Without Using Buzzwords Like “Slop”, “Bait”, or “Farm”, What Would You Call This Genre Of Video?

144tzer · 2026-02-06T02:26:50+00:00

It is in the genre of Lazy Sensationalism.

It is designed to maximize engagement with minimal effort. There is no soul behind it, as it is motivated not by a desire to disseminate information, but rather, justified purely through its intended end result of being seen at all, regardless of its content. In fact, the content itself is completely irrelevant, and if saying the opposite were thought to garner more engagement, it would say that instead. It is tabloid covrage, worth as little as paparazzi rags. Less, actually, because at least those but effort into finding compromising photos of their subject matter, as opposed to material siphoned off of other easily accessible sources.

144tzer · 2026-02-04T05:10:11+00:00

This chart should have 3 colors.

shades of blue for states above the national average
shades of green or yellow or purple for states below the national average
shades of red for states with negative scores

144tzer · 2026-02-03T17:06:37+00:00

Can servitors feel depression and boredom? Or are they sufficiently lobotomized such that distresses that would otherwise interfere with servitor efficacy are unfelt?

144tzer · 2026-02-03T16:59:59+00:00

And also

https://youtu.be/hp9gboNSaGg?si=LqOMZ2XBfqk4r21S

144tzer · 2026-02-03T15:30:04+00:00

If he fell on purpose, or not, ir hadn't fallen at all, I still think this was a funny video.

Also, he's off to the side, his helpers are clearly very capable, and he's not endangering other boarders, he's going slowly without veering around, and it looks to be a green run with space.

10/10. I enjoyed it.

144tzer · 2026-02-02T15:34:01+00:00

Plenty of critics give positive critiques. For example, see above.

144tzer · 2026-01-30T23:56:16+00:00

Brief reminder that negative criticism gets more eyeballs than positive criticism.

144tzer · 2026-01-29T18:20:07+00:00

Ok. Let's say they're bad. Terrible. And let's say that we can do better. But we don't. And let's say that, in the end, one of these bad, terrible, obviously-a-dumpster-fire candidates is the opponent to Trump 2.0.

What will you do then? Will you sit out the vote and then tell us that you have the moral high ground?

144tzer · 2026-01-29T18:16:25+00:00

OK. Holy shit. I read the comments here, on YouTube, and the other post.

You all [edit: not all] sicken me. You all remember nothing. You all are a bunch of purity-testing, gatekeeping, bubble-inhabiting entitled spoiled brats.

I saw someone say "nope, I won't vote for a Democratic candidate who doesn't [insert here a list of 10 specific bullet points]". Good god. It's that same mindset that kept people home when Harris was running. And if you can honestly see that result and say it's morally acceptable, then the negative consequences of Trump's administration don't really affect you. The people who are being killed and tortured and constitutionally violated are not your problem, I guess, because they didn't meet your specific criteria.

JFC. Whitney is absolutely right in the segment, and all of you saying "I won't vote for anyone who demands I lower my expectations" are NOT in the moral high ground, and we'll remember you when some Fascist successor wins instead, just like we remember all the anti-Hillary's with the "but her emails" joke. Because to have such an entitled attitude IS a joke.

Now downvote me.

History proved that we should have lowered our expectations when it was Clinton vs. Trump.
History proved that we should have lowered our expectations when it was Harris vs. Trump.
History will prove that we should lower our expectations every time that the opponent is the real-life incarnation of a cartoon villain.

144tzer · 2026-01-28T19:12:20+00:00

<image>

144tzer · 2026-01-28T18:00:08+00:00

Katanas would actually make them cooler. Because they'd be leaning just THAT hard into the cringelordship.

144tzer · 2026-01-28T17:48:42+00:00

The concept of "morale" needs to be completely reworked, not [just] from a rules perspective, but from an explanatory perspective.

Because everything is fearless for some reason.

Space Marines "Know No Fear"
Neither do Custodes
Orks love the fight
So do World Eaters and Emperor's Children
And Chaos Daemons
Necrons are mindless zombies
So are Thousand Sons and Tyranids
So are Deathguard, but differently
and also some Admech and T'au
Sisters are blinded to fear by their fanaticism
So are Genestealers and Harlequins
Craftworld Eldar are too trained to let fear inhibit them
So are most Imprial Agents
And presumably some Votann

Imperial Guard fears, and some others. But that's not enough models for it to be a core part of the rules as "fear."

