

If I could press a button that would remove social media and all the mainstream propaganda bullshit, I'd press it in a heartbeat. Let's bring the newspaper back."

The only 'context' I'll point out here is that you're literally not understanding that it *was* Trump who created the situation in the Afghanistan departure. Your 'context' only shows that you are purposefully misrepresenting the situation simply because you want to be contrarian.

You're not reading what I'm actually saying. I've already explained this in the other thread. Regardless of where the domino's started falling, if Trump was president during the ACTUAL extraction, my argument is that we wouldn't have heard the end of it on mainstream media. Instead, Biden was able to say it was a very successful extraction, walk that comment back after some backlash and that was really the end of it.

But that's a different subject; a different thread. I've made pretty clear in that thread and maybe also others that I'm not pro-Trump, so cancel the witch-hunt. I've clarified the context of my comment. Move on ffs.

Eldaron Imotholin wrote on Jul 11, 2024, 09:35:
"Maybe it's time to just calm the fuck down. The incredible fear for Trump is a sign of brainrot or some severe case of brainwashing, I swear to god." Context: Double standards (common theme). Let's slow down, be less affected by social media algorithms, stop wtih the hyperbole fearmongering.
"Maybe it's time to just calm the fuck down. The incredible fear for Trump is a sign of brainrot or some severe case of brainwashing, I swear to god. If it was Trump who would have pulled the soldiers out of Afghanistan the way Biden did, leading to countless innocent deaths -- many of them women -- and causing women to be pulled out of schools and back into the enslavement of men, we wouldn't have heard the end of it every single day for four fucking years.

If I could press a button that would remove social media and all the mainstream propaganda bullshit, I'd press it in a heartbeat. Let's bring the newspaper back."

The only 'context' I'll point out here is that you're literally not understanding that it *was* Trump who created the situation in the Afghanistan departure. Your 'context' only shows that you are purposefully misrepresenting the situation simply because you want to be contrarian.

Dacote wrote on Jul 11, 2024, 09:48:
You can add all the qualifiers you want to your statements or say that you're just asking questions. It doesn't make you any less transparent.
It just makes you sad.

You sound so much like Beamer. What is this thing about "just asking questions"?

"You can add all the qualifiers you want" if by qualifiers you mean the actual context in which I said something: no shit. I personally think context matters.

You can add all the qualifiers you want to your statements or say that you're just asking questions. It doesn't make you any less transparent.
It just makes you sad.

Dacote wrote on Jul 11, 2024, 08:59:
You're the same person that said such intellectually challenging things as ... "Let the country burn,"
"Maybe it's time to just calm the fuck down. The incredible fear for Trump is a sign of brainrot or some severe case of brainwashing, I swear to god."
"America is a clown world."

Honey, we had you pegged from day one.

Thanks for presenting a good example of zero intellectual honesty. Ripping words out of context is the oldest example in the books. Let's dissect:

"Let the country burn," Context: Both current president nominees are shit and that should change.
"I dunno. I find your comment extremely confusing. To me, you got it all mixed up here and there and fall in the partisan trap you say you hate. Did you mean to say Biden in your first sentence, for example? You can't possibly believe Biden is less of a puppet than Trump? The man literally can no longer think straight.

I think it's one big clown show. I can't vote for either of the two. Let the country burn, I guess, if the choices we get are these two."

---

"America is a clown world." Context: Both current president nominees are shit and that should change, but if we keep protecting Biden, Trump will probably win and I don't want that either.
"People are all so fucking scared of Trump their hyperfocus on him makes them blind for the party that's making him win: the dems. They're all so stuck in their echo chamber, Biden's debate performance somehow was a surprise to them. Believe me when I say everyone on the center-left/right knew months before the state of that old man. The "cheap fakes" narrative was very cheap itself.

And still, some prefer a demented, senile man as president over Trump. It's that blind level of political bias that lifts Trump off his feet and throws him on the proverbial throne. All he has to do is watch Biden try to speak.

America is a clown world. Maybe it's time to start acting like adults, try to find some common ground with eachother, and stop accepting that the election is all about what personality cult wins."

---

"Maybe it's time to just calm the fuck down. The incredible fear for Trump is a sign of brainrot or some severe case of brainwashing, I swear to god." Context: Double standards (common theme). Let's slow down, be less affected by social media algorithms, stop wtih the hyperbole fearmongering.
"Maybe it's time to just calm the fuck down. The incredible fear for Trump is a sign of brainrot or some severe case of brainwashing, I swear to god. If it was Trump who would have pulled the soldiers out of Afghanistan the way Biden did, leading to countless innocent deaths -- many of them women -- and causing women to be pulled out of schools and back into the enslavement of men, we wouldn't have heard the end of it every single day for four fucking years.

If I could press a button that would remove social media and all the mainstream propaganda bullshit, I'd press it in a heartbeat. Let's bring the newspaper back."

This comment was edited on Jul 11, 2024, 10:02.

