The Rant Thread

[Bartmanhomer]

Ok Here the few rules in this thread. No cursing. If you feel like censor the curse and swears just do like this: **** Also the forum rules always applies. So no religion, no politics, none of that stuff. Ok I go first: I actually talk to a girl who works at movie theater. It was at the concession stand and I asked her about the Stubs Premiere. I was going to get her phone number but one of her co-workers interrupted me saying that she married. Why?! Why does this keeps happening to me?! :furious:

[2D8HP]

Aren't a large percentage of my posts already rants?
But one more!
Most of my Television watching is PBS.
My favorite shows that keep getting "pre-emptive" by "pledge drives" are Ask This Old House and Rick Steve's Europe.
I've learned to hate Deepak Chopra and Suze Ormon!
:furious:

[Bartmanhomer]

Aren't a large percentage of my posts already rants?
But one more!
Most of my Television watching is PBS.
My favorite shows that keep getting "pre-emptive" by "pledge drives" are Ask This Old House and Rick Steve's Europe.
I've learned to hate Deepak Chopra and Suze Ormon!
:furious:

Really? I don't really pay any attention to your rants.

[Goodkill]

yay Drizzit!

psychiatry and psychological science are still in the dark ages. they try to make me take horrible medicines that don't do anything because they don't understand crap about schizophrenia. i can't talk about schizophrenia without invoking religion and spirituality though.

[JNAProductions]

Ok Here the few rules in this thread. No cursing. If you feel like censor the curse and swears just do like this: **** Also the forum rules always applies. So no religion, no politics, none of that stuff. Ok I go first: I actually talk to a girl who works at movie theater. It was at the concession stand and I asked her about the Stubs Premiere. I was going to get her phone number but one of her co-workers interrupted me saying that she married. Why?! Why does this keeps happening to me?! :furious:

Um... Unless he was lying, I don't see the complaint. If you just wanted to make a new friend, you could've gotten the number anyway, and if you wanted a date, well, she's married.


yay Drizzit!

psychiatry and psychological science are still in the dark ages. they try to make me take horrible medicines that don't do anything because they don't understand crap about schizophrenia. i can't talk about schizophrenia without invoking religion and spirituality though.

Speaking as someone who suffers from depression and is on meds for it, I would like to say that it's far from the dark ages. It's not perfect-but it damn well helps, at least in some cases.

[Bartmanhomer]

Um... Unless he was lying, I don't see the complaint. If you just wanted to make a new friend, you could've gotten the number anyway, and if you wanted a date, well, she's married.



Speaking as someone who suffers from depression and is on meds for it, I would like to say that it's far from the dark ages. It's not perfect-but it damn well helps, at least in some cases.
Well her co-worker was a woman.

[JNAProductions]

Well her co-worker was a woman.

Unless she was lying.

Other than that minor mistake... Do you see the point?

[Lethologica]

Um... Unless he was lying, I don't see the complaint. If you just wanted to make a new friend, you could've gotten the number anyway, and if you wanted a date, well, she's married.
Even if the friend was lying, it's one of those lies where, how can I put it, the ethics are highly context-dependent.

[Bartmanhomer]

Even if the friend was lying, it's one of those lies where, how can I put it, the ethics are highly context-dependent. What do you mean?


Unless she was lying.

Other than that minor mistake... Do you see the point?No. I don't understand the point at all.

[Lethologica]

What do you mean?
I mean that the lie could cover anything from "screwing with you for the lulz" to "covering for her friend's discomfort."


No. I don't understand the point at all.
I think JNA is focusing on the fact that there's nothing about the friend pointing out her marital status that should upset you. On the other hand, if you thought something romantic might be in the works, it's reasonable to be unhappy if that turns out to be a dead end, regardless of how you came by that information.

[JNAProductions]

Like I said-if you wanted a new friend, you could've gotten her number anyway. If it was romantic, isn't it better to find out she's married sooner rather than later?

Logically, you have no reason to be upset. I do understand feelings aren't always (or usually) logical, but this sounds like a minor thing rather than some massive unrequited love. Correct me if I'm wrong, but it seems like you shouldn't really be that upset.

[Bartmanhomer]

Like I said-if you wanted a new friend, you could've gotten her number anyway. If it was romantic, isn't it better to find out she's married sooner rather than later?

Logically, you have no reason to be upset. I do understand feelings aren't always (or usually) logical, but this sounds like a minor thing rather than some massive unrequited love. Correct me if I'm wrong, but it seems like you shouldn't really be that upset.
I suppose that you're right about that. It's just that every time that I meet a woman, I get shut down real quick.

[veti]

Rant? You call that a rant? It's hard to rant within the rules of a moderated forum, but I'll give it a try.


My online dictionary says that to rant is to "speak or shout at length in an angry, impassioned way". The opening post in this thread is not angry and impassioned, nor is it "at length". Here's a handy rule of thumb:

If you could post it on Twitter, it's not a rant. It's barely even a whinge.

I'm not a pro, but I've ranted on some quality forums in my time. I've ranted on Usenet, in email, on news sites and on forums like this - anywhere that's rash enough not to give me a character limit. I've ranted about past, present and future, change and stagnation, reality and fantasy, life and art, lies and truth, war and peace, love and hate, wealth and poverty, literature, cinema, drama, art, music, games and sport, politics, economics, history, religion... You name a topic that's forbidden on this board, I've covered it. I've even ranted in verse.

A rant is like a game of pinball. You can just launch the ball and watch it vanish down the slot - but then what's the point? A good game is a solid fifteen minutes' entertainment, with lights and sound and mounting tension as you get nearer to the replay. You hurl the ball against the walls and bumpers of your frustrations, light up the markers of your emotions, catch it and cradle it and re-launch it for the ramp of fury. On a good day, you can draw in the reader to share your emotions - and that's the true goal, the point of the whole exercise. That's the second ball in play, right there, when the reader's pulse quickens, their face flushes, and they catch themselves pumping their fist or nodding wisely or just mouthing obscenities in sympathy.

Every rant is individual. It starts from a provocation, real or imagined. It takes issue with it. Then it drags you through a labyrinth of tenuous connections or tortured metaphors, the connections telling you far more about the author's mind than about anything in the outside world.

It may start laying down premises and building upon them as if with logic, developing from point to point with a deceptive coherence, so that it's not until much later that you realise the author has left the rails of reason far behind and is soaring into the thunderous cumulo-nimbus of passion. Or it may abandon the farce of clarity from the outset and charge straight into the fire, taking the author's prejudices and values as a lifeline, and thus political movements are born.

And it's not something you can dash off in minutes. A rant needs reflection - in the most literal sense, that every line needs to be followed to its natural extent until you know how futile it is. It takes time to grow. Sometimes the actual writing may only take an hour or less, but only because the subject itself has been maturing - or festering - within the author for weeks, or months, or years, and was just waiting for the chance to break out. Like Hannibal Lecter.

When you read a rant, you are reading the author's soul. Your compulsion to follow their argument is in direct proportion to your sympathy with the author, as they wind their thoughts ever tighter around the solid core of their anger, their resentment, their prejudice or fear or hope or desperation - or even love. They wind until either the line snaps, and lashes across your soul like a broken hawser, or until it chokes the host and the rant peters out in limp, rambling frustration. The best rants ROAR.

But even a failed rant contains a little piece of the author's soul; if you agree with it, if you think there is value in it, you should treasure it, because the author has opened up to you something very personal. Ranting is an act of love.

[Comrade]

Was that Shakespeare?

[Bartmanhomer]

I mean that the lie could cover anything from "screwing with you for the lulz" to "covering for her friend's discomfort."


I think JNA is focusing on the fact that there's nothing about the friend pointing out her marital status that should upset you. On the other hand, if you thought something romantic might be in the works, it's reasonable to be unhappy if that turns out to be a dead end, regardless of how you came by that information.

She would have say something to herself about her martial status.

[Lethologica]

I think you're asserting that the person you were talking to would have told you her marital status herself (under what circumstances?). I'm not sure what that has to do with anything.

[Bartmanhomer]

I think you're asserting that the person you were talking to would have told you her marital status herself (under what circumstances?). I'm not sure what that has to do with anything.

There's no circumstances behind it.

[Bartmanhomer]

Also the woman friend was being rude as well. I've every right to get upset. :furious:

[Razade]

Also the woman friend was being rude as well. I've every right to get upset. :furious:

You were ostensibly hitting on someone who, from what I gather, you've never really gotten to know and you got rejected. There's nothing rude about that.

[Bartmanhomer]

You were ostensibly hitting on someone who, from what I gather, you've never really gotten to know and you got rejected. There's nothing rude about that.

Well like I said. She could've said it herself instead of her friend telling her marital status. I mean the woman does have a mind of her own.

[Razade]

Well like I said. She could've said it herself instead of her friend telling her marital status. I mean the woman does have a mind of her own.

And she exercised it by letting someone else tell you instead of herself. You're the one trying to tell her how she should have handled the situation.

[Bartmanhomer]

Moving on, Last week there was another stupid fire drill at my trainee job. Everybody at work have been getting these fire drill lately and it's just getting old and riduiclous. Why not getting use one fire drill and done with it already?! :furious:

[Bartmanhomer]

And she exercised it by letting someone else tell you instead of herself. You're the one trying to tell her how she should have handled the situation. That the whole point of it. The woman isn't an infant. Her friend didn't need to tell me her martial status. She should have spoken it herself.

[Kid Jake]

That the whole point of it. The woman isn't an infant. Her friend didn't need to tell me her martial status. She should have spoken it herself.

Then we'd be getting a petulant rant about how 'She let me get my hopes up and then just rejected me!'

Move on with your life and stop pouting.

[Razade]

Moving on, Last week there was another stupid fire drill at my trainee job. Everybody at work have been getting these fire drill lately and it's just getting old and riduiclous. Why not getting use one fire drill and done with it already?! :furious:

Because companies have mandatory fire drills they need to comply with. Not based on your...absurd dislike of them.


That the whole point of it. The woman isn't an infant. Her friend didn't need to tell me her martial status. She should have spoken it herself.

She shouldn't have done anything she didn't want to do. She didn't want to tell you, maybe to spare your feelings. Who knows. You don't get to tell people what they should or shouldn't do. Especially if you're the one asking for their number.

[MoonCat]

Bartmanhomer, that woman didn't owe you anything. If you are, as you say, annoyed that every time you meet a woman you get shut down 'real quick,' then it wouldn't matter if she told you or if her co-worker did.

If you are upset that her co-worker was 'being rude,' I invite you to consider that you were hitting on a woman while she was working. In other words, she couldn't leave, and is on some level obligated to be friendly and polite to her customers.

Getting hit on at work is a serious issue, and both she and her co-worker have every right to be angry with you for crossing that boundary. Letting you down gently was a damn nice thing, and the fact that her co-worker did it saved you from open rejection.

Be appreciative of that and consider their point of view.

[Bartmanhomer]

Bartmanhomer, that woman didn't owe you anything. If you are, as you say, annoyed that every time you meet a woman you get shut down 'real quick,' then it wouldn't matter if she told you or if her co-worker did.

