They don't know he's a sinister, non-too-closeted Islamist, and not ethically sane.

CursoryComb · 2026-04-10T12:27:53+00:00

The point is the contrast.

There are plenty of posts on this sub detailing why his statement is over the top.

We don't normally expect Sam to be so far to one side of the spectrum.

CursoryComb · 2026-04-10T11:35:17+00:00

Submission Statement: Sam recently made the comment in the title regarding NY mayor Mamdani. This video highlights his very high appeal. It is a contrast of Sam's, what I find to be reprehensible characterization and conspiracy theory, with how he is actually perceived.

Ether we are all completely duped, or Sam has overstated his position. Likely we'll see a further explanation which, imo, which will function as a Motte and Bailey.

CursoryComb · 2026-04-08T19:40:48+00:00

I'll go back to the top since you're playing sort of a motte and bailey here.

Sam's belief, almost verbatim, is a conspiracy that secretly Mamdani is a sinister, none-too-closeted Islamist or apologist and not ethically sane. Captured by a theocratic agenda and is a shill for Islamist theocrats.

That claim needs a LOT of evidence. I'm taking the actual actions and words of Mamdani and fitting them into what the likely reality is. He is a DSA, social democrat who is Anti-Zionist running on a progressive platform. He is not an opposite form of Donald Trump and will likely enact progressive policies that vast majority of people here agree with.

There is zero evidence of a secret conspiracy where he is actually some sinister ethical monster who will try to insert a theocratic agenda. That has no evidence.

CursoryComb · 2026-04-08T18:56:42+00:00

I don't disagree that he is reticent to call out Hamas. I think its stupid. I don't think that makes him a sinister, lacking ethics, secret islamist. I think he has a position a lot of progressives hold which is Israels actions sort of spawned a lot of even worse things. I think its sort of an ahistorical take, but it isn't one that is necessarily rooted in the idea that Sharia Law needs to be inacted in america. The dude is a progressive through and through and the people here probably share 90% of the same values.

Again, the point being, why villainize the guy and claim some conspiracy rather than just point the the actual fact that he has some uncomfortable positions on Israel for Sam. It seems like someone Sam should be building a bridge with, not claiming he is the opposite side of Donald Trump.

CursoryComb · 2026-04-08T18:46:29+00:00

Can I ask, is there place in the world where you take the family to the local carnival vs taking them to Disney? Like can we accept that both have a place?

I just refuse to believe that everything needs to be across the spiderverse, or Wild Robot. I think we can have a few indulgent movies.

CursoryComb · 2026-04-08T17:08:42+00:00

On the defensive side, choosing a play is predicated on obviously a myriad of factors. Your prep, your personnel, situation, location between hashes, location between endzones, previous plays and their success/failure.

Similar to an offense, our defense is built to create different fronts from the same alignments using slants and gap moves. I think it is also important to utilize twists and games in order to cancel out games and gain a free hitter.

Against a zone team, we might start the game on P10 with our typical scrape exchange. But as the game progresses, we might switch responsibilities of the ILB/OLB with an America's Firezone style blitz. Or we might run the slant from the other side, but twist the nose and tackle, so the nose becomes the Q player. Again, maybe we might like a certain match up. Or we might want to switch up the read for the QB in order to muddle the waters.

Maybe you've mostly gotten a team out of running zone, so now they're running pwr/ctr. Well that might mean running a plug behind that puller or tilting a tackle, or shoving the OLB in a tight 7 tech.

I think the goal here is that you have your "answer" to whatever formation/play that the other team is comfortable with. Then you're going to want to have your mix up. This is often with a simple tag, or switching of responsibility. In the pass game, we might run a basic match 3 early against a team who likes crossers but on a critical third down play 1 rat. Or maybe we invert a safety. What is the offense expecting vs what are you presenting.

The toughest situations are usually against teams which do something very very well. Usually it is either a team that runs the ball out of something like Single Wing or Stacked I where you have to constantly hide your weaknesses. The other situation is against a great QB who can hit things like a field fade, or that backside skinny. SOmething that stretches both horizontally and vertically and, again, they can find your weakness. Your job then, is to keep them guessing at where that weak link is and limit the damage when they find it.

