Author Topic: Trump (clicking this is voluntary)  (Read 3054 times)

Offline Mánagarmr

  • Core Member Mark V
  • *****
  • Posts: 4,254
  • if (isInRange(target)) { kill(target); }
Re: Trump (clicking this is voluntary)
« Reply #30 on: January 30, 2017, 04:58:43 AM »
It's pretty dark yeah, but I'm more in a state of "I don't really care anymore" than "Oh god this is so depressing" so it doesn't really bother me. Also in contrast it makes all the *good* things humanity occasionally manages to do stand out much more.
Click here to get started with Mantis for Suggestions and Bug Reports.

Thank you for contributing to making the game better!

Offline Mánagarmr

  • Core Member Mark V
  • *****
  • Posts: 4,254
  • if (isInRange(target)) { kill(target); }
Re: Trump (clicking this is voluntary)
« Reply #31 on: January 30, 2017, 05:32:00 AM »
I stand by my questions. If the most evil, notorious leader in history is not someone Misery (or anyone else) would vote against, there's really no point in continuing discussing this with them.
Your view of Trump is not shared by the entire world. He's a flaming idiot, yes. But he's not Hitler, nor is he even remotely close to the most evil and notorious leader in history.

If you really do believe that then I recommend some actual studying of history.
Click here to get started with Mantis for Suggestions and Bug Reports.

Thank you for contributing to making the game better!

Offline Aklyon

  • Core Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 2,089
Re: Trump (clicking this is voluntary)
« Reply #32 on: January 30, 2017, 01:14:36 PM »
Quote
Ehhh.... I wouldn't say that.  I don't see any hate from anyone here and nothing resembling a full-on argument.  Like a great many topics in this forum, so far, this is just debate.  It seems that we're good at this here.  Heck, I get into random debates with people pretty darn frequently (usually over gaming topics, often with Wingflier), but a proper debate is NOT an argument; there's no bad emotions or dislike anywhere... it's just a good old-fashioned debate.  They can be very interesting.

However, if this DOES devolve into that at any point, I'll simply slam the topic shut.   I really, really doubt it'll go anywhere near that.  That sort of thing seriously just never seems to happen here.  Yeah, there was that gun topic, but I consider that a total fluke.  This is a pretty darn pleasant place really.  There aren't any nasty or mean sorts here.  Heck, I've not met anyone that I dislike in this place, not even one person, and for me that's pretty rare.
I'd certainly agree that its working out particularly well so far with how little rulesetting the OP has. I only really have one other thread to compare it to, and that one is on a seperate forum, the OP consists mostly of rules based on previous locked threads failing to retain their chill composure, and has ended up causing the majority of the notable bans there recently.

Here, we've had a fair bit of links and a quite wordy talk on whether not voting is helping or making things worse.

Offline Draco18s

  • Resident Velociraptor
  • Core Member Mark IV
  • *****
  • Posts: 3,924

Offline WolfWhiteFire

  • Full Member Mark II
  • ***
  • Posts: 182
Re: Trump (clicking this is voluntary)
« Reply #34 on: January 30, 2017, 04:25:06 PM »
This is unsettling.
Yeah, I think that could be nominated for the "understatement of the year" award. The site seemed to have heavy bias, and I felt was trying to make Trump sound as bad as possible (not that he really needs help saying stuff that sounds bad), so it can't be relied upon much, but even considering that it sounds EXTREMELY bad.
Ehhh.... I wouldn't say that.  I don't see any hate from anyone here and nothing resembling a full-on argument.  Like a great many topics in this forum, so far, this is just debate.  It seems that we're good at this here.  Heck, I get into random debates with people pretty darn frequently (usually over gaming topics, often with Wingflier), but a proper debate is NOT an argument; there's no bad emotions or dislike anywhere... it's just a good old-fashioned debate.  They can be very interesting.

However, if this DOES devolve into that at any point, I'll simply slam the topic shut.   I really, really doubt it'll go anywhere near that.  That sort of thing seriously just never seems to happen here.  Yeah, there was that gun topic, but I consider that a total fluke.  This is a pretty darn pleasant place really.  There aren't any nasty or mean sorts here.  Heck, I've not met anyone that I dislike in this place, not even one person, and for me that's pretty rare.
I am aware this forums is pretty pleasant and I also don't know anybody I don't like here, I was just saying that because of two main reasons 1. The comparisons to Hitler, and 2. My experience that politics can get pretty toxic pretty fast sometimes, and occasionally seems to bring out the worse in people. I wouldn't say there is much of a problem right now, I was just hoping to help reduce the chance of a problem from occurring.