If you are upset that her co-worker was 'being rude,' I invite you to consider that you were hitting on a woman while she was working. In other words, she couldn't leave, and is on some level obligated to be friendly and polite to her customers.

Getting hit on at work is a serious issue, and both she and her co-worker have every right to be angry with you for crossing that boundary. Letting you down gently was a damn nice thing, and the fact that her co-worker did it saved you from open rejection.

Be appreciative of that and consider their point of view. Well first off both workers weren't even angry at me. Second I could take a hint went I see one. Last the girl not interested, the girl not interested. I've Been Rejected By Women So Many Times I could remember.

[Kid Jake]

Second I could take a hint went I see one.

But....can you? You don't really seem like the sort of person to pick up on social cues until you're beat over the head with them.

[Bartmanhomer]

But....can you? You don't really seem like the sort of person to pick up on social cues until you're beat over the head with them. What do you mean by that?

[Kid Jake]

What do you mean by that?

Case in point.

[golentan]

What do you mean by that?

He means you started an entire thread to complain about the fact that you hit on a woman who wasn't available and that fact was pointed out to you.

[Bartmanhomer]

Case in point.
Ok so I'm not good at body language. Is that what you're trying to say?

[Razade]

Ok so I'm not good at body language. Is that what you're trying to say?

Yes, and more.

[Kid Jake]

Ok so I'm not good at body language. Is that what you're trying to say?

Yes, you failed to pick up on my body language. That's exactly what I was saying. I guess I was wrong about you after all.

[Bartmanhomer]

He means you started an entire thread to complain about the fact that you hit on a woman who wasn't available and that fact was pointed out to you.
I think you're missing the whole point of this thread. This is a rant thread. You can rant anything you want.

[Kid Jake]

I think you're missing the whole point of this thread. This is a rant thread. You can rant anything you want.

And we've chosen to rant about your reaction to getting rejected. Don't stifle us!

[Bartmanhomer]

And we've chosen to rant about your reaction to getting rejected. Don't stifle us!

Good point.

[Goodkill]

yes i think psychiatry/psychology is not in the dark ages anymore when it comes to most disorders - ocd, depression, add, bipolar, etc. i guess i was wrong to say that the whole science/medicine is bad when it's just, as far as i'm concerned, their interpretation of one single disorder, namely schizophrenia with positive symptoms.

edit: more ranting: seroquel is the main drug i'm on. it's no joke because i put on 70 lbs from it while in the hospital (so being forced to take this is kind of a bitch). it is a sedative. but the evening dose is actually pretty cool because while it sedates you it also gets you high (unlike other drugs i've been put on). it gives me an experience that is kind of spiritual ... unfortunately i've developed a tolerance to this aspect of it so i don't feel it very much anymore.

[AvatarVecna]

About the only thing I really like ranting about is a particular member of this forum that I find to be a sentient pile of crap. Unreliable at the best of times, argumentative and prone to angering quickly at the worst of times, I would accuse this callous ******* of posting for the sake of boosting their post count if I didn't know better. A lack of any social awareness combined with a tendency towards diarrhea of the mouth (well, of the fingers? keyboard?) makes for a ghastly combination I wish I could avoid.

Not a huge problem usually, but when these behavioral quirks become particularly difficult to ignore, this poster's presence on the forum I frequent is the fly in my ointment.

[golentan]

yes i think psychiatry/psychology is not in the dark ages anymore when it comes to most disorders - ocd, depression, add, bipolar, etc. i guess i was wrong to say that the whole science/medicine is bad when it's just, as far as i'm concerned, their interpretation of one single disorder, namely schizophrenia with positive symptoms.

edit: more ranting: seroquel is the main drug i'm on. it's no joke because i put on 70 lbs from it while in the hospital (so being forced to take this is kind of a bitch). it is a sedative. but the evening dose is actually pretty cool because while it sedates you it also gets you high (unlike other drugs i've been put on). it gives me an experience that is kind of spiritual ... unfortunately i've developed a tolerance to this aspect of it so i don't feel it very much anymore.

Hey, uh... I'm schizoaffective and I was put on seroquel in January after a hospitalization incident.

>.>
<.<

If you ever need an ear, I'm available, though I'll say I've had a very different experience from yours.

[Razade]

About the only thing I really like ranting about is a particular member of this forum that I find to be a sentient pile of crap. Unreliable at the best of times, argumentative and prone to angering quickly at the worst of times, I would accuse this callous ******* of posting for the sake of boosting their post count if I didn't know better. A lack of any social awareness combined with a tendency towards diarrhea of the mouth (well, of the fingers? keyboard?) makes for a ghastly combination I wish I could avoid.

Not a huge problem usually, but when these behavioral quirks become particularly difficult to ignore, this poster's presence on the forum I frequent is the fly in my ointment.

The site has an ignore feature.

[AvatarVecna]

The site has an ignore feature.

Doesn't work for this case.

[Bartmanhomer]

Today I play my very first Pokémon Go Gym Battle and I lost by a powerful ******* Goldduck. Goldduck combat points was 2000+ and that Pokémon wipe out all my six weak Pokémon. **** Why did I have battle against a Pokémon on ******* steroids? :furious:

[Razade]

Today I play my very first Pokémon Go Gym Battle and I lost by a powerful ******* Goldduck. Goldduck combat points was 2000+ and that Pokémon wipe out all my six weak Pokémon. **** Why did I have battle against a Pokémon on ******* steroids? :furious:

I don't know, why do you have to curse with every other word? It's just a game, keep things in perspective.

[Lhurgyof]

Ok Here the few rules in this thread. No cursing. If you feel like censor the curse and swears just do like this: **** Also the forum rules always applies. So no religion, no politics, none of that stuff. Ok I go first: I actually talk to a girl who works at movie theater. It was at the concession stand and I asked her about the Stubs Premiere. I was going to get her phone number but one of her co-workers interrupted me saying that she married. Why?! Why does this keeps happening to me?! :furious:

You probably shouldn't listen to me, but my advice is as follows:

Just because there's a goalie, doesn't mean you can't score. :smalltongue:

[Draconi Redfir]

I really, REEEEAAALLLY hate the new Roll20 pathfinder character sheets.

What they had was perfect, it was simple, it was organized, it was just like the real-life pen and paper sheet, you put your skill points down, you weapons were right under your weapons were right beneath your BAB, you could set if they were magical or masterwork right next to their name, everything was amazing. Sure, there were maybe one or two things that could be improved, such as being able to select which ability score modifier to use for skill checks, but in the end it worked, and that's all it needed to do.

This new sheet though? What even the heck? If i want to check if my weapon is magical or not i need to go to one tab, scroll down and click a seccond tab, then look under a third tab to see if a box is chececked. under the "all" page isn't even much better, why the hell is my movement speed all the way under literally everything else!? why can't it be right below my AC or eye and hair colour like is senseable!? Why do i need to go on a freaking scavenger hunt just to find the most BASIC of information!?

I honestly can't understand what everyone enjoys about it! Nothing is in it's place or where it's supposed to be, NOTHING is right in front of your eyes, you need to go looking for everything under a thousand tabs and sub-tabs, and there are freaking boxes and things of like... code? or something everywhere? The heck does that even mean!? why does this need to be there!? Why can't everything just be right in front of you where it ought to be when you're playing a character!????

For the first time in months. i am NOT looking forward to my next session, knowing i'll need to put up with this giant steaming peace.:smallannoyed:

[veti]

I really, REEEEAAALLLY hate the new Roll20 pathfinder character sheets.

Thank you! At last, an actual rant!

[Jon_Dahl]

You probably shouldn't listen to me, but my advice is as follows:

Just because there's a goalie, doesn't mean you can't score. :smalltongue:

This. This is true.
My friend, who is a psychologist, always tells me this when I'm in doubt with a woman:
"Go ahead and try it. You never know what a girl likes."

[golentan]

This. This is true.
My friend, who is a psychologist, always tells me this when I'm in doubt with a woman:
"Go ahead and try it. You never know what a girl likes."

...

Because even if the other party isn't in an open marriage, who needs a moral compass or cares whether or not a family will break apart/innocent spouses or children will be hurt if there is a chance that you can take advantage of someone's moment of weakness or low moral fiber to have sex? It's the same logic one of my classmates argued when he said "it's not shoplifting if you don't get caught."

[Jon_Dahl]

...

Because even if the other party isn't in an open marriage, who needs a moral compass or cares whether or not a family will break apart/innocent spouses or children will be hurt if there is a chance that you can take advantage of someone's moment of weakness or low moral fiber to have sex? It's the same logic one of my classmates argued when he said "it's not shoplifting if you don't get caught."

I trust my friend's advice a great deal. I can't argue about his logic on his behalf. He thinks about these things a lot more than you and I combined so I'd say that we should show some reverence.

[SaintRidley]

You probably shouldn't listen to me, but my advice is as follows:

Just because there's a goalie, doesn't mean you can't score. :smalltongue:


Frankly, that's the most idiotic advice possible in this situation. OP, if someone's in a pre-existing relationship, a) don't be angry when you're rejected on account of it (because you have zero right to, regardless of who the messenger is) and b) don't try to insert yourself. If they want you involved, then they'll get you involved, not the other way around.

Jon_Dahl, if your friend would suggest the same, your friend is an idiot and we shouldn't listen to him with reverence (and seriously, reverence? He's not a source of moral guidance to be revered in the first place. Maybe listening to him has been a pet of your problem all along, because it sounds like you place way too much stock in his opinion by your language there).

[golentan]

I trust my friend's advice a great deal. I can't argue about his logic on his behalf. He thinks about these things a lot more than you and I combined so I'd say that we should show some reverence.

If your friend is the sort of person who spends a great deal of time thinking about getting people to commit adultery, I would say he is the last person whose opinion I would be inclined to show reverence on the subject.

Cannibals undoubtedly spend a great deal more time thinking how to cook human beings than I do. That doesn't mean I'm inclined to ask for Hannibal Lecter's recipe list.

As Saint Ridley said, I agree on this subject. There is nothing Saint Ridley said which I even feel inclined to quibble or equivocate for slight accuracy gains, and that's rare for my own thoughts, let alone another person's opinions.

[SaintRidley]

As Saint Ridley said, I agree on this subject. There is nothing Saint Ridley said which I even feel inclined to quibble or equivocate for slight accuracy gains, and that's rare for my own thoughts, let alone another person's opinions.
Thanks, and likewise I disagree with none of your points. I do quibble with the fact that my post originally dropped the i in 'it,' but I've fixed that now.

