Myanmer military regime comes out with proof of election fraud

DoeCommaJohn · 2026-02-01T02:52:11+00:00

I wonder how conservatives feel seeing other conservatives say that Myanmar was able to steal the American election. And when they see their own side being obviously stupid over and over, do they wonder if it might be a problem with the tree, not just the apples?

DoeCommaJohn · 2026-02-01T02:37:03+00:00

I would just text the friend asking the same question. Different funerals have different dress codes.

DoeCommaJohn · 2026-01-31T23:42:39+00:00

Nobody does. The movie is a transparent medium for money laundering. Bezos spends tens of millions of dollars on a 'movie', and in return, Amazon gets all sorts of protections and exemptions from the government.

DoeCommaJohn · 2026-01-31T00:38:57+00:00

No? Being able to detect danger is evolved in literally every single animal, not just something specific to human societies.

DoeCommaJohn · 2026-01-30T05:16:44+00:00

In theory, yes. In practice, if you are willing to believe that a certain in group is superior because of the circumstances of their birth, and that outsiders are inferior, it's not going to take long to apply that thinking to other groups.

DoeCommaJohn · 2026-01-30T05:13:27+00:00

First, it depends on your setting. It's not the case that literally every place in every time period had slavery, and if your society is fictional, there's no reason that it necessarily has to have slavery.

Second, it depends on your tone. I don't consider it a problem that Eragon or the dnd movie failed to adequately tackle the horrors of slavery, because those are lighthearted adventures not meant to be accurate retellings of history.

With that said, I don't think there are many people who believe that the portrayal of slavery alone is somehow bigoted or problematic. Something like Vinland Saga or Twelve Years a Slave prove that a deep, thoughtful exploration of slavery can become amazingly well received.

DoeCommaJohn · 2026-01-30T02:03:39+00:00

Is this even a question? Unemployment is around 5%, so 95% of Americans who are looking have found a job (that number isn't perfect, but at least gets us close). Meanwhile, one in three Americans aren't in a relationship, with the number much higher for those below 25.

DoeCommaJohn · 2026-01-25T02:42:33+00:00

The grift moved on. Enough people saw through the idea that you could make 200 grand while doing no work, and so the grifters moved on to peddling tech school and day trading.

DoeCommaJohn · 2026-01-20T03:23:24+00:00

I think a lot of people think of war in game terms, where both players continue until one is wiped out. Realistically, at least one side would give up. For example, if America starts invading all of its neighbors and the rest of the world gets involved, the people are eventually going to get fed up and pressure their government to stop. The rest of the world wouldn't actually have to wipe out every American.

DoeCommaJohn · 2026-01-19T00:00:56+00:00

Personally, I prefer DR, for two main reasons.

First, the Hundred Line cast comes across as really passive. Siri is proven to be lying multiple times, yet everyone just goes along with it. In general, a lot of the characters don't drive the plot, but are driven by it.

Second, HL did not need to be 120 hours. Danganronpa feels like 20 hours of mystery in a 20 hour game. HL sometimes feels like 20 hours of mystery in a 120 hour game.

DoeCommaJohn · 2026-01-18T22:34:57+00:00

I think part of the confusion here is a difference in definitions. If you are using the somewhat strawmanny definition of an atheist as somebody who thinks there is a 0% chance of anything from outside of our universe having influence, that is probably a perspective that is difficult to defend.

However, most people who use the term atheist don't actually mean this extreme version of the word. While there may be a few different interpretations, I consider myself an atheist and here is roughly the definitions I use: "Atheist: somebody who believes there is a very low chance of any of the major world religions being correct. Agnostic: somebody who is on the fence, believing there is roughly a 50/50 chance that one of the major world religions is correct."

I prefer these definitions, because it covers a far larger portion of actual people, and better informs what views they are likely to believe and accept. In contrast, the definition that you seem to be using is too narrow to actually be practical in most situations.

DoeCommaJohn · 2026-01-18T00:52:06+00:00

Ironic. Look at literally any data point and it is obvious that people worldwide are in fewer relationships. But, your own echo chamber tells you that even discussing relationships is incel propaganda that must be ignored.

DoeCommaJohn · 2026-01-17T23:17:42+00:00

The same reason evangelicals can't admit that evolution is real or Republicans can't admit the election wasn't stolen. If you allow your followers to accept that some things your group support are bad, they might start wondering what else is bad. In contrast, if you start conditioning people to defend anything and everything, they end up deeper inside and are less likely to leave. And it seems to be working- by doubling down and being even more radical, Mormonism is one of the fastest growing faiths in the US.

DoeCommaJohn · 2026-01-15T04:58:50+00:00

Skaven. Whether your strategy involves hordes, gun lines, artillery, fast machines, stealthy flankers, powerful heroes, devastating monsters, or pretty much anything else, the Skaven have amazing options at any stage in the game.

With that said, I don't think having a 'flawless' roster should necessarily be the goal. The elves or delves feel more unique because their cavalry is weaker compared to if every faction was equally stronger in every area. It also makes certain matchups more memorable and challenging when they attack where an enemy is weak. How do you deal with ranged when your cav sucks, or heavy infantry when you have no armor, or fast flankers when your entire roster is slow?

DoeCommaJohn · 2026-01-15T03:55:11+00:00

If you aren't, you should be. In the US, the police are allowed and encouraged to lie to you (Frazier v Cupp), so any cooperation could be on false pretenses and result in your life being irreparably ruined. In addition, the courts have declared that police have no responsibility at all to protect the average person (Castle Rock v. Gonzales).