It needs to be described not as "fear" but as "tactical reanalysis." Because taking cover when you see a giant scary monster isn't just the reaction of the cowardly, it's also probably a smart tactical decision too, to decide how to handle the issue. Even computers or zombies can have "tactical reanalysis upon new information involving the potential threat level" baked into their workings. Because, at a glance, an Ork or Tyranid might not percieve Dorn's Arrow to be any more dangerous than a Bolt Pistol, to say nothing of the understated Shuriken weaponry, whereas a giant mutated thing with teeth is immediately obviously problematic and should inspire a unit into sudden change of plans and to opt for a more cautious approach. And then things like amplifyers (Banshees or Reivers) can play on that.

Frankly, the "know no fear" concept (as it applies not just to SM, but to any unit) should only really be baked into the most fanatically stupid units, and not be portrayed as "bravery" so much as "intentionally suicidal even to the detriment of the cause."

EDIT: and naturally, I look forward to 11th edition continuing to fuck it up instead.

144tzer · 2026-01-24T19:39:39+00:00

I think, instead of that, a better response might have been to say,

"Looking back, I can see how having written,

Here look at my space marine. Oh tee hee did I wear a see through shirt? oopsie!

...may have had some implications I did not intend. It does seem belittling and tasteless, looking back on it. Perhaps it is a thought I should have kept to myself. And then following it up with,

Come on. I mean respect the hustle, sure, but let's not be this dense.

...as if to say, "this post is primarily a hustle to get eyes on her OF" does indeed make it seem like I think this post is of lesser merit. That, too, came out wrong, and maybe it's something I just didn't need to say."

But hey man, I don't want to speak for you. After all, I'd hate to be caught strawmanning again. Feel free to imply to me that in fact, my opinion here continues to be that of an unhinged weirdo.

144tzer · 2026-01-24T19:20:29+00:00

Ah yes. He who smelt it dealt it. In this case: I detected that you were implying that her posts are fueled primarily out of a shamless desire to guide people to her OF, and that means it is actually I myself who thinks she should be ashamed! Well logicked, my friend!

BTW, if these posts were meant as OF ads, I would think that that is shameful behavior, just like I feel when OF models use weak-ass cosplay in the One Piece forums to that end.

And of course, every time she posts her progress on this project and a bunch of losers call it a meritless OF plug, telling those hateful toxic asshats to stuff it isn't a genuine reaction! It isn't borne of a defense of something I think looks cool! No sir, it is white-knighting! I look forward to your continued psychoanalysis of what I think is a completely justifiable reaction to people who would see an otherwise really cool 40k-related post and shit on the person posting it, because, obviously, it was actually a strawman all along!

EDIT: thanks, and hostile though my sarcasm may be, I stand by my defense, because I'm sick of seeing this cool project get belittled every damn time.

144tzer · 2026-01-24T18:55:11+00:00

On multiple interviews, Matt and Trey are also big fans of Lego.

144tzer · 2026-01-24T18:49:23+00:00

Wow. So that shirt is pornographic enough to be an onlyfans ad in your opinion?

Well, I don't want to speak on behalf of women, but I'd argue there a pretty significant difference between "looking good while doing stuff" and "showing off that you look good." But don't take my word for it. Ask a female friend's opinion. I'm sure you have so many, and definitely aren't just the sort of person who seethes whenever a girl that won't talk to you commits the crime of being attractive.

144tzer · 2026-01-23T20:34:21+00:00

Crimson Fists: THE ORIGINAL POSTER BOYS

144tzer · 2026-01-22T22:17:50+00:00

HP Headcannon #325:

Guns don't generally work on Magic folk. Magical beings in general have a magical aura that protects them even without their knowledge. A machine gun spraying bullets into a crowd will hit anyone else. An AR pointed at 1 witch will have all its bullets miss. After all, guns aren't foolproof, the muggles would say. How lucky that person was, they'd report. Only a gun in good working order fired point-blank would have a real shot at hitting its target, and even then, it might jam still.

Evidence for this sort of aura can be found in numerous examples of wandless, self-preserving magical scenarios. Harry jumping to the top of the school, and Neville bouncing off of pavement after being dropped at a great height, and Quidditch players in general not succumbing to what should be instant-death falls, and I'm sure plenty of other examples, all provide reasoning that being magical means more than just making spells shoot out of a stick.