[Serpentine]

That the whole point of it. The woman isn't an infant. Her friend didn't need to tell me her martial status. She should have spoken it herself.
Yeah, no. When this is a thing:

http://ragegenerator.com/uploads/205460.png
https://cdn.funpic.us/i_have_a_boyfriend-40-9583.jpg
http://images-cdn.9gag.com/photo/aMGwnYx_700b.jpg
http://www.cheerupemokid.com/wp-content/uploads/2016/01/2016-02-01-help.png
http://itsfunny.org/wp-content/uploads/2013/12/I-have-a-boyfriend.jpg
http://starecat.com/content/wp-content/uploads/girl-echo-hello-ok-wow-i-have-a-boyfriend-bye.jpg


you do NOT get to blame her for not telling a complete stranger, who is hitting on her at her place of work and who so far as she knows might take it well, might fall back on plausible deniability of "I was just being friendly", or might lash out at the rejection, a private fact about her personal life. You just don't, mate.

[Astrella]

This. This is true.
My friend, who is a psychologist, always tells me this when I'm in doubt with a woman:
"Go ahead and try it. You never know what a girl likes."

How about you ask?

[Crimmy]

You probably shouldn't listen to me, but my advice is as follows:

Just because there's a goalie, doesn't mean you can't score. :smalltongue:
Hey look, this was good advice at first, and terrible afterwards! :smalltongue::smalltongue::smalltongue:
(Do the faces mean it's better?)


This. This is true.
No, it's not.

My friend, who is a psychologist
Completely irrelevant point, what he does for a living, unless you're talking about how you need psych help.
Maybe his advice has been, you know, misunderstood. Because that's a thing that happens with people. For example, we all understood, clear as day, that there was no interest.

always tells me this when I'm in doubt with a woman:
"Go ahead and try it. You never know what a girl likes."
There's no doubt about anything. Your "friend's" advice is not for this case. Bye.


I trust my friend's advice a great deal.
That's good. You know what goes good with trust? A pinch of salt. You may need a big old bucket, though.


I can't argue about his logic on his behalf.
Wow, sane reasoning!

He thinks about these things a lot more than you and I combined[...]
There's no way to know that for sure without implying this:
a) "You're stupid, that's how I know he thinks more about these things"
b)"I'm stupid, and you too, that's how I know..."


[...] so I'd say that we should show some reverence.
No, what you're saying is to turn off your brain because someone with an allegedly greater thinking ability said something that suits your rather off-center moral compass and lets you get away with saying some reaaaally shady s*** without being held responsible for what it actually implies.
"Oh, he's smart and he said we should do it. if it's wrong... hey, he said it, not me!"


Ok Here the few rules in this thread. No cursing. If you feel like censor the curse and swears just do like this: **** Also the forum rules always applies. So no religion, no politics, none of that stuff. Ok I go first: I actually talk to a girl who works at movie theater. It was at the concession stand and I asked her about the Stubs Premiere. I was going to get her phone number but one of her co-workers interrupted me saying that she married. Why?! Why does this keeps happening to me?! :furious:

Maybe because you're approaching girls at their workplace? Maybe because you're actively seeking a relationship with so much intensity that you're willing to forget how creepy that is? Maybe it's because you actually don't read much into the context of what's happening (or read too much into it, maybe?) and think that because a girl was a decent human being (as in, she smiled at you or said hello) she's into you... but then "the world" hates you and makes it impossible for you to pursue a relationship.
Either way, I'm sure, really sure, way damn f****** sure that just because you're screwing yourself. Be open to talk to girls without expecting they're going to be your girlfriends some day (or rather, not your girlfriends in a romantic sense, just being friends with you). Be polite with people at their workplace. If they're interested, maybe (just maybe) they'll share with you stuff. Be conscious that girls, much like the rest of mankind, are HUMANS. They have the ability to choose what they want, what they do, and what they like, and you don't get to tell them what to do.


Well like I said. She could've said it herself instead of her friend telling her marital status. I mean the woman does have a mind of her own.

Case in point. You're saying what they shouldn't do, you're automagically assuming they're doing something out of evil intent or like some sort of "The world" mind control that makes them not do something you want them to.


----
To summarize:
-Don't listen to Jon Dahl. He advocates for being a bad person, saying someone else said it was a good idea, and generally being ignorant of other peoples' feelings and desires.
-Don't listen to Lhurgyof either. He's apparently the equivalent of the facebbok :V movement (the smilies make it funny and smart!)
-Don't be that guy who stalks or annoys or tries to romance people at their workplace
-Don't complain if your stalkerish or annoying presence at the workplace of a girl makes her friend(s) talk in her stead. It's your behaviour that's making them do it, so they have every reason to do it until you change that behaviour.
-If she's smiling at you, she's NOT flirting.
-If she says hello with a smile, she's NOT flirting.
-You can (and possibly should) show your romantic interest to a girl, but that also implies you have to be grown-up about it. You can (and will) get shut down sometimes. Suck it up, man, we've all been there and it's ok.
-I think it's uncalled for to rant about it because it implies you were done wrong or someone did a screw-up that ended up with you getting the fuzzy end.

Finally, my rant is this: I find it irking that people assume they should turn off their brains just because someone "who thinks a lot more about it than you and me combined", as if brainpower and individual thinking is something to be saved up, like that one special brandy. Thinking and using your moral compass is not something you should try to save for special occasions.

[Merellis]

Always find the idea of hitting on someone when they're at work to be a bit off. Namely in the sense that in a position like that, they sorta have to be nice and polite with you, and the fact that they're there to work and not to engage in a courtship.

Anyway.

Getting so tired of a lot of my clients. Our office hours are posted, I always recite them when they're asking me about times that I'm available, or when they need to come in. And yet, without fail, I will always get a call on my lunch break an hour after they were supposed to show up. Or they'll be showing up a half-hour after I was supposed to get off when they had already said they'd be there two hours before that.

Just. I'm so tired of this, I gotta pick up my kid, the bridge closes for construction every night and missing that timing adds another goddamn hour to my commute home. AHHHHHHH. And don't even get me started on the ones that show up out of the blue looking for the owner without setting an appointment when he's overseeing construction all over the area, or the ones that wait until the day before their quarterly reports are due to give me the damn sack full of receipts.

Once again. AHHHHHHH

[DJ Yung Crunk]

What rants, in particular? Can I rant about how everyone has terrible taste in music but me?

[grimbold]

Yeah, no. When this is a thing:

you do NOT get to blame her for not telling a complete stranger, who is hitting on her at her place of work and who so far as she knows might take it well, might fall back on plausible deniability of "I was just being friendly", or might lash out at the rejection, a private fact about her personal life. You just don't, mate.

p sure all women are evil Serps which is why I can't get laid. It's not the fact that I'm entitled and make women uncomfortable and am creepy.

Why can't girls just like me because I'm a nice guy!

:smalltongue:

(Serps I love you so much, I might even get over my fear of Australia to come snuggle you)

[Serpentine]

Omg Grimmy I have a boyfriend omg ok bye

(dooooooo do that yes snugs)

[SDF]

As a general rule if someone in a customer service role is nice to you while on the job, it isn't because they are into you, it's because they are providing good customer service. 100% of the time.

[grimbold]

Omg Grimmy I have a boyfriend omg ok bye

(dooooooo do that yes snugs)

NOOOOOO
Now I just have to facebook stalk away my sexual frustration

Why can't girls like me? I wear all the sweetest flame button downs and fedoras. My beard is starting to reach my beard and not just my neck now!

(Also serps - is bearded grimmy a good look?)

[Mister Loorg]

my rant is that you can't post anything in the rant thread without getting continually bashed for it

[Murk]

Isn't it kind of a requirement for a rant to be either illogical or wrong, preferably both? Otherwise, it's just a valid complaint or a passionate attempt to better the world.

Poort Bartman is just doing a good rant. That's what he's here for!

Edit:

my rant is that you can't post anything in the rant thread without getting continually bashed for it

I got ninja'd by a lego figure, who has a valid point here, and keeps it short - so while I agree with the lego ninja, it's not a good rant.

[Lethologica]

What rants, in particular? Can I rant about how everyone has terrible taste in music but me?
yes please do oh my god this thread

[grimbold]

my rant is that you can't post anything in the rant thread without getting continually bashed for it

Can my rant be "why is it that this forum I used to love has been ruined by MRA's?" :smalltongue:

[DJ Yung Crunk]

yes please do oh my god this thread

Don't tempt me. I'll do it, you know.

[AvatarVecna]

Don't tempt me. I'll do it, you know.

As far as threats go, this is pretty mild. So uh...I dare you? Whatever.

[RabbitHoleLost]

What rants, in particular? Can I rant about how everyone has terrible taste in music but me?

Moff Chumley used to have a thread that was this exactly, I think.
All, the old days.

SIGHS WISTFULLY

[Lethologica]

Don't tempt me. I'll do it, you know.
Now you're just making me beg. It's undignified.

[Teddy]

Isn't it kind of a requirement for a rant to be either illogical or wrong, preferably both? Otherwise, it's just a valid complaint or a passionate attempt to better the world.

Poort Bartman is just doing a good rant. That's what he's here for!

If you need to spill out whatever illogical and misdirected complaints you happen to harbour, these boards are really not the best forum for doing so. There's a pretty strong feminist (as well as many other equalities) community here, and some of us aren't particularly content with letting people use tired entitlements to shift all the blame for their failures and mishaps onto other people uncontested. It happens everywhere across the Internet and the physical world already, we don't need it on our home field too.

[Razade]

Can my rant be "why is it that this forum I used to love has been ruined by MRA's?" :smalltongue:

You can't be serious. "Ruined by MRA's", where exactly? The forums seem fairly progressive in general.

[JNAProductions]

You can't be serious. "Ruined by MRA's", where exactly? The forums seem fairly progressive in general.

Pardon my ignorance, but Googling MRA gets me a magnetic resonance angiogram. I'm pretty sure that's NOT what is meant.

Edit: Men's Right Activists, according to some pals. That correct?

[Razade]

Pardon my ignorance, but Googling MRA gets me a magnetic resonance angiogram. I'm pretty sure that's NOT what is meant.

It isn't. It stands for Men's Rights Activists. A group comparable to internet feminists in so far as they both have wildly rabid bands of members who...well let's just say if you gave them enemas they could be buried in matchbooks. The idea that this forum has been "ruined by" said group is...laughable.

[JNAProductions]

Also, if y'all don't mind, I've got a minor rant. Tis about a friend of mine-and I'll preface this by saying he's a good guy, very kind, but he kinda irked me as of late.

We were driving to a Games Workshop for fun times, and we were talking about Giant in the Playground. He said he didn't like internet arguments, since nothing ever gets resolved and no one changes their minds. I agreed with him... For the most part. I think this forum has a surprising amount of people who actually DO listen and change their minds, or at least are open to new viewpoints.

Anyway, afterwards, we got on the topic of optimization, and I brought up the 3E lead hat trick. He said that felt like metagaming and he'd never allow it, and that it felt very artificial. I said that it made perfect sense in setting, especially for a 20+ Int Wizard, but he didn't really accept that, and followed it up by saying "No matter how many examples you bring up, you're not going to change my mind, so just stop talking about it."

Am I unreasonable to be a little irked at the hypocrisy?

This is at GW, same day. He said that another guy we're friends with at the store runs a pretty hard army (in Age of Sigmar), but that's okay, because he owns up to it.

