Best posts made by Arkandel

https://www.vox.com/culture/2019/12/23/20991659/ebook-amazon-kindle-ereader-department-of-justice-publishing-lawsuit-apple-ipad

"But Apple couldn’t enter the ebook market while charging consumers five dollars more per unit than its biggest competitor was. It needed some assurance that no one would have a cheaper product than it had. So it made a deal with five of the Big Six publishers (Simon & Schuster, Penguin, HarperCollins, Hachette, and Macmillan; Random House, then the biggest trade publishing house, abstained): They could all sign on to Apple’s agency model, as long as they guaranteed that they’d also use that same agency model with every other retailer they worked with. That way, Amazon, too, would be forced to sell its ebooks for $14.99 — and if it refused, publishers could withhold their ebooks from Amazon and make them exclusive to Apple.

Publishers agreed to the deal. And just like that, everything changed."

I can feel @Glitch twitching but no, this isn't about the platform MSB runs on or asking for more skins but the content itself.

Basically I was browsing through a thread asking how to improve Slashdot earlier (this one to be exact) where a very good point was made. Someone was asking for a "disagree" Mod for posts - as opposed to using that site's equivalent of our downvote button when they disagree with someone - and other posters disagreed with the idea because of how counter-productive it was. The proper way to deal with disagreeing with a post, they claim, is to post back and rebuke it.

Now, personally I don't pay much attention to upvotes/downvotes but I think it could be healthy to discuss this; although they have no real bearing on our posts, do you think we generally downvote when others make an argument we disagree with but is on topic, presents an interesting point of view and contributes to the thread? For that matter, do you think downvoting matters at all?

I mean we're not WORA - WORA was on average a lot more heated than this is. But although I vehemently disagree with some of you people (you know who you are, and you are still wrong about all the things) I still like having a forum like this to debate games, and as much as we're often accused by outsiders of having a hive-mind I think we're pretty good at fostering completely different points of view here.

Thoughts?

@Ganymede What bugs me specifically is how easy it is for markets to be cornered illegally through price fixing these days, to the detriment of consumers.

The same thing applies to ISPs. Underbid everyone until competition is basically extinct then price fix with other major corporations still in the market at will. What are the sheep going to do, go elsewhere?

@Shayd said:

If you guys don't get the idea that there's a difference between online games and real life, then I do not know what to tell you.

And if you can't get that when the sum of your interactions with someone are online and they are typically unfortunate then it doesn't really matter to to them what you are like in real life, you will continue to run into a wall again and again around here.

@Groth said in Good or New Movies Review:

@GreenFlashlight said in Good or New Movies Review:

See also the rainbow-colored Mickey Mouse hats they sell during Pride Month. I think I mentioned those already but can't be bothered to check.

That is blatant profiteering merchandising. Not a statement of support. Disney would sell nazi Donald duck plushies at far right rallies if they thought it would make them net profit.

Donald Duck does not fuck around, my friend.

Also, did you actually want a Disney/Nazi crossover?

@surreality What bugs me about it is that more and more games go out of their way to prevent players from communicating with each other at all as an attempt to prevent asshattery. You can't even chat with your opponents in Hearthstone other than with pre-coded things like "well played" or "sorry".

Dracula (the new TV series on Netflix) was amazing.

But it was only amazing if you watch the first two episodes then ignore the huge cliffhanger at the end and stop right there.

The third episode was a self-indulgent piece of shit of epic proportions. The two which preceded it were full of tension, great performances and - despite a few very obvious plot holes put there just to make the plot work - really worth a watch. Sister Agatha was a kickass character.

If you like Dr. Who then you'll also want to check it out as this is written by Moffat/Gatiss and... well, it shows. A lot.

@Groth said:

@Arkandel said:

2. Making sure one side doesn't dominate everything. People have and will roll for the winning team until it's invulnerable.

Planetside has an interesting mechanic to deal with this where the team with the least territory actually becomes more powerful. I think it would be worthwhile to add similar mechanics to a PvP focused MU*

It's hard to implement any such thing on a MU* unless you're willing to enforce what concepts actual PCs get to play. Power is very often a matter of active hands on deck - no amount of NPCs or coded bonuses can possibly make up for the absence of actively played characters on each side.

Once a faction gets going and people see RP happening there that is where they'll go. Some will roll new PCs, others will migrate their existent ones over, but it's a pretty well known phenomenon.