Eldaron Imotholin wrote on Jul 11, 2024, 08:11:

Beamer wrote on Jul 11, 2024, 06:58:

Eldaron Imotholin wrote on Jul 11, 2024, 05:53:

Bringing up a black sushi chef in Dave the Diver completely misses the point of our discussion about double standards in cultural criticism. It's not about the existence of diverse characters, but about how rules are applied inconsistently. But you're not even trying to engage in an honest discussion. That you've proven many times by now, Beamer.

Because we've had about 30 of you here since gamergate. You come in and whine about things you utterly misrepresent and miss the point of (while accusing others of doing so), you make trollingly aggressive posts then claim to be attacked when people respond in kind (look how often your posts claim to be innocently asking questions but are full of confidently incorrect condescension), and you make all of your aggression because you think your some victim to random bots on Twitter.

Your whole schtick is about being a victim, and all over things you're too angry about to actually stop and understand. No one here will change you. You'll just keep bringing race into every single topic here. You're one of those perpetually online people that whines about how everything is political as you make everything political, all from a desperately outraged and confused pov.

Remember your first posts here in a long time, when you got angry at me for immediately understanding your perspective in "just asking questions," and claimed I didn't know you, then immediately took the mask off and revealed how accurate we were in diagnosing you as what I just said: a confused and terminally online white guy outraged because he thinks he's society's biggest victim.

This is a smart and older board, with people generally sophisticated about what they like to discuss. It doesn't respond well to condescension from people that aren't well versed in the topics they endlessly try to initiate and are unwilling to learn about. And like I said, we've had 30 of you in the past decade rush in here to tell us some NPC doesn't have the right skin color or big enough breasts, and therefore he is the target of the world, usually in a topic about Pacman or video cards.

I'm reading a lot of anger and personal attacks in your response, but once again, there's no engagement with the actual discussion. You're not addressing any specific points I made or explaining why my comments warrant your aggressive behavior. This seems to be a trend in your responses. You project an image or character onto me that you associate with people who disagree with you on these types of subjects.

Ending your insults with "this is a smart and older board" is quite ironic and seems to lack any self-reflective insight.

You're the same person that said such intellectually challenging things as ... "Let the country burn,"
"Maybe it's time to just calm the fuck down. The incredible fear for Trump is a sign of brainrot or some severe case of brainwashing, I swear to god."
"America is a clown world."

Honey, we had you pegged from day one.

Prez wrote on Jul 11, 2024, 07:42:
People can change. I did, remember? I'm glad you don't still think of me as the jerk I used to be.

Who I am hates who I've been, lol. In my 20s and before, I was so certain of everything. It wasn’t until later that I learned the importance of arguing in good faith and practicing intellectual honesty. Now, I present my arguments and try to remain open to having my mind changed.

I follow one rule when arguing online: 'Would I talk to you like this if we met in a pub, or would that probably get me a black eye?'

I think that's a rule we could all benefit from.

Beamer wrote on Jul 11, 2024, 06:58:

Eldaron Imotholin wrote on Jul 11, 2024, 05:53:

Bringing up a black sushi chef in Dave the Diver completely misses the point of our discussion about double standards in cultural criticism. It's not about the existence of diverse characters, but about how rules are applied inconsistently. But you're not even trying to engage in an honest discussion. That you've proven many times by now, Beamer.

Because we've had about 30 of you here since gamergate. You come in and whine about things you utterly misrepresent and miss the point of (while accusing others of doing so), you make trollingly aggressive posts then claim to be attacked when people respond in kind (look how often your posts claim to be innocently asking questions but are full of confidently incorrect condescension), and you make all of your aggression because you think your some victim to random bots on Twitter.

Your whole schtick is about being a victim, and all over things you're too angry about to actually stop and understand. No one here will change you. You'll just keep bringing race into every single topic here. You're one of those perpetually online people that whines about how everything is political as you make everything political, all from a desperately outraged and confused pov.

Remember your first posts here in a long time, when you got angry at me for immediately understanding your perspective in "just asking questions," and claimed I didn't know you, then immediately took the mask off and revealed how accurate we were in diagnosing you as what I just said: a confused and terminally online white guy outraged because he thinks he's society's biggest victim.

This is a smart and older board, with people generally sophisticated about what they like to discuss. It doesn't respond well to condescension from people that aren't well versed in the topics they endlessly try to initiate and are unwilling to learn about. And like I said, we've had 30 of you in the past decade rush in here to tell us some NPC doesn't have the right skin color or big enough breasts, and therefore he is the target of the world, usually in a topic about Pacman or video cards.

I'm reading a lot of anger and personal attacks in your response, but once again, there's no engagement with the actual discussion. You're not addressing any specific points I made or explaining why my comments warrant your aggressive behavior. This seems to be a trend in your responses. You project an image or character onto me that you associate with people who disagree with you on these types of subjects.

Ending your insults with "this is a smart and older board" is quite ironic and seems to lack any self-reflective insight.