I run a list I myself call "brutal" in 40k. He has (the first friend, not the other guy) on several occasions given me a lengthy talk about how my army isn't really sporting and how I need to own up to it... Despite the fact that I call it a brutal army, and either play people who know me or warn them "My list is absolutely killer" before playing.

This is the big one. We were, still same day, at lunch with a third friend. The third friend brought up transgenderism, just as a minor detail (some guy who starred in a dumb youtube video is now a girl-didn't see the video, and which video isn't really relevant). After lunch, he said he was surprised that I had brought it up, since I knew his views on it. I actually did not, and he said that he thinks that man and woman were made in god's image, and that god didn't make mistakes. This kinda upset me, since I have transgender friends (and the thing is, so does he) and he's basically saying that they're all wrong. It just... I dunno. Like I prefaced this with, he's a nice guy, and he wouldn't hurt anyone or even really judge anyone-but his view just seems sort of wrong to me.

Also, if anyone thinks this is too religious for the forum, just let me know and I'll remove this-I don't THINK it's too religious, but I'd rather be safe than sorry.

[Lethologica]

Also, if y'all don't mind, I've got a minor rant. Tis about a friend of mine-and I'll preface this by saying he's a good guy, very kind, but he kinda irked me as of late.

We were driving to a Games Workshop for fun times, and we were talking about Giant in the Playground. He said he didn't like internet arguments, since nothing ever gets resolved and no one changes their minds. I agreed with him... For the most part. I think this forum has a surprising amount of people who actually DO listen and change their minds, or at least are open to new viewpoints.

Anyway, afterwards, we got on the topic of optimization, and I brought up the 3E lead hat trick. He said that felt like metagaming and he'd never allow it, and that it felt very artificial. I said that it made perfect sense in setting, especially for a 20+ Int Wizard, but he didn't really accept that, and followed it up by saying "No matter how many examples you bring up, you're not going to change my mind, so just stop talking about it."

Am I unreasonable to be a little irked at the hypocrisy?

This is at GW, same day. He said that another guy we're friends with at the store runs a pretty hard army (in Age of Sigmar), but that's okay, because he owns up to it.

I run a list I myself call "brutal" in 40k. He has (the first friend, not the other guy) on several occasions given me a lengthy talk about how my army isn't really sporting and how I need to own up to it... Despite the fact that I call it a brutal army, and either play people who know me or warn them "My list is absolutely killer" before playing.

This is the big one. We were, still same day, at lunch with a third friend. The third friend brought up transgenderism, just as a minor detail (some guy who starred in a dumb youtube video is now a girl-didn't see the video, and which video isn't really relevant). After lunch, he said he was surprised that I had brought it up, since I knew his views on it. I actually did not, and he said that he thinks that man and woman were made in god's image, and that god didn't make mistakes. This kinda upset me, since I have transgender friends (and the thing is, so does he) and he's basically saying that they're all wrong. It just... I dunno. Like I prefaced this with, he's a nice guy, and he wouldn't hurt anyone or even really judge anyone-but his view just seems sort of wrong to me.

Also, if anyone thinks this is too religious for the forum, just let me know and I'll remove this-I don't THINK it's too religious, but I'd rather be safe than sorry.
1. Well, it is an exploit, and it can feel artificial, but it also makes sense in setting given that the exploit exists, and he is being hypocritical.
2. Well, he better pay attention.
3. Well, this is obviously a biased sample of his behavior, but I'm not a fan. Like, he's not just holding this view, he's expressing displeasure that you would even mention the topic given that he holds this view. That's a weirdly controlling reaction.

[JNAProductions]

1. Well, it is an exploit, and it can feel artificial, but it also makes sense in setting given that the exploit exists, and he is being hypocritical.
2. Well, he better pay attention.
3. Well, this is obviously a biased sample of his behavior, but I'm not a fan. Like, he's not just holding this view, he's expressing displeasure that you would even mention the topic given that he holds this view. That's a weirdly controlling reaction.

1-Okay. Just wanted to make sure I wasn't being unreasonable in being irked. It's a minor thing, really-I'm pretty much over it by now.

2-Eeyup.

3-We've had some pretty strong disagreements that have made our friendship rocky in the past, and that's what he's trying to avoid.

[2D8HP]

Can my rant be "why is it that this forum I used to love has been ruined by .....


The idea that this forum has been "ruined by".......
:eek:
:frown:
Please just no.
Let's just argue about things like Dungeons & Dragons, My Little Pony, and Pokemon.
Pretty please?
https://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/en/thumb/a/a6/Pok%C3%A9mon_Pikachu_art.png/200px-Pok%C3%A9mon_Pikachu_art.png

[Illven]

:eek:
:frown:
Please just no.
Let's just argue about things like Dungeons & Dragons, My Little Pony, and Pokemon.
Pretty please?
https://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/en/thumb/a/a6/Pok%C3%A9mon_Pikachu_art.png/200px-Pok%C3%A9mon_Pikachu_art.png

Pikachu is a USELESS PIECE OF ****!

How about we talk about God! Or The pokemon that's greater then God!

Arceus, and Mega Rayquaza for those at home. :smalltongue:

[AvatarVecna]

Let's just argue about things like Dungeons & Dragons, My Little Pony, and Pokemon.

Of the three, I think we all know which one is clearly the worst.

[JNAProductions]

Of the three, I think we all know which one is clearly the worst.

Pocket Monsters... Which is really saying something, since I like Pokemon! It's just that all three are pretty dang awesome.

[DataNinja]

Of the three, I think we all know which one is clearly the worst.


Pocket Monsters... Which is really saying something, since I like Pokemon! It's just that all three are pretty dang awesome.

Well, I've got a link to a mix of two of them in my sig. And I know that at least one person has brewed up some Pony variants to go in it, so, there you go. Why choose? :smalltongue:

Confound it! Who brought civility into this rant thread?

[Kid Jake]

Well now I want to make a game where preteens force sentient ponies to do battle in their backyards for their amusement.

[DJ Yung Crunk]

Moff Chumley used to have a thread that was this exactly, I think.
All, the old days.

SIGHS WISTFULLY

Oh, dang, I remember him! Man, good times.

[Misery Esquire]

Aha!

At which I can successfully vent my spleen and thereby become a calmer person by reducing the many complaints I would like to wish to register with life itself for review and arbitration!

...Wait, no. I'm already calm. I just like the idea of writing long dissertations about minor things that bother me. Just the idea of it, though. I wouldn't actually enjoy writing them for someone to read. It would damage my secret standing.

Maybe this rant is that I don't have the drive to rant correctly. But then, isn't a rant usually just an angry digression from a civilized conversation? Though, I suppose it has been seeing use as a impassioned speech filled with bile and rhetoric. Not to say that rhetoric is a problem, of course. And bile is best left in the stomach. Not that anyone means the physical acidic bile when that say that. It is merely a curious expression to do with something that you feel brings that effect; the taste of sick to the back of your throat. Which is thoroughly unpleasant and explains why few people ever refer to any part of their own rants as "bile".

... I'm not entirely sure where I'm going with this. And I can pretend that's irritating. Grr & such.

[Astrella]

Aha!

At which I can successfully vent my spleen and thereby become a calmer person by reducing the many complaints I would like to wish to register with life itself for review and arbitration!

...Wait, no. I'm already calm. I just like the idea of writing long dissertations about minor things that bother me. Just the idea of it, though. I wouldn't actually enjoy writing them for someone to read. It would damage my secret standing.

Maybe this rant is that I don't have the drive to rant correctly. But then, isn't a rant usually just an angry digression from a civilized conversation? Though, I suppose it has been seeing use as a impassioned speech filled with bile and rhetoric. Not to say that rhetoric is a problem, of course. And bile is best left in the stomach. Not that anyone means the physical acidic bile when that say that. It is merely a curious expression to do with something that you feel brings that effect; the taste of sick to the back of your throat. Which is thoroughly unpleasant and explains why few people ever refer to any part of their own rants as "bile".

... I'm not entirely sure where I'm going with this. And I can pretend that's irritating. Grr & such.

Meta-rant! :D

[Teddy]

Also, if y'all don't mind, I've got a minor rant. Tis about a friend of mine-and I'll preface this by saying he's a good guy, very kind, but he kinda irked me as of late.

We were driving to a Games Workshop for fun times, and we were talking about Giant in the Playground. He said he didn't like internet arguments, since nothing ever gets resolved and no one changes their minds. I agreed with him... For the most part. I think this forum has a surprising amount of people who actually DO listen and change their minds, or at least are open to new viewpoints.

Anyway, afterwards, we got on the topic of optimization, and I brought up the 3E lead hat trick. He said that felt like metagaming and he'd never allow it, and that it felt very artificial. I said that it made perfect sense in setting, especially for a 20+ Int Wizard, but he didn't really accept that, and followed it up by saying "No matter how many examples you bring up, you're not going to change my mind, so just stop talking about it."

Am I unreasonable to be a little irked at the hypocrisy?

Is it really hypocrisy, though? Saying that you don't like discussions where noone is willing to change their viewpoint does not mean that condemn refusals to change your mind, only that you don't find such discussions fun. Sure, saying outright that you aren't going to change your opinion no matter what may be a bit hypocritical, but people are prone to exaggeration as a part of natural speech, and you have to consider whether he really meant it or not.

Also, note that he did it to shut the discussion down. As far as I read it, you didn't give him any good enough arguments for him to consider changing his mind, and he didn't enjoy the discussion, so he stopped it. Sure, "Can we just cut this short, I'm not having fun" would be less hypocritical, but if you want him to say so, try to say so next time this happens. http://i.imgur.com/jLvmsd9.png

[veti]

We were driving to a Games Workshop for fun times, and we were talking about Giant in the Playground. He said he didn't like internet arguments, since nothing ever gets resolved and no one changes their minds. I agreed with him... For the most part. I think this forum has a surprising amount of people who actually DO listen and change their minds, or at least are open to new viewpoints.

Anyway, afterwards, we got on the topic of optimization, and I brought up the 3E lead hat trick. He said that felt like metagaming and he'd never allow it, and that it felt very artificial. I said that it made perfect sense in setting, especially for a 20+ Int Wizard, but he didn't really accept that, and followed it up by saying "No matter how many examples you bring up, you're not going to change my mind, so just stop talking about it."

Am I unreasonable to be a little irked at the hypocrisy?

Actually, I don't think that was hypocrisy.
Item 1: he doesn't enjoy arguments where nothing gets resolved and no-one changes their minds
Item 2: he doesn't want to participate in an argument where he's not prepared to change his mind.

These two points are perfectly consistent with one another. What would be hypocritical would be if he did enter a vigorous debate with you, on a topic on which he wasn't willing to be persuaded.


This is the big one. We were, still same day, at lunch with a third friend. The third friend brought up transgenderism, just as a minor detail (some guy who starred in a dumb youtube video is now a girl-didn't see the video, and which video isn't really relevant). After lunch, he said he was surprised that I had brought it up, since I knew his views on it. I actually did not, and he said that he thinks that man and woman were made in god's image, and that god didn't make mistakes. This kinda upset me, since I have transgender friends (and the thing is, so does he) and he's basically saying that they're all wrong. It just... I dunno. Like I prefaced this with, he's a nice guy, and he wouldn't hurt anyone or even really judge anyone-but his view just seems sort of wrong to me.