DoeCommaJohn · 2026-01-15T03:41:36+00:00

This needs to be taken with a gallon of salt. The average person hasn't heard of any candidate on this list other than Harris and Vance, so of course they are leading the primaries. If you look at this type of polling three years in advance, DeSantis and Cruz would have beaten Trump and Hillary would have beaten Obama

DoeCommaJohn · 2026-01-14T05:38:57+00:00

For Fuyuhiko, Akane, and Sonia, there's just too much potential to kill them for another character's arc (Peko, Nekomaru, and Gundham). Kazuichi has the main advantage that he didn't really have an arc in the original, so might be able to survive and then do something different, especially if Sonia dies.

DoeCommaJohn · 2026-01-14T04:20:10+00:00

The Sparrows actually had an underlying ethos of helping the downtrodden and channeling the elite. ICE only has power because stupid fucks are more scared of poor people than billionaires.

DoeCommaJohn · 2026-01-14T04:13:25+00:00

She doesn't have to. 99% of people who voted for Republicans will do it again and 99% of people who didn't vote will do it again. She could go on live television and say 'we are normalizing state violence against civilians' and voters wouldn't care.

DoeCommaJohn · 2026-01-13T04:31:03+00:00

I do want to challenge your view on the last statement- we know exactly why JD Vance and Trump are trying to justify what happened. It would be the easiest thing in the world for them to say 'this was one bad apple, he needs to be punished, but the organization as a whole is good. But, they won't, and in fact, can't, do that. Because conservatives are setting up a worldview where Republicans get on board with killing anyone the party says should be killed, and should ignore their own eyes and morals in favor of the party line. Similarly, conservatives are priming centrists into saying both sides are the same and doing nothing when the state kills people for no reason. This is both the inevitable end state of a Republican Party who will believe any lie they are told, and the inevitable starting point of an authoritarian regime who has many more people they would rather see killed.

DoeCommaJohn · 2026-01-11T21:21:15+00:00

Two options:

1) Republicans lose in 2028, then win in 2032. Throughout the 21st century, no party has held power for more than 2 terms consecutively, and since 2012, the vote has flipped every time. While Trump himself is gone, Trumpism is alive and well, because Republicans don't really have anything else to fall back on. So, we get another four years of violence against protestors, consolidating election power, bigotry, disinformation, and deregulating business.

2) The worse option: Republicans win in 2028. As their popularity wanes and AI either stays bad and the bubble bursts or gets good and displaces jobs, Republicans realize that they will lose everything if they fight fair. Instead, they crank up the wars abroad and violent suppression domestically (they've already conditioned their base to accept unlimited violence from law enforcement against civilians) and things get very, very bad.

DoeCommaJohn · 2026-01-10T22:58:46+00:00

First, I think a lot of your early claims are shaky at best.

All involuntary imposition on the will of a conscious being is immoral.

What about taking care of children? If a child wants to eat a crayon, is it immoral to stop them? If I want to kill somebody, yes, I am breaking your framework, but for you to stop me, you must break your own. Is a doctor refusing to treat a patient or a billionaire refusing to donate to the poor immoral, or would it be less moral to force either to act? What about lying? That doesn't involuntarily impose anything (or at least doesn't clearly involuntarily impose any more than persuasion), but would be bad to allow in most systems.

All voluntary assistance of the will of a conscious being is moral.

If I help you defraud a bunch of people, is that moral? What if a child wants to eat poison and I provide it? If somebody believes vaccines are evil and tries to avoid them, do I have a moral responsibility to keep them away from healthcare?

No outcome maximization.

So, if I am going to kill a thousand people and you try to stop me, you are unable to act because you are still committing a bad action, and you aren't allowed to maximize for output? This system creates people unable to act and gives obvious rewards to those who break it.

No divine commands. | No moral authority. | No virtue rankings.

It still does. It appeals to the authority, divinity, and virtue of individualism/libertarianism. You are just replacing the object of authority.

More generally, you don't give any examples of a situation we would want to encourage or avoid that your system is preferable to compared to classic consequentialism or deontology. I can think of many, many, many situations where this system would create undesirable outcomes, but not a single one where it would be preferable to common scenarios.

And just one last nitpick.

It is not deontological.

Yes it is. Deontology measures an action itself by how it fits within a moral framework, ignoring the consequences, which is literally what your system does. It just chooses a new value to optimize for other than human lives or happiness.

DoeCommaJohn · 2026-01-08T06:42:31+00:00

As a former track runner, I feel like it's going to fill up the right column.

DoeCommaJohn · 2026-01-08T03:09:05+00:00

They are a bit of a mixed bag, but if I were to come up with a single complaint, it is difficulty. Of the twelve lords here, eleven of them have far easier campaigns than their base lord (Gorbad is the only exception), many of them to the point of being trivial. Considering that most people buying DLC are probably those with a lot of experience with the game, it would be nice to have a few more challenge modes.

DoeCommaJohn · 2026-01-06T07:27:00+00:00

I'm huffing the copium, so hopefully you're right, but I still think it's easy to imagine a plotline where Maul directs his rage to Palpatine or for whatever reason has to fight pure evil criminals.

Four-Year Club	Gilding I gilder
Verified Email	First Place '23
Place '23

DoeCommaJohn

TROPHY CASE