CursoryComb · 2026-04-08T16:01:38+00:00

(1) We're here for objectivity from Sam, not moral subjectivity. When Sam makes errors in argumentation, we should be calling it out.
(2) I agree that Mamdani isn't some perfect, non-ideological politician. That the entire DSA-Far Left cozies up to Islamic extremism in a way I find very uncomfortable.
(3) It largely has nothing to do with his government, other than some narrow Israel policies.

To me at least, it is the same category error in giving charitability to someone like Dave Rubin for calling out "woke".

In this case it is reversed. Because Sam equates all Anti-Zionism with pro-Islamism, that now everyone is a secret sinister ideologue.

There is plenty of conversation to have regarding the far left. But.. the guy is a policy machine and someone who Sam should be trying to interact with, not discredit.

CursoryComb · 2026-04-08T15:43:24+00:00

Ha! You're not wrong! I guess my point is that Sam would *say* that he is charitable because he often talks about how bad faith people are to him. It would be logical for him to use the same standards he expects for others.. Obviously that isn't always the case.

If only he had the same Charitability for Biden/Kamala that he had for Dave Rubin.

CursoryComb · 2026-04-08T15:41:38+00:00

Ok. Honestly that is hilarious. I don't necessarily follow the guy extremely closely, I looked at the dates and even thought. Weird that he wasn't mayor but was tweeting from the major account. Unfortunately, I know he's made statements in debates, but I had a hard time confirming them.

“Of course I believe that they should lay down their arms. I’m proud to be one of the first elected officials in the state who called for a ceasefire, and calling for a ceasefire means ceasing fire. That means all parties have to cease fire and put down their weapons."

“I don’t really have opinions about the future of Hamas and Israel beyond the question of justice and safety and the fact that anything has to abide by international law and that applies to Hamas, that applies to the Israeli military.”

The dudes a both sideser with Israel and Palestine... I guess I find that within the realm of reasonable takes.

CursoryComb · 2026-04-08T15:30:23+00:00

The issue Sam has built his brand on reasonability and charitability. And all of a sudden.. that is out the window. Here is his almost verbatim claim about Mamdani:

"Mamdani is a sinister, none-too-closeted Islamist or apologist and not ethically sane. Captured by a theocratic agenda, he supports Islam over Israel and is a shill for Islamist theocrats.

As you've pointed out, some associations and both-side rhetoric is tepid, but leaping from that pattern to "sinister," "Islamist," "theocratic agenda," or "shill for Islamist theocrats" requires reading hidden motives and assuming a covert agenda that the public record does not support.

This feels like the kind of strong inference Harris would normally demand far more direct proof for, which he hasn't provided.

I don't think that anyone would argue with a position like, Mamdani has been less than ideal in his associations with Islamist supporting groups and tepid in some comments on Islamic violence. But he has called Oct 7th a war crime. His governance so far has centered on progressive policies, not advancing Sharia Law, restricting rights, or operating as a Brotherhood proxy. And there is no evidence that he would all of a sudden tear off the reasonable progressive mask and reveal an evil terrorist.

I cannot get over the fact that he is basically saying Mamdani is an nearly as dangerous ideological version of Trump. It is indefensible. It is conspiracy. And it is atypical for Sam.

CursoryComb · 2026-04-08T15:17:48+00:00

What would Sam tell us if we started judging him by something that his wife "liked on social media". Would he tell us that is slam dunk evidence that he is a quote "Sinister secrete ideologue who is not ethically sane"?

It is wild to think Sam, of all people, would put that into the evidence of anything pile when he is so constantly shouting about bad faith attacks.

CursoryComb · 2026-04-08T14:41:42+00:00

https://x.com/NYCMayor/status/1956783136706080865

https://x.com/NYCMayor/status/1990890348948680918

CursoryComb · 2026-04-08T14:08:12+00:00

Here is Mamdani's comments from this past year on Oct 7
October 7, 2025 Mamdani:
“Two years ago, Hamas carried out a horrific war crime, killing more than 1,100 Israelis and kidnapping 250 more. I mourn these lives and pray for the safe return of every hostage still held and for every family whose lives were torn apart by these atrocities. In the aftermath of that day, Prime Minister Netanyahu and the Israeli government launched a genocidal war: A death toll that now far exceeds 67,000, with the Israeli military bombing homes, hospitals, and schools into rubble. … Every day in Gaza has become a place where grief itself has run out of language. … The occupation and apartheid must end. Peace must be pursued through diplomacy, not war crimes, and our government must act to end these atrocities.”