The only other way staff can try to work on it is to split the flagship players around. But that, too, assumes such players are willing to do so and/or they'll be somewhat equally active, neither of which is a given.

I suffer from a man cold. Pray for me.

@Lisse24 said:

Finally, I always highlight my name client side along with the name of immediate family/packs/coterie mates/etc. It helps me know when I should be focusing on what's being said instead of zoning out.

Yeah, I do that too, it helps a ton. Then again I never remember to make it MU-specific, so I'm playing different games and "Daniel" gets lit up for no reason.

I wish I was a vegetarian but that's only because I know how the animals whose meat I eat are treated before they are slaughtered.

I am not ready to be one. That's on me, I consider it a flaw of mine.

However I'll happily tell whoever tries to push me to change how I eat (by guilt-tripping me into it or otherwise) just how they can best fuck off.

@mietze My thing is to run more or less stereotypical versions of concepts - the core of them being someone no one would blink at when they heard he belongs to that faction - and then trying to find the twist in that core. One thing that doesn't quite add up, usually an infusion of realism, emotional baggage he can't quite rid himself of, a hangup he can't get over, a weakness or personality flow.

It usually takes me a few sessions to find the crack in the armor and when I do, I pound on it until it breaks so I can see what's beneath.

Mon-Fri:

• Wake up at 5:00
• Have a protein shake, let the dogs out
• Drive to the gym, work out until 7:30
• Shower
• Work 8:00 - 11:30
• Eat lunch
• Work 12:30 - 16:00
• Drive home
• Watch TV/play games/read books until 21:00
• Sleep

Weekend:

• Wake up when Rusty, the asshole moluccan cockatoo, decides I should be up.
• Have a protein shake, let the dogs out
• Drive to the gym, work out until whatever.
• Get home, have lunch, play games/watch TV/read books until I'm sleepy.

On Tuesday nights I also have basketball between 17:00 and 19:00, then on Thursdays a soccer game between 17:00 and 18:00.

I don't like a lot of variety in my life. I do well with a routine and dislike it being upset for too long.

@VulgarKitten said:

@Arkandel I didn't say there was a problem for anyone else, just that it weirds me out personally. It really does.

Fair enough, I can't really comment on a feeling, it's what it is.

And can more often lead to lines blurring. As for your first point re: people who have paired up more than once vs RL couples; it's completely different on so many levels. One is an online relationship, the other is a relationship that (more often than not) includes far more intimacy and feelings

When most people pair up without knowing each other iRL it's because several stars have aligned; their personalities match, their active times also do, they have compatible tastes and they are more or less certain the other person isn't a psychopath. Hopefully that's the case for most RL relationships as well.

The only question here as far as the original question in this thread is concerned is whether this association creates problems somehow.

That's what my observation was about - I don't see it. Sure, a bad set of people can blur the IC/OOC line and do favors for each other but if anything that makes online couples more prone to it; if Bob wants to score points with Jane online he'll have to do something in-game for her but if I do, I just need to take the garbage out on time.

@Auspice I suck at it, but it's a social thing with coworkers, which I do like doing.

@Pyrephox I think a good way to look at rolls as a Storyteller is to consider them hooks tying the players to your story.

Everyone wants to be useful in a plot; to come in and have an impact. Some players are proactive enough to do so no matter their stats but not everyone is, so giving them an entry point into the story ("roll wits+composure please") so you can hand-feed them some information perhaps unique to them achieves at least that much - they are now relevant.

Rolls are also an opportunity to highlight character aspects which are not often useful to them. A combat PC is never going to be out of fashion but how often does a locksmith, med student or car mechanic get to do their thing? Perhaps less often, so give them that nice fat exceptional success to go with the rest of the scene. I've specifically add elements to the story before to let the spotlight be shared.

Especially in systems like GMC where failure is actually rewarded it's even neater.

@Caggles said in Good or New Movies Review:

Just back in from Jojo Rabbit. Absolutely loved it - switches from laugh out loud one moment to tears the next. Highly recommend. 5/7.

... why are you grading movies out of 7?

@Sunny What happens behind the DM screen stays behind the DM screen.

@Chime said:

If you can't, get a real editor.

If it's not vim it's not a real editor anyway.

The only problem here is in generalizing anything based on people's associations.

It's not even that different a conversation than the one(s) we had before about cliques - it's still discussing an in-crowd, just on a smaller scale. It's a meaningless practice because there are always going to be both small groups of tightly knit people who are close or spend tons of time together chatting/playing - that's just human behavior.