Beamer, you hit the nail on the head.
Thanks

People can change. I did, remember? I'm glad you don't still think of me as the jerk I used to be.

Eldaron Imotholin wrote on Jul 11, 2024, 05:53:

Bringing up a black sushi chef in Dave the Diver completely misses the point of our discussion about double standards in cultural criticism. It's not about the existence of diverse characters, but about how rules are applied inconsistently. But you're not even trying to engage in an honest discussion. That you've proven many times by now, Beamer.

Because we've had about 30 of you here since gamergate. You come in and whine about things you utterly misrepresent and miss the point of (while accusing others of doing so), you make trollingly aggressive posts then claim to be attacked when people respond in kind (look how often your posts claim to be innocently asking questions but are full of confidently incorrect condescension), and you make all of your aggression because you think your some victim to random bots on Twitter.

Your whole schtick is about being a victim, and all over things you're too angry about to actually stop and understand. No one here will change you. You'll just keep bringing race into every single topic here. You're one of those perpetually online people that whines about how everything is political as you make everything political, all from a desperately outraged and confused pov.

Remember your first posts here in a long time, when you got angry at me for immediately understanding your perspective in "just asking questions," and claimed I didn't know you, then immediately took the mask off and revealed how accurate we were in diagnosing you as what I just said: a confused and terminally online white guy outraged because he thinks he's society's biggest victim.

This is a smart and older board, with people generally sophisticated about what they like to discuss. It doesn't respond well to condescension from people that aren't well versed in the topics they endlessly try to initiate and are unwilling to learn about. And like I said, we've had 30 of you in the past decade rush in here to tell us some NPC doesn't have the right skin color or big enough breasts, and therefore he is the target of the world, usually in a topic about Pacman or video cards.

NKD wrote on Jul 10, 2024, 18:00:

Eldaron Imotholin wrote on Jul 10, 2024, 05:52:
Finally, could you tell me in your own words why people would react differently to a white protagonist in an african AC theme? I'm not trying to trap you. I just like the fact you actually engage that earlier point of mine. Also, hypothetically, what if there finally was representation equilibrium. Would a white protagonist in a feudal african theme be OK again in your view?

People would react differently because it would be seen as a lost opportunity to tell a story about a Black African protagonist in a video game market which basically lacks that entirely, in favor of yet another white man, which dredges up the ghosts of colonialism, slavery, and oppression where white people systematically stole the opportunities of Black people for centuries, and continue to do so to this day. In short, it's just a bad look, regardless of the actual intent of the people involved or the nuances of the story being told.

As to your second question, I have no idea. There's more to it than just the maths of representation. It's hard to quantify an emotional reaction, which this ultimately is.

I agree, which might be the lungs of the issue. While it's true that reactions are hard to quantify and representation isn't just about numbers, the goal should be to find a more objective and consistent way to address representation. If emotional reactions drive the standards, it leads to inconsistent and subjective applications of cultural critiques, which is precisely the frustration I've been highlighting.

Also I'd like to clarify something since you've mentioned it several times regarding cultural appropriation. Yasuke isn't an example of cultural appropriation. He is a figure from Japanese history who was assimilating into the culture in a place that demanded assimilation. It's not cultural appropriation when that culture is essentially forced upon you. It's actually an erasure of your own culture, which I imagine will be something that comes up in Yasuke's story.

I agree that Yasuke's forced assimilation isn't cultural appropriation. My earlier comments about cultural appropriation tried to highlight the inconsistency in how nuanced positions are taken based on context and the favored narrative.

To wrap this up.. I understand the importance of historical context and the value of representation. My main concern is simply about consistency in applying the rules. It feels like we've been consistently lectured by "the enlightened ones" (again, sorry for using the dumb phrase I coined myself for argument's sake) about certain cultural norms and standards and racial representation. When these same standards are not applied equally across different situations, it comes across as hypocritical to many people. For them, the best way to push back against this perceived inconsistency is to highlight these double standards by playing by the rules set by those who advocate them.

I'm not a champion in expressing my thoughts, but perhaps I'm better at it than the majority who I believe feel the same way. For the majority, I think, it's not about the black samurai. It's about being endlessly confronted by a new set of rules they never agreed to, and when those who set the rules break them, that's when shit hits the fan.

Beamer wrote on Jul 10, 2024, 18:10:
I just started playing Dave the Diver. Did you guys know there's a black sushi chef in the game?!

How did that get by the keyboard warriors?!

Bringing up a black sushi chef in Dave the Diver completely misses the point of our discussion about double standards in cultural criticism. It's not about the existence of diverse characters, but about how rules are applied inconsistently. But you're not even trying to engage in an honest discussion. That you've proven many times by now, Beamer.

This comment was edited on Jul 11, 2024, 06:07.

Beamer wrote on Jul 10, 2024, 18:10:
I just started playing Dave the Diver. Did you guys know there's a black sushi chef in the game?!

How did that get by the keyboard warriors?!

Isn't he also a Samari? I actual started playing that this week, and it's not bad. Kinda fun infact.