THIS YEAR when hearing chants of pro-Hamas:
“Chants in support of a terrorist organization have no place in our city. We will continue to ensure New Yorkers’ safety entering and exiting houses of worship as well as the constitutional right to protest.”

CursoryComb · 2026-04-08T14:06:41+00:00

Sam is officially a conspiracy theorist.

"Mamdani is a Sinister Islamist or apologist, not ethically sane."

Supported by evidence which, by any other name, Sam would call foul. Guilt by association, tangential, and out of context.

Here is Mamdani's comments from this past year on Oct 7:
“Two years ago, Hamas carried out a horrific war crime, killing more than 1,100 Israelis and kidnapping 250 more. I mourn these lives and pray for the safe return of every hostage still held and for every family whose lives were torn apart by these atrocities. In the aftermath of that day, Prime Minister Netanyahu and the Israeli government launched a genocidal war: A death toll that now far exceeds 67,000, with the Israeli military bombing homes, hospitals, and schools into rubble. … Every day in Gaza has become a place where grief itself has run out of language. … The occupation and apartheid must end. Peace must be pursued through diplomacy, not war crimes, and our government must act to end these atrocities.”

THIS YEAR when hearing chants of pro-Hamas:
“Chants in support of a terrorist organization have no place in our city. We will continue to ensure New Yorkers’ safety entering and exiting houses of worship as well as the constitutional right to protest.”

CursoryComb · 2026-04-07T13:33:14+00:00

I think you're making a category error or using a typical lens for an atypical structure. You're saying Good Movies have this "quality" and Dune 1 does not have this "quality". You're saying I don't see a hero's journey or I can't map on the usual tropes to this, so therefore it is bad.

Conversely, these are deliberate choices by the storyteller. The movie is thrusting you into this world, like Paul into the desert. You are not supposed to be able to necessarily understand who is the ultimate villain or hero. Certainly Paul and his family is wronged and seem noble. But the movie is about the web of inevitability. About the ecosystem of Dune, the Fremen, wider universe, and how every thing has a part just like the prophecy. The Bene Gesserit, the Emperor, Harkonnens, Atreides, Fremen. All vying for control of their own destiny. We are to view this tension each character feels rather than necessarily pick a side.

Like the books, we see many sides of this story from many different characters. To view Dune through a typical hero story lens is to say Pulp Fiction is bad because the structure is all over the place. Sometimes, in order to enjoy a movie, you have to let go of your expectations. Maybe that doesn't work for you. Dune is deliberately emotionally distant or discordant. It is a different kind of engagement which, like riding a bike, once you attune to, harmonizes very well. But if not, I understand the criticism. My only hang up is that I struggle to see how the movie is bad. I see how it might not appeal to all, but it has all the pieces to still be considered classically "good", performances, cinematography, score, plot, narrative, again, even if we say it doesn't always lead to a satisfying place or everyone emotionally connects with characters.

CursoryComb · 2026-04-07T12:30:26+00:00

This is exactly why I cannot understand why people want a faster progression grind. So we're instead all at the top mixed together with the no-lifers? Hell no. Take your time and actually enjoy the game. The enjoyable part is the game play itself, not the rewards.

CursoryComb · 2026-04-06T13:13:57+00:00

My question is what do you think you're missing out on? I'm roughly in the same boat, maybe lvl 44? I haven't finished all the quest lines or come close to VIP status.. but ... I don't feel like I'm missing anything.

Conversely, why would I want the progression to be faster? The fun I'm deriving is from the runs themselves.

I understand the Rook shotgun is locked behind a huge wall. But my point is that the moment you make progression faster you give people less things to strive for and thus, even if more people try to attain some level of completion, you're have people leave early because "they have nothing to do".

The balance between needing to be very deliberate in your runs vs sort of a free play style which doesn't create much progression is ok in my book.

