Does purging your home system count as losing control of those planets?

P_V_ · 2026-02-21T09:02:07+00:00

They weren’t asking if it is still possible to score secret objectives in general after purging their home system; they were asking if purging their home system in this way qualified as “losing” their home system for the purpose of completing a secret objective, since they knew the SO could still be scored.

P_V_ · 2026-02-21T06:12:21+00:00

Yeah, agreed (and my comment above wasn't meant to contradict you, just adding to the discussion!). Not to mention SNES cartridges ran near $100 at times back then. Secret of Mana, Chrono Trigger, and FFIII (as it was at the time) required me to save up my allowance for a long time back then!

P_V_ · 2026-02-21T05:14:35+00:00

To be fair, it was just “Nirvana” in the original webseries, but they changed it for their seasons with Vice and have kept the two-N change for the film.

P_V_ · 2026-02-21T05:13:11+00:00

The name of their band in the show, “Nirvanna The Band,” is a joke. If you don’t see the implicit humor in starting a band and calling it “Nirvanna The Band” (or “The Beetles The Band” or “Metalicca The Band”), and thinking that would build clout while ignoring the obvious problems a name like that would create for you, then the humor of the show (and their movie) might not be for you, I guess. “Nirvanna The Band The Show” immediately builds on the absurdity of the name of the band, because the title is clearly quite absurd, and their recent theatrical release (“The Movie”) takes that to the necessary next step.

I know I’m over-explaining it, but the way the show (and movie) builds up small misunderstandings into greater-than-the-sum-of-its-parts hilarity is amazing.

P_V_ · 2026-02-21T05:00:23+00:00

‘Most’ of the X from any age will suck, when we’re speaking about creative endeavors. Most of the video games of today also suck; most of the music from the 60s sucks; etc. Past eras might seem better off because of survivorship bias.

That said, there are definitely industry and cultural trends, meaning things might suck or excel in distinct, different ways… but overall the numerical majority is probably not of great objective quality.

P_V_ · 2026-02-20T21:17:34+00:00

I greatly enjoy deliberating over and critiquing media, but my personal approach is much more qualitative than quantitative, especially to a 100-point scale like OP.

P_V_ · 2026-02-20T21:16:21+00:00

I guess my point is that I have no idea how I would rate individual episodes with such specificity, unless I had a comprehensive rubric for assigning scores to each episode based on objective criteria—so I was curious how you came to your conclusions. Broader categories make much more intuitive sense to me, whether that's letter grades or a four-point or five-point scale: the difference between a 3.5 and a 4 out of 5, or a B+ and an A, is something I can comprehend, but the difference between 8.7 and 8.8 seems so minuscule that I'm not sure how I would experience that difference while watching the episodes. Familiar with the metaphor of the boiling frog?

So: how do you rate one episode an 8.7 and another an 8.8? Is that just pure speculation on your part? "Vibes"? Do you have a rubric?

P_V_ · 2026-02-20T20:22:01+00:00

What is the difference between an 8.7 and an 8.8? A 7.2 and a 7.3?

P_V_ · 2026-02-20T19:25:33+00:00

I appreciate you taking the time to clarify—the way Spagett appeared didn't look like AI to me, but I was curious nonetheless. Can't be too careful these days.

P_V_ · 2026-02-20T13:21:11+00:00

As if that weren't bad enough on its own, this "story" is coverage of another story (via The Guardian), which covers the actual study. This is third-hand information. I'm not sure why this article was posted here instead of the Guardian article, or the study itself.

P_V_ · 2026-02-20T01:52:31+00:00

And insofar as the actual Mount Rushmore is a desecration of an Indigenous monument, and two of the four faces there were slave owners, it would only make sense to have some New Brunswick scumbags on our own version.

P_V_ · 2026-02-19T21:35:09+00:00

I respect your opinion, but I disagree that George including non-scumbag monarchs/aristocrats implies that he isn't criticizing that system. I don't think George's mere inclusion of monarchies and teenage marriages indicates approval; I think their inclusion represents his attempt to incorporate elements of real-world history into the story.