Also, if anyone thinks this is too religious for the forum, just let me know and I'll remove this-I don't THINK it's too religious, but I'd rather be safe than sorry.

Sorry, I think there's a small inconsistency in your story here. You say your friend brought up the topic, but your other friend said you brought it up. Is that what you meant when you said "I actually did not", or did you mean you didn't know his views?

Either way, whenever religion comes up, you need to make allowances for the fact that the believer is speaking a completely different language from the non-believer. The words sound the same, but their meanings are changed in ways that make the whole discussion a minefield. Which probably has a lot to do with why the whole topic is banned from here. Only you can decide whether you're willing to let a thing like that spoil your friendship - depends how much you value it, I guess.

[2D8HP]

Meta-rant! :D
Dang those blasted Meta's to heck!
:furious:

[Bobbybobby99]

You know, this is probably the least coherent thread I've ever seen here.

It's a refreshing change of pace, except for the giant angry faces and vaguely sexist remarks.

[AvatarVecna]

You know, this is probably the least coherent thread I've ever seen here.

It's a refreshing change of pace, except for the giant angry faces and vaguely sexist remarks.

What does your opinion about classic movies say about how sexist you really are? Take this quiz to find out!

Disclaimer: All quizzes return result of "Super-sexist"

[JNAProductions]

Actually, I don't think that was hypocrisy.
Item 1: he doesn't enjoy arguments where nothing gets resolved and no-one changes their minds
Item 2: he doesn't want to participate in an argument where he's not prepared to change his mind.

These two points are perfectly consistent with one another. What would be hypocritical would be if he did enter a vigorous debate with you, on a topic on which he wasn't willing to be persuaded.



Sorry, I think there's a small inconsistency in your story here. You say your friend brought up the topic, but your other friend said you brought it up. Is that what you meant when you said "I actually did not", or did you mean you didn't know his views?

Either way, whenever religion comes up, you need to make allowances for the fact that the believer is speaking a completely different language from the non-believer. The words sound the same, but their meanings are changed in ways that make the whole discussion a minefield. Which probably has a lot to do with why the whole topic is banned from here. Only you can decide whether you're willing to let a thing like that spoil your friendship - depends how much you value it, I guess.

Alright, I guess that's legitimate for the first thing. Hadn't really thought of it that way.

For the third bit, it was brought up by the third friend, but I was the one who talked more at length about it.

[DJ Yung Crunk]

What does your opinion about classic movies say about how sexist you really are? Take this quiz to find out!

Disclaimer: All quizzes return result of "Super-sexist"

I only read up to "super-sex"

How about a link eh, champ?

[Crimmy]

It isn't. It stands for Men's Rights Activists. A group comparable to internet feminists in so far as they both have wildly rabid bands of members who...well let's just say if you gave them enemas they could be buried in matchbooks. The idea that this forum has been "ruined by" said group is...laughable.

Comparable because they have rabid members.
Sure.
I mean, you're comparable to a piece of dog poop in that you both exist in the universe. We're comparable to a spoon in that we're made of matter. That makes sense.

In a serious rant, I get irked that people compare two groups that push for completely different idea(l)s: One which advocates for equality and quality of life for both men and women in that a change in the way the world works right now can and does damage and handicaps both women and men.
The other which whines about how you can't rape a woman without being insulted, or that you can't stalk one, be a creep and then complain aout how she doesn't want to tell you herself she's married or in a relationship.

[Misery Esquire]

Dang those blasted Meta's to heck!
:furious:

I shall not be danged! Or darned! Darning is for socks! And I am not a sock!

I mean, as far as I know at least. Maybe the body is philosophically a sock for the brain, which is the foot. But that implies that your functions are based on... Toes? And that there's a leg somewhere.

And some people think you shouldn't have socks before marriage anyway but I suspect they're from somewhere warm and dry, because I would freeze my toes off in winter up here. And my shoes would be pretty terrible smelling. And honestly boots would be a trial to wear.

...It is socks, isn't it?
Lovely socks.

[eggynack]

I feel like this thread lacks the essence of ranting. There was that rant about rants awhile back, but it felt like it was missing something. Meaning, or purpose, or whatnot. I think you really have to keep making new points throughout the thing, y'know? And still have it be super long. That said, here's my shot at it.

***

I hate The Imitation Game. It is, quite possibly, my least favorite film of all time, and I've seen some movies that I really hate. It's not because the movie wasn't somewhat enjoyable. Because it was. However, the film has a few fundamental problems which are, while perhaps excusable on their own, utterly deplorable in combination. Or, rather, it may be those issues in combination with the fact that it got an Oscar nomination. After all, there's nothing like widespread acclaim to really get your hate brewing. My hatred is to the point where any topic even reasonably close to The Imitation Game, y'know, other biopics, similar kinds of issues, gets me going off on the movie's stupidity.

So, first issue, the movie is incredibly formulaic. Everything in it, perhaps correctly given the title, feels like a rote imitation of some other work, with no real originality whatsoever. You have the whole thing where the guy bucks the system and is undermined by his superiors, the thing with the scrappy team coming together, and, fittingly for the actor, the main character reads more as Sherlock Holmes than as any sort of real person. They even have that idiotic phrase they keep repeating throughout the movie, which is so bad that it makes the movie almost feel like a parody of itself. With remarkably few exceptions, I struggle to think of a scene or section of that movie that comes off as the least bit original. I guess the part where they started using the information was halfway original, but even that wasn't really all that original. I feel like I could have just watched a bunch of other biopics and gotten the same overall experience.

The second issue, because being unoriginal isn't exactly a problem on its own, is that the movie isn't that good of an example of the thing it's copying. The movie isn't awful at doing the cliche biopic, but we're not working with greatness here. The movie frequently gets overly treacly, and is, partially because of the third issue, really difficult to believe. To that latter point, what the hell were these characters doing before Turing was on the scene, and even after he came around? Was their whole plan seriously to manually break individual codes, never even really examining what the codes were like, before inexplicably giving up when the individual codes became irrelevant to the war effort? Was the upper brass seriously so into that inane plan that they intended to shut Turing's machine down? And how, exactly, was the computer doing anything at all before they found some commonality between messages to base things on? What was it even doing before that point? Some of these issues were easily noticed while the movie was going on, some I could only put my finger on afterwards, but all made the movie feel fundamentally off. Like, I wasn't taking perfect note of the issue with the computer's earlier workings, but that issue did make the logic behind that part of the movie hard to get my head around.

And that segues quite neatly into the third issue. The movie wasn't accurate at all. Turing was gregarious, not possessed of some semi-ambiguous mental disorder. Turing's homosexuality was well known among his friends, not completely hidden away. And, of course, no element of the technological aspect was even remotely accurate, to the point where it's not worth going too far into the details. Suffice to say that this was not the first machine of its kind at all, that everyone was on board with the old timey computer, and that the main fight was in getting the thing to work right, rather than in getting people convinced that this was the way to break Enigma. The film's issues with accuracy are bad enough that you'd be better off reading a single paragraph about the man if you want any kind of information about him. Anything beyond that paragraph in the movie actually removes your knowledge about the events in question, by feeding you lies.

As with the first two issues, this third issue isnt that bad on its own. Plenty of biopics, most, really, are filled with inaccuracies like these. Maybe not to the same degree, where the essence of the character and his doings is stripped away along with the usual details and facts, but a movie with all those accuracy problems doesn't necessarily have to be awful. The problem is that they didn't do anything good with their crazy reality warping powers. They didn't change this story into something original, and they didn't change it into something great. They changed it into something wholly derivative and average. The true tragedy of The Imitation Game is that the actual story is more interesting. They stripped away all the elements that don't fit into our cookie cutter narrative about how these things happen, and how things were then, and left us with an utterly banal film. They reduced Turing to this... this characiture of a great man. Way I figure it, when you make a biopic, you can either get the movie right, or you can get the man/events right, and this movie did neither. It had nothing to say except for stupid lies, and that is why it is my most hated movie.

***

Yeah, see, that's how you get ranting done. Tons of words, pretty solid new idea density, and while there's room to object to the claims, it's not like those claims are objectionable on a basic level. It's the difference between, "The Imitation Game sucks, and you should hate it," and, "The Imitation Game sucks cause it's about homosexuality or something else that's stupid, and you're all wrong for not hating it on that basis." There's a difference between ranting and trolling, y'know?

[Bobbybobby99]

You see, that's a proper rant.

[grimbold]

Moff Chumley used to have a thread that was this exactly, I think.
All, the old days.

SIGHS WISTFULLY
Would you believe we didn't get to hang last time I toured near him because he had WORK? :smalltongue:

I think I get to see him in September and the playground will explode in nostalgia

[2D8HP]

...It is socks, isn't it?
Lovely socks.That post made me laugh so hard I had tears.
DARN YOU!

[Illven]

Dang those blasted Meta's to heck!
:furious:

Fox only, No items, Final destination!

[Velaryon]

Not sure if this is ranty enough, but I'm rather pissed off at something that happened today.

My tablet (a Google Nexus 7) broke on me today. I take it pretty much everywhere (perhaps not a great idea) and it's small enough to fit in my pocket - in fact, more than one person has asked whether that was my phone.

Anyway, I had my hands full on my way out of work this afternoon, so I put the tablet in my pocket, got to my car, put my stuff inside, and sat down. Normally I would get my tablet out of my pocket first, because it does fit but it's not a comfortable fit when sitting down. However, I didn't think about it and I sat... and I heard a crack.

Without ever leaving my pocket, my tablet caught on the rim of my door frame and cracked. The entire lower half of the screen is spiderwebbed with cracks. You'd think I smashed it with a baseball bat with how bad it was.

The damn thing is 2 years old, which isn't old at all but it's old enough to be out of any kind of warranty. I didn't have it in a case, but I've always been careful not to drop it. Now it's cracked so badly that the touch screen doesn't work at all. I didn't have any music or books on there, but I had a fair amount of pictures and saved game data. I also had two chat apps that I use to speak with people I don't have any other way to contact, which means I'm (temporarily at least) unable to reach them.

I bought a new tablet after work, which was an expense I can afford but wasn't planning on. Unfortunately because I'm at my other job tonight, I don't have the time to finish reinstalling everything.

So yeah, not having a great day.

[TurboGhast]

My college orientation required me to listen to a comedian for no logical reason. It wasn't even a lure to get people to go to the actual orientation section, because there was no orientation information here, just an hour of comedy that completely fell flat to me. The majority of his comedy was (non D&D) race-based jokes, which require a decent amount of buy-in to be humorous without crossing the line. Needless to say, I cringed at his jokes despite only overhearing them when browsing the internet on my phone. The entirety of this comedy event in the middle of an orientation made no sense.

[Lhurgyof]

Frankly, that's the most idiotic advice possible in this situation.