Offline Aklyon

  • Core Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 2,089
Re: Trump (clicking this is voluntary)
« Reply #35 on: January 30, 2017, 07:31:32 PM »
Sounds stupid enough to be trump, bias or not.

Offline Cyborg

  • Master Member Mark III
  • *****
  • Posts: 1,914
Re: Trump (clicking this is voluntary)
« Reply #36 on: January 30, 2017, 08:33:06 PM »
I've heard so VERY often now that BOTH candidates were freaking awful.  I have no bloody clue WHICH groups would have been hurt under Hillary's rule.  It doesn't MATTER which ones


What?  :o

To buy something is to support the company selling it... it's a very simple concept. 

We're not talking about buying something from the company. The analogy isn't quite right. Would you take a moment to think about that again? The difference is, in a situation where you are buying something, there are three outcomes: you are buying product A, product B, or you go home with nothing. In this situation, millions of people will be forced to live their lives at the behest of a person A or person B. There is no option to avoid both and go home with nothing. The analogy doesn't work.

I also don't like seeing people hurting in a situation where I can DO something (without then hurting an equal number of people, which is all that voting does, in my view).

You haven't described what the alternate universe would be if you had voted someone else. By not voting, you are in fact making a choice. You can't avoid the existence of a decision. That's one of the facts of life. The world turns, whether or not you pull the levers. Your participation- or not- is an active choice. If you are dealt a poker hand, you don't get to decide that the deal never happened. In effect, you folded, and you let the winning hand on the table stand. It's still a choice you made, and you own a part of the consequences.

Both candidates are poisonous:  I don't need deep research to know this.  Hell, LOTS of people know this, and I guarantee you that very few voters REALLY research their choices. 

You "don't need to learn." Yes, you have said this many times. It's no less troubling each time I read it. You have created this oversimplified paradigm where you pretend that you can insulate yourself by staying indoors. It doesn't work like that. By the way, I'm not pushing Hillary. This line of questioning is about voting. In the case of Donald Trump, yeah I think he's a bad guy, but that's not the point here.

they often feel like they have this "duty" to still vote anyway, just because "voting is the thing you do". 

I have never heard that. The duty you might be referring to is to make the best choice with the cards you're dealt for yourself and your country (although, people may change the order of those two entities).

Also, you didn't answer the, "if Hitler were in the running, would you be willing to vote for the other person" question. I'm guessing that you refuse to answer that question, and so I will move on from it. I'm just going to add, I find that a little bit disturbing. It's not a trick question. It's easiest question you could ever get.

I find that a lot of the Hillary hate comes from people who are getting their news from Facebook. Yeah, there's a lot about her to dislike. She's not my first choice. But comparing her to Donald Trump, I would surely like to understand why it's a wash. Why are they equally bad?

A quick note, multiple people have accused me of comparing Donald Trump to Hitler. Never happened. Please use the quotation feature before you make accusations. Also, you should understand that the Hitler topic is there as a comparison. It's used as a limit test to see how far the intellectually hollow argument of not participating actually goes. It's to see if there is ever a point at which voting means something. I'm using it as the absurd. But even with a softball like this, I can't get a straight answer, which is really disturbing to me. Anyone who knows anything about history, millions of people including Jews and persons with disabilities were killed. They were poisoned, gassed, incinerated, [email protected], tortured. But people can't even say that they would vote against that? I don't understand any eventuality in which a person voluntarily lets this happen because they are sticking to some dishonest argument they have built up in their heads. It's troubling.

When I make decisions, I have two sieves that I put into action. The first is, character of conscience. I look at an issue and decide, what is the most right thing to do? Even given a bad hand with multiple undesirable solutions, what's the best move from a position of conscience? I have a strong sense of self and justice. To me, living is something we can all agree on and as a common point of reference for what justice means.

The second is, logic. I'm a programmer. I make my living writing sieves. I know how to take large issues and chop them down into tiny pieces, analyze them, research what I don't know, create algorithms and assemble it into the whole. It's my job and my nature.

Together, with those two sieves, I can decide.

After all this, looking at people's arguments, I think what I see is this: compared to the sieves and the order that I use, I think other people are using a different set of rules. It looks like something very subjective, something like a sense of revulsion and dissociation. I'm also seeing a little bit of illness in some of these comments. When you look at external versus internal locus of control, it reminds me of where a person feels that the world around them is what it is irregardless of their participation. There's no connection for them between the world in which they live and their choices in it. In any event, subjective and personal issues rather than a set of rules that could be used by a wider group.