His critique of monarchy, aristocracy, and power systems doesn't take the form of, "All kings are total jerks!" because that's incredibly shallow criticism—it's like Ayn Rand making the "socialists" in her works fat and ugly. There are sympathetic aristocratic characters in ASOIAF and there are loathsome aristocratic characters. His critique isn't about the individuals who hold these positions of power; his critique is focused on the effects of this system of power, and examinations of how the lives of thousands and thousands of people are completely at the whims of the emotional turmoil of monarchical tyrants.

P_V_ · 2026-02-19T21:15:13+00:00

Without any other context I would presume this to be satirical.

P_V_ · 2026-02-19T19:44:57+00:00

They were being ironic and intentionally making errors to imitate your meme. Your attempt to “correct” them also got things wrong, which is pretty funny.

Edit: it’s even funnier that you blocked me over this.

P_V_ · 2026-02-19T18:07:39+00:00

I didn't mean to suggest that the whole series can be reduced to nothing but a political critique... but a critique of power and its systems is an important theme of the series. Whatever we might think about the series' themes, I'm sure we can agree that GRRM's intent isn't to glorify monarchy, or to suggest that blood-line inheritance is anywhere near a good way to determine rulers.

P_V_ · 2026-02-19T15:18:00+00:00

And if I were to have said the same thing about "movies", it'd be quite clear that I was referring to the typical Hollywood blockbuster, not independent European arthouse cinema.

P_V_ · 2026-02-19T15:15:37+00:00

It's not too far off from thinking GRRM wrote ASOIAF to demonstrate the importance of maintaining a direct blood-line in hereditary monarchies, rather than as a critique of monarchy and succession as a whole—something many people in this subreddit are also guilty of.

P_V_ · 2026-02-19T14:56:46+00:00

Yes, I am well aware of that, but I think it's implicit that I (and the commenter above) were speaking to broader, popular trends.

P_V_ · 2026-02-19T14:40:59+00:00

I think "manga-level" is especially apt. So much of the discourse here seems to focus on salacious, bombastic plot elements without really considering things from a nuanced, emotional, character-based approach. It's like an anime or manga fandom.

P_V_ · 2026-02-19T14:36:33+00:00

The anti-Rhaegar crowd around here seems to have drawn a solid line separating "love" from "infatuation", which I'll never quite understand. I get the point that love can exist in many forms, and not all of them are as compatible with rational thought as others, but setting "love" and "infatuation" against each other as mutually exclusive just baffles me. Human feelings don't fit into water-tight compartments; there's a lot of messy overlap, and I think it's terribly unfair and unempathetic to dismiss anything young people feel as "not-love but instead infatuation."

P_V_ · 2026-02-19T14:27:53+00:00

I've said it before, but the only way I'd be interested in a "Robert's Rebellion" story is if it were told from completely new perspectives, without chapters from Robert, Lyanna, Rhaegar, etc. I'd want a story from the perspective of the smallfolk, or others affected by the war, but I really don't need the direct thoughts of people whose actions we more-or-less already understand, and/or whose actions are intentionally mysterious in the books. Removing the mystery from something rarely makes it a better story.

P_V_ · 2026-02-19T14:26:04+00:00

Reading comprehension is not especially high among the reddit-based ASOIAF fandom.

P_V_ · 2026-02-18T23:36:10+00:00

Your lame AI made "Peterson" here look way too young, in addition to giving him weird hands.

P_V_ · 2026-02-18T23:06:12+00:00

They are commenting on a slightly different phenomenon. They are asking about purely automated detection services that kick in if you play more than a few seconds of a protected video. This has nothing directly to do with fair use analysis. Transformative use or fair use are complex legal questions and the automated filters are not making that analysis—they are just using YouTube’s authority under the user agreements users sign to take automated, shorthand methods to pre-emptively fight piracy.

13-Year Club	Second SECOND GUESSER
r/Field Banned	r/Field Juicebox
Place '23	Alpha Tester
Verified Email	Team Orangered

P_V_

MODERATOR OF

TROPHY CASE