-other words-

You're assuming that the advice was sincere, which it wasn't. I though the :smalltongue: face was enough to convey my sarcasm, but I guess some people are just bad at picking up[ on some things.


Hey look, this was good advice at first, and terrible afterwards! :smalltongue::smalltongue::smalltongue:
(Do the faces mean it's better?)

-irrelevant blabber-

-Don't listen to Lhurgyof either. He's apparently the equivalent of the facebbok :V movement (the smilies make it funny and smart!)

Hey, if he's dumb enough to take the advice, that's not my fault. Well, maybe it is. But it'd still be pretty funny.


Doesn't mean you can't try. It's certainly not something I would do, but my best friend just became a homewrecker and is dating a married woman with kids who was unhappy in her relationship.

[grimbold]

Doesn't mean you can't try. It's certainly not something I would do, but my best friend just became a homewrecker and is dating a married woman with kids who was unhappy in her relationship.

I...
Is this whole thread like some sort of performance art piece?

[Kid Jake]

I...
Is this whole thread like some sort of performance art piece?

Nah, you can tell because people are paying attention to it. :smallbiggrin:

[grimbold]

Nah, you can tell because people are paying attention to it. :smallbiggrin:

I wish I could sig context...

[Lethologica]

I wish I could sig context...
You can have quote within quote and that'd probably be enough context for the joke.

[MorgromTheOrc]

Since things seem a bit sour here, and because of some political mentions and questionable statements that I think will likely get the thread shut down, I'm going to go ahead and do a long rant about my life, and various dishonesty, double standards, and hypocrisy I've been witness to. I'll warn that I do technically have Aspergers, and I do understand that any social conflicts are likely my fault, but since it's a rant thread I'll share anyway. Just be warned.

On double standards and hypocrisy I'll first tell about an argument I had a few years ago, and cut all political or religious references out of it. Basically there was a girl I had been friends with for years who came to me to complain about something in her life, as she had many times before to similar results as will happen this time, except that this time I had more confidence and spoke up. Her complaint was about people in general and specific ones at our school that assumed too much about her actions and beliefs from her interests and lifestyle. As usual I told her not to worry about what they think, and the classic, "If you and the people important to you know they're wrong, that's all that matters." And I said that I understood where she was coming from, and share(what I know to be from being her friend) her actual beliefs, and as usual she said thank you but that I couldn't possibly share the same beliefs, I must hold such and such political and religious beliefs and am wrong because I love science and my parents made decent money(not rich but upper middle class). For the first time though I told her that she was being hypocritical assuming that I couldn't hold the same beliefs because my interests and lifestyle was different from hers. She said it wasn't the same thing because all people who love science or have a stable home life hold such and such beliefs, and of course when I tried to explain that she was holding a double standard she tried to claim that double standards don't exist.

Events almost exactly like that have played out countless times in my life. Like when someone would complain in science class that they aren't taken seriously because of their beliefs, and I later try to converse with them, they will either claim I must be looking down on them, or that I'm too closed minded to talk to them despite them knowing nothing about me aside from that I love science. The closed minded thing really irks me, I always try to explain that just because someone uses logic and reasoning doesn't mean they can't think for themselves, or that they shut away anything not perfectly objective. I always had a saying relating to Batman that went something like, "Even though Batman is a rational man who didn't grow up believing in vampires, if there is anything that suggests there might be vampire attacks going on in Gotham you know he would be carrying some garlic in his utility belt." Somehow even people who know me, and just got done having a conversation with me where I said I'd be more than willing to take on some weird Orochimaru level transhumanist stuff, will say that I must be closed minded because of my scientific interest and family life. I mean I don't even want to imagine what more open minded than the guy who happily plays a lifeshaper in D&D and calls himself a flesh savant looks like. And I think it's because they don't mean, "open minded", they mean, "Just like me." And that gets me into honesty.

There are a lot of minor things people are consistently dishonest about, I'm especially bothered by the things that they know everyone else knows they're being dishonest about. Like when I used to work at McDonald's some people would say they want their burger well done, and either they don't know what well done means, or they're covering up the fact that they want their burger burnt, all McDonald's burgers are well done, they have to be to be safely and fully cooked or else you'd get sick. If you want a burnt burger just say it don't mislead and try to cover it up because burnt sounds weird. Next, while I know you might not believe it because even terrible people have some people attracted to them, I've been rejected by every girl I've ever asked out in my entire life, I've never had an actual romantic relationship and despite me only trying with girls I was close with it definitely is not for lack of trying(I couldn't even think of what the actual number is at this point), I have had false waiting in the wings relationships which I'll mention later, and I was kissed once because a girl who didn't know me thought that I was dark and mysterious, but her interest disintegrated when she found out it was just because I'm not a very expressive person. Now unlike many others I know full well they are not at fault for not liking me, I'm not very physically attractive, and I can't win people over mentally either because anyone I share with is scared off by the almost eldritch nature of my inner thoughts or simply thinks I'm lying to them(even my family shoos away any talk of my actual plans or thoughts, and I have to do the old, "Yes I want to get married and have kids."). So I know it's my fault for misunderstanding something or holding ridiculous hopes but I just wish they'd be honest and say that they aren't attracted to me instead of using lines so tired I don't have to recite them for you to know what I mean. When it's because they don't want to hurt my feelings I understand but it does more harm than good, but despite my social lacking I can read eyes very well and I can tell by the looks of disgust and worry that they're usually just saying them so they don't look like a mean person.

If people would just be more honest the world would run much smoother. it makes me think of the annoying trope in entertainment media where conflict occurs just because of some ridiculous misunderstanding due to dishonesty(seriously be less lazy writers, it's not that hard to write characters with legitimate philosophical differences). I've found that despite my lack of social ability I can often make a good diplomat simply because I honestly convey my thoughts and intentions to people rather than attack them or lie about what I want, and people respond very well to logical conversation. Back to waiting in the wings relationships, many girls in my life have taken the opportunity to directly lie about their interest in me so that they could keep me around as backup, or make me do something, or get close to someone I know. It's the same as people who pretend to want to be friends with someone so that that person will buy them things or do them favours. I've never desired to use someone or be dishonest in this way and I can't comprehend how anyone could. Like when a girl I talked to a few years ago claimed to have the same interests as me and support my plans in life, after we had gotten close and she had gotten me to spend considerable money on her she claimed that she just thought I was joking and she laughed about it all night back then, and she proceeded to say that my thoughts were disgusting and weird, and then never spoke to me again. Even if she did think I was joking and was generally honest, I many times seriously discussed it with her and she should have been honest about her feelings on it.

Now I in no way think this is typical of most people, and it might be just something about Ohio, but I know at least around here it is common enough that someone like me can fall prey to dishonesty like this on an almost monthly basis. But again I have no social sense, so I always try to entertain the thought that it's just my fault and I don't understand it. And I don't blame people for their thoughts, just wish that they could be more honest and understanding of different views, maybe implement some introspection into their lives.

[Teddy]

[...]

There are a lot of minor things people are consistently dishonest about, I'm especially bothered by the things that they know everyone else knows they're being dishonest about. Like when I used to work at McDonald's some people would say they want their burger well done, and either they don't know what well done means, or they're covering up the fact that they want their burger burnt, all McDonald's burgers are well done, they have to be to be safely and fully cooked or else you'd get sick. If you want a burnt burger just say it don't mislead and try to cover it up because burnt sounds weird. Next, while I know you might not believe it because even terrible people have some people attracted to them, I've been rejected by every girl I've ever asked out in my entire life, I've never had an actual romantic relationship and despite me only trying with girls I was close with it definitely is not for lack of trying(I couldn't even think of what the actual number is at this point), I have had false waiting in the wings relationships which I'll mention later, and I was kissed once because a girl who didn't know me thought that I was dark and mysterious, but her interest disintegrated when she found out it was just because I'm not a very expressive person. Now unlike many others I know full well they are not at fault for not liking me, I'm not very physically attractive, and I can't win people over mentally either because anyone I share with is scared off by the almost eldritch nature of my inner thoughts or simply thinks I'm lying to them(even my family shoos away any talk of my actual plans or thoughts, and I have to do the old, "Yes I want to get married and have kids."). So I know it's my fault for misunderstanding something or holding ridiculous hopes but I just wish they'd be honest and say that they aren't attracted to me instead of using lines so tired I don't have to recite them for you to know what I mean. When it's because they don't want to hurt my feelings I understand but it does more harm than good, but despite my social lacking I can read eyes very well and I can tell by the looks of disgust and worry that they're usually just saying them so they don't look like a mean person.

If people would just be more honest the world would run much smoother. it makes me think of the annoying trope in entertainment media where conflict occurs just because of some ridiculous misunderstanding due to dishonesty(seriously be less lazy writers, it's not that hard to write characters with legitimate philosophical differences). I've found that despite my lack of social ability I can often make a good diplomat simply because I honestly convey my thoughts and intentions to people rather than attack them or lie about what I want, and people respond very well to logical conversation. Back to waiting in the wings relationships, many girls in my life have taken the opportunity to directly lie about their interest in me so that they could keep me around as backup, or make me do something, or get close to someone I know. It's the same as people who pretend to want to be friends with someone so that that person will buy them things or do them favours. I've never desired to use someone or be dishonest in this way and I can't comprehend how anyone could. Like when a girl I talked to a few years ago claimed to have the same interests as me and support my plans in life, after we had gotten close and she had gotten me to spend considerable money on her she claimed that she just thought I was joking and she laughed about it all night back then, and she proceeded to say that my thoughts were disgusting and weird, and then never spoke to me again. Even if she did think I was joking and was generally honest, I many times seriously discussed it with her and she should have been honest about her feelings on it.

Now I in no way think this is typical of most people, and it might be just something about Ohio, but I know at least around here it is common enough that someone like me can fall prey to dishonesty like this on an almost monthly basis. But again I have no social sense, so I always try to entertain the thought that it's just my fault and I don't understand it. And I don't blame people for their thoughts, just wish that they could be more honest and understanding of different views, maybe implement some introspection into their lives.

It's an interesting question, why are people overall so fond of littering their natural speech with small dishonesties? I've never heard anyone do a scientific discourse on it, so I'm left with speculation, but speculation is fun, so here I go.

My first guess is that it's built into our genes as a form of natural teaching method. I.e. in order to learn to distinguish honesty from dishonesty, we have it in our genes to take interest in sarcasm and dishonesty-driven wordplay. This way, the ability to distinguish the intentions behind (rather than within) a statement is passed down from generation to generation through our language.

My second guess is that it's a bonding thing. We humans are naturally attracted to people who understand us, and being able to decipher the true meaning behind a dishonest statement shows such understanding is present in the listener. I believe reference humour work the same way; if you get the reference, you understand there's a hidden meaning to my statement, and we find community in that.