I don't hope to convince anyone that participating is important. Most of the people here are too old to change without wanting to or doing the real work that involves. The one tiny hope I see in Misery's comments (and the best thing that I thought he said) was about how problem-solving would be about coming together and trying to find the best solution. It's the mindset of children, and I mean that in a good way. It's the way we think before we are old enough to become bitter, comprehend politics, become depressed or develop illness, before we are hurt over and over again by life itself. In some people, when they come out the other side of that, it's just too late to go back. But, if there is a chance for Misery to care enough, I would think that particular statement is the one to build off of. I would start there.

I don't object to the point that money in politics is overwhelmingly counterproductive or that politicians today leave much to be desired. Completely agree on that point. But I do think that letting the mold grow on the house and pretending it's not there is not very effective. If you believe that money in politics is hurting our country, doing nothing isn't going to fix it. It's just simple inertia. I was a Bernie fan. I even read his book that just came out in November. Although, having read his book and listened to him in person, I think that a lot of his audience missed the boat. Maybe caught up a little bit too much in the rally part of things without a grasp on the political part of things. Bernie is very much about making the best out of what you have. Not because you are settling, but because progress happens in increments. It's hard work. There's a lot of losing involved. But, along the way, in increments, it can get better even in the face of overwhelming odds.

Kahuna strategy guide:
http://www.arcengames.com/forums/index.php/topic,13369.0.html

Suggestions, bugs? Don't be lazy, give back:
http://www.arcengames.com/mantisbt/

Planetcracker. Believe it.

The stigma of hunger. http://wayw.re/Vi12BK

Offline Draco18s

  • Resident Velociraptor
  • Core Member Mark IV
  • *****
  • Posts: 3,924
Re: Trump (clicking this is voluntary)
« Reply #37 on: January 30, 2017, 08:40:51 PM »
Yeah, I think that could be nominated for the "understatement of the year" award. The site seemed to have heavy bias, and I felt was trying to make Trump sound as bad as possible (not that he really needs help saying stuff that sounds bad), so it can't be relied upon much, but even considering that it sounds EXTREMELY bad.

Given that the bullet points they have are all pulled from some other sources (Fox News being one!) and each of the links I looked at went into greater depth than the thing I linked.  To me it didn't look like they inflated the importance of the things they listed in the bullets, just summarized.

So while there may be some bias to the site the events its pointing to are being reported other places, so any bias can be filtered with a reading of the original news sources.

Offline Misery

  • Global Moderator
  • Core Member Mark V
  • *****
  • Posts: 4,040
Re: Trump (clicking this is voluntary)
« Reply #38 on: January 30, 2017, 09:48:03 PM »

Quote
What? 

Okay, that quote isn't working quite right for me, but whatever.  The bit that you asked "what" to stands.  What I meant is, it doesn't matter which group it is that is getting hurt:  SOMEONE IS STILL GETTING HURT.  I'm not going to go "Oh, okay... It's just THOSE guys getting hurt now.  I don't care about those guys, so that's fine".  It doesn't matter to me which specific group is getting damaged by something.... they're all people, and as far as I'm concerned, all equally important.   That's why I say "it doesn't matter which group it is".  I'm not going to jump out of the woodwork JUST because Group A is getting hurt, but NOT if Group B is getting hurt.   My point is:  SOMEONE, somewhere, will get hurt from either choice.  EITHER choice.   I suspect here though is simply a case of me not phrasing things correctly; as an autistic individual I do this *frequently*, so be aware of that when trying to deal with me.


Quote
We're not talking about buying something from the company. The analogy isn't quite right. Would you take a moment to think about that again? The difference is, in a situation where you are buying something, there are three outcomes: you are buying product A, product B, or you go home with nothing. In this situation, millions of people will be forced to live their lives at the behest of a person A or person B. There is no option to avoid both and go home with nothing. The analogy doesn't work.

.....What?  Yes it does.

Go read what I wrote again.  The analogy was based on a NORMAL business transaction in a typical industry in this country. I was thinking like, I dunno, buying a game, or a cleaning product, or whatever.  I daresay that there IS, in fact, an option to simply not buy the game/product in question.... you will not A: starve or B: catch on fire if you do not choose a game or cleaning product to buy.  MOST purchases in this country are like that:  Not stuff we MUST have to survive.  Something like food, yes.  But even then, some people grow their own.   So my analogy wasn't related to something where if you don't buy it, you are doomed. 

Quote
You haven't described what the alternate universe would be if you had voted someone else.

What would be the point?  I could have voted for some third party that we all KNOW would not have won.  Even I, with my limited political knowledge, know full well that third parties *never* win, and not only that, don't stand even the foggiest ghost of a chance of winning.  Why in the world would I waste my time going and voting for them?  Knowing that the MAIN candidates were bad, bad, bad means I sure as heck wasn't voting for THEM.  By your logic, the only other answer would be to vote for a third party.  But reread my bit about "empty gestures".... I don't like doing that, and refuse to.  If I'd have to vote for a third party to make a vote that isn't terrible, then I'm just going to say "screw it" instead, which is what I did. 