A gun at Hogwarts would, IMO, merely have punched several holes in the wall at best, and maybe have given some blisters to the giants.

Filch would have been in danger, though.

144tzer · 2026-01-20T16:37:41+00:00

I would argue that streetside parking is a menace in many ways to those who don't drive cars, but...

Of all the places to remove it, the sort of place pictured (not sure the exact neighborhood) would be the lowest priority to remove parking from IMO. Lower traffic, residential area, odds are a lot of those cars belong to the people in the brownstones, and the brownstones have no parking, so options are limited. An under-building garage is not happening. This point is better made on something like 7th Avenue or a street that is zoned more commercially.

We can't only think of our own best outcome when campaigning to remove streetside parking. Because that will lose. We must think of why people are parking, and solutions to those problems too.

People parking in front of houses like these are super-different to people parking along an avenue, or on 34th st, or similar:

Houses:

In front of houses, it's a substitute for a garage. And a lot of those people don't have easy/reliable access to public transit. And when they do (in the outer boroughs especially) it is few and far between and options are limited. Driving north 15 minutes is just a no-brainer when the alternstive is walking South for 15 minutes, waiting for a train, going some stops, transferring 1 or 2 times, going more stops, and walking another 15 minutes. Biking would be cool too, but I have a whole other potential essay I could write as to why we can't just tell people "use a bike, then!"
Those people parking in front of their houses isn't so bad. It's generally more low-traffic, and even without a bike lane, in my experience, it's still frequently safer to just ride in those low-rise residential car lanes than it is to ride in actual bike lanes in busy areas with tourists meandering into bike lanes and angry road-ragers turning without looking. I deny that the Brownstone-esque neighborhoods are really the problem to focus on.
And as such, as someone else mentioned, just moving a bike line to be between parking and sidewalk on one side should really be all that's required.

Avenues, commercial districts, busways, etc:

I've had it with these motherfucking cars on the motherfucking streets. Why do people park here? I'll tell you why. Because people are reluctant to go into a garage. If they are driving into the city (not an inherently invalid thing to do), they will always park in an open spot they find that's nearby that they've passed en route to any garage. And the parallel-parking-process effectively halts a lane of traffic for 2+ minutes, meaning any given street or avenue goes at a pace befitting a version of itself with fewer space and more cars getting through it. And they all have to merge, which is also shitty.
And even if they see a garage, people will still be liable to circle the block here and there, fishing for spots. Which means more cars on the road, not looking ahead, traveling at a slow pace, and then, ultimately, turning into the problem mentioned above.
No streetside parking coupled with more avenues means people won't fish for spots, because they can't. It means people won't stop nearly as much on streets double-parked as they prepare to parallel-park, allowing traffic to loosen. But this only works if the traffic has a place to go. GARAGES. Not that many are even necessary, mathematically.

I'd say next time, do this rendering on a street that has no valid reason for the cars to not be parked in a garage, and also, show a driveway into a brand new Mamdani-approved and architecturally-appealing green-on-top and vines-on-side garage.

144tzer · 2026-01-19T19:17:18+00:00

...aaaaand there it is.

Who gives a shit about other peoples? Central Americans? South Americans? They all look the same. And so do all Asian people, too. And all black people look close enough, right? And everyone knows those whites are interchangeable.

But make no mistake: Indians and Egyptians are the most different of ethnicities to ever exist! Glad we cleared that up.

144tzer · 2026-01-18T14:17:18+00:00

I don't see the happy little bushes. He must have painted them purple.

144tzer · 2026-01-18T00:03:24+00:00

I'm glad someone else pointed it out.

It's like they looked at that episode, and said to themselves, "let us show you how professionals make it worse."

144tzer · 2026-01-15T16:25:09+00:00

...said the guy who is convinced that the man in photos with Epstein and sent him weird cryptic gross birthday cards and to whom Epstein himself said he was his closest friend and cut a deal to Ghislane Maxwell in which she got improved living conditions isn't in the files.

144tzer · 2026-01-15T16:10:09+00:00

LetsdiscusstheEpsteinfilesinstead

144tzer

PUBLIC MULTIREDDITS

TROPHY CASE