erin

I don’t know if the format really applies. Complaining about one corporation stealing your data while using another’s product that does the same seems a bit pointless, especially when there are cheaper, better alternatives. The putting a stick through your own bike tire format seems more appropriate.

Committee vote

Andor was awesome. Considering that the fighters in Star Wars do aerodynamic flight and sound is not just added for effect but audible in universe, I’ve always subscribed to the head canon that in the Star Wars universe, space is a gas of some sort. We also see people in space that die of suffocation, not pressure shock. The name S-foils also implies a similar purpose to airfoils, but the canon isn’t even consistent on that. Some TIE models explicitly use their S-foils aerodynamically in atmosphere, but other ships are ambiguous.

High effort troll, though insulting people’s intelligence while sticking your head in the sand like an ostrich is certainly a strategy. Good luck with that and your fascinating approach to discourse.

Mission failed. Try responding to my longer message on its merits, instead of dismissing anything that causes cognitive dissonance.

Is this the one response you have to everything that challenges you? Imagine if you addressed the points being made instead of implying that the reason you’re incomprehensible is the reader’s competence, instead of your bizarrely antisocial comments.

How often is gut-feeling actually just bias and/or bigotry under the surface though? I feel like we shouldn’t use those gut feelings to make judgements, ever, without examining exactly why we’re having that response. The suspect might just be socially awkward or neurodivergent and that gut-feeling is actually just unexamined prejudice.

What on earth are you on about? I have no interest in being your friend or influencing you. I’m having a good time making fun of a troll acting ridiculous.

You seem like an insane person. Imagine a hypothetical community that has a bunch of positive and uplifting content, but about 10% of posts are just making fun of trans people, or immigrants, or supporting Nazis, or what have you. Someone calls the community moderator on that content, and they go, “Read again. Slowly. Look at all these positive posts you’re IGNORING.”

Do you not understand how online communication works? This person was not referring to those other posts, so you bringing them up and acting all self-righteous about it just seems kinda silly and ridiculous. It’s like pure rage bait behavior, but it seems like you actually believe it. They don’t have any issue with those posts, didn’t bring them up, and they don’t excuse the harmful content you’re hosting. I don’t understand why you think the existence of positive posts makes the negative ones okay, or why you have a bizarre expectation that they have to weigh in the non-hateful content when judging the hateful.

“This user just posted Nazi apologia, but they have a different post supporting gay marriage so it must be okay!” This is what you sound like.

Try using a bigger screen, or moving your screen further from your face. When moving your focus off the dot, move it to the closest part of the image and then move from there. It can help to align a feature in your periphery before moving to it.

That wouldn’t be crossing. Crossing is when you focus your eyes in front of the image. Wall-eyed is where you unfocus your eyes behind the image. Trying to look at your nose is crossing. The way you look at most magic eye images is wall-eyed.

I don’t think so. When I cross my eyes, it looks correct. Wall-eyed viewing makes it look like a hole. Crossing your eyes makes them go inward. Wall-eyed makes them go parallel. They’re created specifically for crossing eyes.

Oh, I wasn’t complaining about any of those things. I think they’re awesome. X-Wings and TIE fighters are definitely not using their S-foils for reentry gliding though. I’m a huge Star Wars fan. I think it requires a level of suspension of belief to engage in the storytelling, because it’s not supposed to be at all realistic. There is also plenty of Star Wars media that is definitely not for kids or fits closer into sci-fi, but even Andor, the most sci-fi of the Star Wars media I’ve watched, was definitely still leaning on its fantasy roots.

I don’t think a defense of the most-hated parts of the prequels is a great argument. This comes across as George Lucas misreading his audience and trying to defend a product that missed the mark for most of his serious fans.

SW is for children is not a great take. It’s just not sci-fi, and shouldn’t be judged as such. It’s a space fantasy, and it leans into the camp and the suspension of disbelief. They use wings and aerodynamics in space. Destroyed ships “sink.” The good guys never get hit and the bad guys die in one shot. Now, the new movies were absolutely disappointing, but Star Wars was never sci-fi, at least not in the ways this discussion is defining the genre.

I use the lowest setting on every machine gun, intentionally. It conserves the most ammo and allows me to use the HMG almost like a DMR that has a ton of ammo. I’m tap firing, only hitting headshots, and clearing hordes way faster than just spraying and sending 50% of shots into the dirt. The only time I switch to high firerate is to delete heavies, which have much larger hitboxes.

It was a hypothetical. Pretending those two statements are the same is willful ignorance. You’re continuing to pearl-clutch over a statement that doesn’t mean what you’re claiming it does. You’re putting words and intent I people’s mouths and then making moral judgements based off your misinformation. You’re making ad hominem attacks against a hypothetical. How are you still trying to justify an untenable position?

You continue to change the narrative. The did not say “Death to every [blank].” You said that. They said “death to the IDF.” If I say “death to capitalism,” I’m not saying “kill all capitalists.” They’re calling for the downfall of an evil organization. You are choosing to misunderstand them and put words in their mouth. You keep walking back your initial exaggeration. They clearly do not mean kill all Israeli adults. This is the same willful misinterpretation that the rest of the neoliberal media does.

Missing the point. “Death to [organization]” is not synonymous with “kill all members of [organization].” Even if it did, my other point is that the entire country is not in the IDF. You’ve made claims and extrapolations that have nothing to do with anyone’s actual beliefs. It wouldn’t be genocide regardless.

How does “death to the IDF” mean death to the entire adult population? Regardless of mandatory service in the past, they aren’t in the IDF now, and they aren’t the ones “just following orders.” I also don’t think Bob Vylan is actually suggesting that every person in the IDF be killed, regardless of complicity, but calling for the downfall of the organization perpetuating genocide.

“Death to ICE” doesn’t mean the same thing as “kill all ICE agents.”