Quote
You "don't need to learn." Yes, you have said this many times.

This is true, but I am getting the impression you're not grasping what I mean by it whatsoever.   In this case, I specifically said that I don't need research to know that both parties are bad.  That DOESNT mean "I don't learn anything".  It means that the writing on the wall is SO freakishly obvious that further research IS NOT NECESSARY.    I don't need to know the exact numerical value of their "badness" level.  All I need to know, is that they are bad.  And that evidence is so totally EVERYWHERE that why in the world would I "research" it?   It's already been screamed at me from every corner at all times.  I've heard it from my family, I've seen it on the news, I've seen it on the Net, I've seen and heard it EVERYWHERE.   I don't need to do any research to gain info that I, in fact, already have:  That both candidates are no good.

And beyond that, some of it is just very simple logic.  Like my understanding of the nature of politicians, and why the political system is so bloody broken.  You don't need "research" to generate logic.  With some things.... you need only observe a bit.  If I see some guy beating his face against a tree, I do not need to then go to the local library, pull out a stack of books, and research wether he is, in fact, beating his face against a tree.  He made it pretty damn obvious that he was and I could see just by looking.  It's like that with politics, to me:  It's just so very, VERY obviously toxic and bad that research is utterly pointless.  The only thing that I could possibly learn is "it's even more poisonous than I thought".  All I have to do is see basic news on some site, or even just watch/listen to people argue about political topics to know these things.   

And since you mentioned facebook:  I don't use it.  Or twitter.  Or any social media.  I have no idea if you think I do or not, but I figured I may as well say so.

Quote
Also, you didn't answer the, "if Hitler were in the running, would you be willing to vote for the other person" question. I'm guessing that you refuse to answer that question, and so I will move on from it. I'm just going to add, I find that a little bit disturbing. It's not a trick question. It's easiest question you could ever get.

......Wait, what?  That WASNT a rhetorical question?

....Why in the numerous hells would anyone vote for Hitler?  Why... is this even an actual question being asked?  I know I'm negative as all hell, but surely you don't think I'm THAT messed up.  Of course I wouldn't vote for that murderous nightmare of a total maniac.  Again, why is this even a question?   This is making less and less sense.  "Not voting" does not equal "voting for Hitler". 

I mean, just.... what.

Offline WolfWhiteFire

  • Full Member Mark II
  • ***
  • Posts: 182
Re: Trump (clicking this is voluntary)
« Reply #39 on: January 30, 2017, 10:05:20 PM »
ven that the bullet points they have are all pulled from some other sources (Fox News being one!) and each of the links I looked at went into greater depth than the thing I linked.  To me it didn't look like they inflated the importance of the things they listed in the bullets, just summarized.

So while there may be some bias to the site the events its pointing to are being reported other places, so any bias can be filtered with a reading of the original news sources.
I was aiming to acknowledge that when I said
but even considering that it sounds EXTREMELY bad.


Offline Aklyon

  • Core Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 2,089
Re: Trump (clicking this is voluntary)
« Reply #41 on: January 31, 2017, 04:56:46 PM »
In other news, "the cyber" must be fixed asap, essentially because he said so.
Cyber is not a word, it is a prefix.

Offline Draco18s

  • Resident Velociraptor
  • Core Member Mark IV
  • *****
  • Posts: 3,924
Re: Trump (clicking this is voluntary)
« Reply #42 on: January 31, 2017, 06:26:32 PM »
Not to mention:
Quote
(ii)   Within 30 days, a preliminary draft of the Plan to defeat ISIS shall be submitted to the President by the Secretary of Defense.

(iii)  The Plan shall include:

(A)  a comprehensive strategy and plans for the defeat of ISIS;

Offline TheVampire100

  • Hero Member Mark III
  • *****
  • Posts: 1,248
  • Ordinary Vampire
Re: Trump (clicking this is voluntary)
« Reply #43 on: January 31, 2017, 07:09:11 PM »
Not to mention:
Quote
(ii)   Within 30 days, a preliminary draft of the Plan to defeat ISIS shall be submitted to the President by the Secretary of Defense.

(iii)  The Plan shall include:

(A)  a comprehensive strategy and plans for the defeat of ISIS;
I assumed this was a joke.

Offline Aklyon

  • Core Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 2,089
Re: Trump (clicking this is voluntary)
« Reply #44 on: January 31, 2017, 07:32:48 PM »
No, it fits perfectly fine into his series of dumb ideas. Joke does not exist with the current white house.