As for true, harmful, cheating-others dishonesty, I'm not sure what drives people who outright abuse others' trust, but also here I think there's something genetic to it. We humans evolved out of extreme scarcity, and scarcity drives conflict as well as cooperation. Just as people who were capable of cooperating were better at securing their own survival, so were people capable of securing advantages from others (without drawing the ire of the group), and I sure know there's a thrill to it when you successfully deceive someone completely and utterly (a lot of games are built around this concept). This causes a very interesting evolutionary battle of virtues which must have had a lot of interesting side effects. Like casual dishonesty as a social mechanism, for example...

[Lethologica]

Humans are built to be social creatures, not truth-tellers. We have to work at the latter. And think about how many of those little lies are about greasing the wheel of social interaction, or projecting a particular image of oneself to one's fellows (or to oneself).

[Teddy]

Humans are built to be social creatures, not truth-tellers. We have to work at the latter. And think about how many of those little lies are about greasing the wheel of social interaction, or projecting a particular image of oneself to one's fellows (or to oneself).

Well, we're definitely built to be truth-tellers too given how uncomfortable many are with lying. After all, dishonesty is a poor foundation to build cooperation upon, people must be able to predict the actions and reactions of their peers to form a society.

[Lethologica]

Well, we're definitely built to be truth-tellers too given how uncomfortable many are with lying. After all, dishonesty is a poor foundation to build cooperation upon, people must be able to predict the actions and reactions of their peers to form a society.
Fair point, but it also supports the basic thesis that the underlying impulse is facilitating social interactions.

[veti]

Truth is overrated. It seemed that MorgromTheOrc was complaining about euphemisms, which are not so much "dishonest" as "evolving language". Context is everything. If everyone knows, and everyone agrees, on what they mean by a "well-done burger", then why would you want to call it anything else? Out of some misguided sense of linguistic precision or purity?

Machiavelli wrote, 500 years ago, that rulers should not be too honest, because if they are transparent about why they do things, it is trivially easy for their enemies - their country's enemies - to manipulate them. And yet people seem to expect their own politicians to tell them "the truth", without ever pausing to consider that their job is to lie. The trick to politics is not to pick an honest candidate, because that candidate would be a disaster in office. It's to pick someone who you think, on balance, will work in the way you want them to, including lying to you.

[JNAProductions]

-snip-

Probably a bit too close to politics for this forum. A good point... But for another forum.

[Teddy]

Machiavelli wrote, 500 years ago [...]

Just because something was written a long time ago doesn't mean it has to be true, you know.

[nyjastul69]

Just because something was written a long time ago doesn't mean it has to be true, you know.

The obverse is true too. Are you trying to make a point of some sort? Both statements are obvious truths.

[Teddy]

The obverse is true too. Are you trying to make a point of some sort? Both statements are obvious truths.

You claim it is an obvious truth that total honesty means you're trivially easy for your opponents to manipulate? I don't, and citing a 500 year old source does not really convince me that I should reconsider that.

[nyjastul69]

You claim it is an obvious truth that total honesty means you're trivially easy for your opponents to manipulate? I don't, and citing a 500 year old source does not really convince me that I should reconsider that.

Not sure why you are hanging the bolded bits on me.

The 500 yo old thing isn't my statement. I made no such citation.

I apologize, I think I was trying to be coy and lost the point in the process. PM me if want further clarification.

[Lethologica]

Truth is overrated. It seemed that MorgromTheOrc was complaining about euphemisms, which are not so much "dishonest" as "evolving language". Context is everything. If everyone knows, and everyone agrees, on what they mean by a "well-done burger", then why would you want to call it anything else? Out of some misguided sense of linguistic precision or purity?
You start out with a claim about the value of honesty, but you end up arguing that honesty isn't the issue to begin with. I agree with you on the latter, and the former is interesting though controversial--I would say that at the very least, predictability and unpredictability both have their advantages, and many people lead more cooperative and less adversarial lives than Renaissance monarchs. That's as far into politics as I'll go.

[golentan]

Okay, here's my rant, and it's my opinion of No Man's Sky.

As someone who hoped this game would live up to the hype, but was cautious enough not to sink cash into it before the reviews were in and I'd seen gameplay footage... It was with a mounting sense of trepidation that I followed the rollout of No Man's Sky. Over and over I'd see footage of the CEO of Hello Games try to walk back expectations for his product: Don't expect multiplayer, don't expect this or that or the other feature... and then next sentence get... baited frankly into promising a whole universe full of special snowflake moons. And then the game is delayed for polishing: not a particularly good sign for a game that's been in development this long. Not a terrible sign, but not a great sign. Except, it was coupled by a lack of pre-release reviews, a whole host of basically gag orders, an embargo on any information about the game proper so that "the experience" will remain intact, despite supposedly every planet being a marvelous wonderland unique in the universe (or galaxy, they kept alternating words).

Day 0. Everyone is gushing about it. Everyone is playing it. And I watch... And it looks like the demo gameplay they'd already released of their CEO playing for about 5-15 minutes. Over. And Over. And Over. The planets are boring single biomes with some cool creatures... that you can't load into your starship and take with you, which is really what I was hoping for in this game (I wanted to build an interstellar zoo). You can only fly a little starfighter: sure there are these massive capital ships and space stations, but you can't influence them, and the inside of the space station has... one guy who you can talk to (sort of, because you don't share a common language, which is actually a cool idea but the implementation... gag). And I look and I say... this is not the game that was alternately promised and walked back. People are gushing about this still, but it seems to be the release of expectation rather than anything cool. Stability issues, framerate issues. Skyboxes rather than dynamic star systems... And as I watch over the next couple of days... the gushing effusions of praise start to dry up, as people notice how small this giant sandbox is.

And the cynic in me says... this is by design. No Man's Sky was made by a team of what, 15 people, and when they showed their demo several years ago, it was instantly covered in praise from people who wanted this game, wanted it desperately. Hell, I was one of them. I said "I wanna keep an eye on this project, and I hope it pays off." But it was covered like a AAA title from a major studio by game media, but it was only a group of 15 people. And I believe, genuinely, that they started out wanting to live up to the hype. They wanted to meet their own promises, they wanted to shatter the expectations of the thousands and then millions of fans. But... the project was too big for them. Possibly too big for anyone. And the CEO just. Kept. Damn. Well. Promising.

Sometime in the last couple of years, they had to realize that while they might not be holding a turd, it was at best a suspiciously shaped lump of clay without a gold nugget in it. They knew they had overpromised. Bitten off more than they could chew, however you want to say it. So what do they do? They're only 15 people.

What it looks like to me is they clamped the lid on press that would put the lie to the massive expectations their fans were building. They very carefully kept the expectation bubble as high as possible to the last. Possible. Second. They had their preorder sales figures, and they had an idea how well preorders translate into 1st week purchases, and they are largely computer scientists: they can do math just fine.

Day 1, No Man's Sky on steam had a quarter million people playing it at the same time. Console versions broke sales records. Let's say... before that first blush of rose had peeled off the glasses, 1.5 million copies sold for about 60 dollars apiece. 90 million dollars split fifteen ways, even after overhead costs, fees, taxes, and management taking a bigger cut still leaves enough money for a person to retire with with some good investments, or start up a new company. Even if the backlash against the game means Hello Games never gets another big release, they could well be set for life.

Not a bad outcome for a developer. If you don't have much integrity.

The Molyneux Effect has exceeded the wildest overpromises of its namesake on this one guys.

[Razade]

Okay, here's my rant, and it's my opinion of No Man's Sky.

As someone who hoped this game would live up to the hype, but was cautious enough not to sink cash into it before the reviews were in and I'd seen gameplay footage... It was with a mounting sense of trepidation that I followed the rollout of No Man's Sky. Over and over I'd see footage of the CEO of Hello Games try to walk back expectations for his product: Don't expect multiplayer, don't expect this or that or the other feature... and then next sentence get... baited frankly into promising a whole universe full of special snowflake moons. And then the game is delayed for polishing: not a particularly good sign for a game that's been in development this long. Not a terrible sign, but not a great sign. Except, it was coupled by a lack of pre-release reviews, a whole host of basically gag orders, an embargo on any information about the game proper so that "the experience" will remain intact, despite supposedly every planet being a marvelous wonderland unique in the universe (or galaxy, they kept alternating words).

Day 0. Everyone is gushing about it. Everyone is playing it. And I watch... And it looks like the demo gameplay they'd already released of their CEO playing for about 5-15 minutes. Over. And Over. And Over. The planets are boring single biomes with some cool creatures... that you can't load into your starship and take with you, which is really what I was hoping for in this game (I wanted to build an interstellar zoo). You can only fly a little starfighter: sure there are these massive capital ships and space stations, but you can't influence them, and the inside of the space station has... one guy who you can talk to (sort of, because you don't share a common language, which is actually a cool idea but the implementation... gag). And I look and I say... this is not the game that was alternately promised and walked back. People are gushing about this still, but it seems to be the release of expectation rather than anything cool. Stability issues, framerate issues. Skyboxes rather than dynamic star systems... And as I watch over the next couple of days... the gushing effusions of praise start to dry up, as people notice how small this giant sandbox is.

And the cynic in me says... this is by design. No Man's Sky was made by a team of what, 15 people, and when they showed their demo several years ago, it was instantly covered in praise from people who wanted this game, wanted it desperately. Hell, I was one of them. I said "I wanna keep an eye on this project, and I hope it pays off." But it was covered like a AAA title from a major studio by game media, but it was only a group of 15 people. And I believe, genuinely, that they started out wanting to live up to the hype. They wanted to meet their own promises, they wanted to shatter the expectations of the thousands and then millions of fans. But... the project was too big for them. Possibly too big for anyone. And the CEO just. Kept. Damn. Well. Promising.

Sometime in the last couple of years, they had to realize that while they might not be holding a turd, it was at best a suspiciously shaped lump of clay without a gold nugget in it. They knew they had overpromised. Bitten off more than they could chew, however you want to say it. So what do they do? They're only 15 people.

What it looks like to me is they clamped the lid on press that would put the lie to the massive expectations their fans were building. They very carefully kept the expectation bubble as high as possible to the last. Possible. Second. They had their preorder sales figures, and they had an idea how well preorders translate into 1st week purchases, and they are largely computer scientists: they can do math just fine.

Day 1, No Man's Sky on steam had a quarter million people playing it at the same time. Console versions broke sales records. Let's say... before that first blush of rose had peeled off the glasses, 1.5 million copies sold for about 60 dollars apiece. 90 million dollars split fifteen ways, even after overhead costs, fees, taxes, and management taking a bigger cut still leaves enough money for a person to retire with with some good investments, or start up a new company. Even if the backlash against the game means Hello Games never gets another big release, they could well be set for life.

Not a bad outcome for a developer. If you don't have much integrity.

The Molyneux Effect has exceeded the wildest overpromises of its namesake on this one guys.

You should add in that the developers actually didn't develop the major codes that do all the permutations within the game but stole it from someone else.

[Teddy]

Not sure why you are hanging the bolded bits on me.

The 500 yo old thing isn't my statement. I made no such citation.

I apologize, I think I was trying to be coy and lost the point in the process. PM me if want further clarification.