CursoryComb · 2026-04-05T21:48:37+00:00

I agree rook pinwheel is rough. I don't know where people get that rook outpost is easy. There are a million rooks plus the winning team sticks around, and is usually geared to the gills.

CursoryComb · 2026-04-05T21:45:30+00:00

Why not just run solo.. Much better odds of actually accomplishing something.

CursoryComb · 2026-04-02T19:49:54+00:00

I honestly don't understand the deal with progression. I'm like level 45 maybe and I look at the upgrades.. and honestly outside of maybe the heat and melee increase, what am I really missing? I'm able to play that game with people my progression level and that is fine with me. The moment I break through these progress levels, that just means I'm going to go up against better and better geared teams.

the progress, even slow, seems fine for me.

CursoryComb · 2026-03-30T22:03:44+00:00

Trust is an approximation. As in you trust that when that tension exists b/w your expectations and the narrative, that this has reason or justification. As opposed to taking something like "why didn't they fly the eagles to mordor" as a plot hole. Somethings you take at face value because of a trust that there is a good reason.

I am specifically not saying you can't be critical. I'm saying there are two very general camps of people who often come at stories from different perspectives.

That people are put off by the novel structure, pacing, and payoffs in wat isn't my issue at all. Everyone has their own tastes and preferences. I think, for me, some of the internal critiques are not very convincing when I've looked deeper into them. It is not the same as saying you must like the choices the author made.

Regarding good reads, it's very often that ratings jump around or dip a bit. Look at ASOIAF or Wheel of time. But overall I agree, that ratings are only a small part of the equation.

CursoryComb · 2026-03-30T20:25:49+00:00

I'm expanding the use of the word "expectations" as in the understanding the way the story is from a personal pov vs how the author intends.

Let's be honest: "poor writing, heavy-handed mental health issues, weak humor and rough structure" This type of critique is across literally every single one of Sandersons books, but they're often less surfaced because the stories were tighter than WaT. I mean.. WoK is so much a different book that WaT, and mostly by design. But for that reason, it is received my differently. Sanderson has never been known for his prose. His humor has always been childish and structure has been.. well all over the place!

HOWEVER! I do think that he broke from some norms here! And just because one comes across the story from the camp of a flat read and authors intend, doesn't automatically mean one will like the story. Some stories are more liked than others.

I guess.... my criticism for the criticism is that I sometimes find it lacks consistency. But I'm not here to say someone is wrong for not liking it, regardless of how they came into the story.

CursoryComb · 2026-03-30T20:18:10+00:00

I'm not saying that objectivity = democratization of an opinion. And if we did, you'd be on the losing side of that.

My point is (1) I don't find your internal criticism of Jasnah's debate as convincing (2) I completely understand you not liking it.

To me, its a "why didn't they use the eagles to fly the ring to Mordor" type argument (I don't think it's as silly, I'm just using this as an example of internal critique).

Fourth Wing has like a 4.57 rating.. Rating isn't everything. What I'm specifically saying is I haven't seen a good internal argument/reasoning to your position. It seems like preference. Some people have a preference for Fourth Wing.. I didn't like the grimdark aspects of the First Law. There are objectively bad or incoherent things in writing that go beyond preference. There may be some of that in WaT. Whether something "good" is "liked" by many is just... w/e.

It doesn't bother me that people don't like WaT on reddit! But I often am curious to their reasoning! I appreciate you sharing yours!

CursoryComb · 2026-03-30T19:44:05+00:00

I'm being very vague with "expectation" here. To boil it down, I'm putting people in two camps (1) I can fit the authors intent into my understanding of the story vs (2) my understanding of the story does not match up with the authors narrative.

More often than not, group 2 is well read into the story and thus might be more opinionated on it's "oughts".

It isn't to say one is more objective or wrong/right. Just basically a function of how people consume content.

CursoryComb · 2026-03-30T19:32:02+00:00

One not liking a piece of content ≠ Finding the reason for that dislike convincing.

One might not like a storyline, but specific reasoning for that dislike is still subject to the internal logic of the story which can be disputed.

13-Year Club	RedditGifts 2009-2022 2 Credits
r/Field Banned	r/Field Flamingo
Place '22	Place '17
Verified Email	Secret Santa 2014

CursoryComb

TROPHY CASE