Because that is the primary part of veti's post, i.e. the core statement which was driving everything, and the part which I was challenging. I stripped off everything but the first bit since it was starting to delve into politics, and the politics side of it wasn't important for the core statement anyway, so if that meant it lost context, I apologise.

However, if you aren't seconding veti's statements, then what were you even replying to? http://i.imgur.com/kavzNLd.png


You should add in that the developers actually didn't develop the major codes that do all the permutations within the game but stole it from someone else.

Unconfirmed and officially denied, though. Since it would be patent infringement if they did, I'm pretty sure they've worked out something on their own. It would be pretty naive of them if they didn't, and/or pretty costly.

[cobaltstarfire]

There is a rant for this, but it is completely unintelligible gibberish that is running angry ruts through my brain right now.

GG Amazon Fulfillment
(http://sta.sh/025z1w72tzlv)



Go ahead, guess what state the fixture arrived in! I'll give you a hint, there was no packing material in that box, and the LEDs are housed in a glass tube!

[nyjastul69]

Because that is the primary part of veti's post, i.e. the core statement which was driving everything, and the part which I was challenging. I stripped off everything but the first bit since it was starting to delve into politics, and the politics side of it wasn't important for the core statement anyway, so if that meant it lost context, I apologise.

However, if you aren't seconding veti's statements, then what were you even replying to? http://i.imgur.com/kavzNLd.png



Unconfirmed and officially denied, though. Since it would be patent infringement if they did, I'm pretty sure they've worked out something on their own. It would be pretty naive of them if they didn't, and/or pretty costly.

We are going OT here. I don't want to. I will reiterate: If you want clarification please PM me. 'Nuff said.

[Razade]

Unconfirmed and officially denied, though. Since it would be patent infringement if they did, I'm pretty sure they've worked out something on their own. It would be pretty naive of them if they didn't, and/or pretty costly.

It's neither. Neither Hello Games or Sony have said a thing about the use of the formula and it's not unconfirmed. We know the formula that Hello Games is using is one made by the other company. It is confirmed that Hello Games has used the formula. Read some articles on it (http://www.movienewsguide.com/did-no-mans-sky-steal-its-planet-generating-superformula/251607). You're misinformed (http://www.forbes.com/sites/jvchamary/2016/07/27/no-mans-sky-superformula/#f6e085a2e851).

[tomandtish]

Today I play my very first Pokémon Go Gym Battle and I lost by a powerful ******* Goldduck. Goldduck combat points was 2000+ and that Pokémon wipe out all my six weak Pokémon. **** Why did I have battle against a Pokémon on ******* steroids? :furious:

And you reached my personal rant... Pokemon players. Is it too much to ask for that you actually pay attention to where you are going? There was enough people walking into things because they were looking at their cellphones before this game. but NOOOO.. we have to devise another way to make sure humanity takes itself out of the gene pool.

This gets started because there's an area in Round Rock, TX, where the game is very popular and people are playing even late at night. I've had people walk into my car twice (fortunately while I was stopped both times). The second time the guy actually snapped off my side-view mirror, then tried to claim that I hit him. Fortunately one of the cops who is usually in the area saw him actually walk into me, and he's in trouble since he actually made a false report to another officer saying I hit him.

But for the love of Zeus busy traffic areas is not the place to have your head buried in your phone!

[Teddy]

It's neither. Neither Hello Games or Sony have said a thing about the use of the formula and it's not unconfirmed. We know the formula that Hello Games is using is one made by the other company. It is confirmed that Hello Games has used the formula. Read some articles on it (http://www.movienewsguide.com/did-no-mans-sky-steal-its-planet-generating-superformula/251607). You're misinformed (http://www.forbes.com/sites/jvchamary/2016/07/27/no-mans-sky-superformula/#f6e085a2e851).

Your articles disagree with you, they both raise the possibility that just because the superformula was namedropped doesn't mean it's actually in use in the final product. Ergo unconfirmed.

[Razade]

Your articles disagree with you, they both raise the possibility that just because the superformula was namedropped doesn't mean it's actually in use in the final product. Ergo unconfirmed.

They don't.


Per a Business Insider report, Hello Games said they have plugged in the superformula into the game and were amazed by the results. However it was not confirmed whether or not they proceeded with the usage of the formula.

It is confirmed that Hello Games has used the formula.


Murray, sitting before his monitor, typed the Superformula into the terrain of a test planet. He began simply, creating walnut-shaped forms that floated in an infinite grid over a desert. [...] “One of the hardest things for us to do is to create coherent shapes,” he told me as he worked. In order to produce varied landscapes, a formula must be able to cope with a wide range of random information without generating mathematical anomalies that cause glitches. “This sounds ridiculous, but it is hard to find a formula that you can rely on,” he said. The Superformula appeared to be reliable.

Another point. Hello Games has used the formula. That's not unconfirmed.


Meanwhile, the The New Yorker article stated that the Superformula used 120 lines of code — a specific detail that an experienced writer is unlikely to misinterpret. Murray probably used the formula at some point, otherwise he’s implying that the journalist fabricated a large part of a story, which is a serious accusation.


Those 120 lines of code were part of the formula.

Again, you're misinformed.

[Teddy]

They don't.

[...]

It is confirmed that Hello Games has used the formula.

[...]

Another point. Hello Games has used the formula. That's not unconfirmed.

[...]

Those 120 lines of code were part of the formula.

Again, you're misinformed.

Whether Hello Games have experimented with the Superformula or not is an uninteresting question, you can't patent experimentation on a formula. What's interesting is whether the Superfomula still remains inside the game or if they replaced it with something of their own design, only having used the Superformula for inspiration. Let's shift the emphasis of your first extract:


Per a Business Insider report, Hello Games said they have plugged in the superformula into the game and were amazed by the results. However it was not confirmed whether or not they proceeded with the usage of the formula.

This is the point I'm arguing. It is unconfirmed whether they still use the formula or not. If they didn't ship it with the commercialised product, they haven't done anything wrong.

[Bartmanhomer]

Verizon and Samsung sucks! On Friday night, My phone was not working because the SID card need to be re-insert it. I try it so many times and it didn't work. So i went to my brother the next morning he tried to fix it but it didn't work. So anyway I went to the Verizon store at West 80th Street to see if they give me a free SID card. So they did and it still didn't work. The manager told me that the phone is broke. I ask him can he fix it and he said no. I didn't get insurance because I thought that I didn't need it. So anyway that night I told my brother about the phone situation and he figure why my phone wasn't working. He said the tooth of the SID card is broke. So I don't have a phone at all. So I have to wait for next month to get a new phone. My brother is going to help me with that. S **** Verizon and Samsung for creating such crappy phones! :furious:

[Elenna]

Don't know if this is really a rant, but I need to grumble to someone about this and my sister is asleep...

So a few weeks ago I did a midterm. And I figured it went reasonably okay, probably got 70%, hopefully 80%.
Then today I got the automated email my university sends out if the teacher changes your grade on the website.
...It said I got 39.5% on the midterm. :smalleek:

Needless to say I kind of freaked out.
I clicked rather numbly on the link to the website and saw... that I actually got 39.5/50.
Which is in fact very much not 39.5%. It is, actually, 79%, a mark I am much happier with.

So nothing bad really happened in the end, which is why I said this wasn't really a rant. But seriously, way to nearly give me a heart attack. :smallmad:

(Also, now I keep worrying that somehow I actually did get 39.5%, which is not helping me concentrate on the other work I should be doing).

[DracoknightZero]

Lets see what to rant about today? There is a lot to rant about these days if you are not living under a rock and by the elements i wish i was! Though like 90% of the stuff i want to rant about is most likely under the forum rules of "Stay off" to make sure one doesnt invite a flamewar of the internet police, moral free fighters, keyboard warriors and other riff-raff that have so little to do in their life that they take offense for the sake of others.

So how about that? A rant about ranting! Hell! There was a time where you actually could have opinions and rant about something without you having to pick a damn side, how politics have infulenced into the social norm of speech and opinions are sickening and delving deeper into that end would still be a "no no" in the sake of the forum rules. Its ruled off the forum for the very reason i am ranting about!

Are people so stuck up in their line of "pack mentallity" that they literally cannot see that there is a neutral side in all of this? Cant anyone see that there is actually possible and viable to criticize both sides without being branded as a supporter of the other or some 3rd party bull?

So in the wake of the current state of the internet and the modern world all i can do is to rant in terms so vague that i dont point fingers, and so board that it could be anyone, so mild mannered i could rant in a kindergarden, and so light that i could carry nitroglyserin.

Between all of the weird fantatics out in the world i stand here trying to be the true neutral... but in the end "neutral" is just another term for "You against everyone".

[Thundercracker]

I can't stand it when people on the street are walking all slow because they're on their phones, taking up the whole width so I can't get around them. Or when they're on their phones heading the opposite direction and they veer right in front of me. It's like watch where you're going dumbass!

Or parents who wait on line for a full 15 minutes at McDonald's and get up to the front and _then_ ask the kid what he wants. Drives me crazy. What were you doing the last 15 minutes???

People who get to the top of the escalator and stop and stand there looking around trying to decide where to go drive me nuts too. People are trying to get off the escalator, move!

[Bartmanhomer]

Today at my job. It's was 2:29 PM. I was about to clocked out at 2:30 PM right until a surprised fire drill show up. Darn it. Why did a surprise fire drill have to show up at the wrong time. Why man why?! :furious:

[JNAProductions]

Today at my job. It's was 2:29 PM. I was about to clocked out at 2:30 PM right until a surprised fire drill show up. Darn it. Why did a surprise fire drill have to show up at the wrong time. Why man why?! :furious:

Because your company has a vested interest in keeping you safe, and fire drills are an important part of that?

[Bartmanhomer]

Because your company has a vested interest in keeping you safe, and fire drills are an important part of that?

I understand that. But why can they at least make it random by a much earlier time? :mad:

[JeenLeen]

I understand that. But why can they at least make it random by a much earlier time? :mad:

Would you have gotten in trouble if you waited a few seconds and clocked out at 2:30 before leaving?
At least where I work, the fire drills are such that nobody would care if I waited a bit to pack up my suitcase before heading out. I reckon most places would be comparable unless they are really safety-strict.

I also chuckled at the thought of "random by a much earlier time", since the idea of a random fire drill would mean they don't choose the time. In practice, I imagine the fire drill was not actually at a random time -- just an unknown time for the workers -- so likely someone picked that time. That being the case, they probably did pick a bad time if they knew a shift ends around 2:30 and you have a fairly legitimate complaint that the drill happened at that time. (Also sounds incredibly unfair for anyone who was supposed to clock in at 2:30, if this means they have to wait outside until the drill ends and thus don't get paid for the time period between 2:30 and when they actually clock in.)

[Roland St. Jude]

Sheriff: Thread closed due to thread necromancy.

It probably should have been closed the first time to avert inevitable disaster. While not itself a rules violations, consolidated rant threads aren't really workable here. For one thing, they violate the one topic per thread concept. For another, they usually just devolve into a rules-violating cesspool of anger. Please take your random banter to the current random banter thread, be it cheery, ranty, or something in between.