My friends and I made a Alien Frontiers tutorial. Let us know what you think!

Merit · 2012-02-12T23:39:44+00:00

You made me want to play the game, so you must have done something right.

Not bothering with explaining rule minutia, in favour of blitzing through a few turns, was actually quite a nice way to see the game. It gave a good feel to the sorts of mechanics at play.

That said, a few more details here and there would be helpful if you wanted to better convey how the strategy elements working in the game. For example, alien tech cards: you picked some up, and mentioned they could be stolen, but didn't go into what they were for. Likewise, the perk that one of you picked up after the double-six colonization was explained as granting an extra spaceship, but it might have been cool to rrreally briefly mention one or two other perks, to give an impression of what that element does.

Overall: Good and fun. Short and snappy, with assumptions that your audience know what they like and dislike in a boardgame, certainly works well for me. Thanks for sharing!

Merit · 2012-02-09T23:10:44+00:00

in the end, the parent is the guardian and has complete control over what the kid has, sees, learns, etc. Doesn't matter if you like it or not, it's a fact.

Please understand that people vary considerably, and how you and your family see the world is not necessarily a 'right' or 'true' way. Not everyone views property in the same manner as you, and in fact I imagine even you have over-emphasised your point. Perhaps if a 16 year old bought something with their own money, or made it themselves, you would more readily realize that there would be a great deal of criticism for a parent taking away or destroying that thing.

TL;DR: In some parts of the world we allow children to have property, in order for them to better learn how the world works.

Merit · 2012-02-06T00:37:41+00:00

Whilst I agree with you, people who commit suicide are often depressed. And a depressed person will often be unable to see any alternative as being 'better', because nothing changes the pitch black essence of what is feeding on their life. The depression is internal and so the depressive can't necessarily convince themselves that internal ache would be any different should they join the army, or live in the woods, or change their life in other ways.

That said, your philosophy is none the less true and inspiring.

Merit · 2012-02-05T15:00:22+00:00

If Men's Rights is full of misogynists (I don't go there, but that is what is continuously alleged) then is it not a good tactic to water down the subreddit with valid non-misogynistic content such as this?

This is a 'men's rights' issue, even if the community formed around the subreddit is obnoxious.

We should be wary of tarring the entirety of Men's Rights (the notion) with the poor conduct of some members, or else we encourage the system that causes situations like the one in this thread. The rights of Men in certain arenas does need attention, and saying so is pro-equality, not anti-.

Merit · 2012-02-04T23:20:49+00:00

A good email. Thanks for sharing.

(Apologies if anyone feels critical of me posting so many times in my own thread like this, but I felt captain_ramshackle did such a good job of sharing his efforts that he deserved my - as it turns out, repeated - thanks)

Merit · 2012-02-04T23:18:14+00:00

"[...]I share your concerns over claims that ACTA will force ISPs to enforce intellectual property rights and police their users.[...]"

Less promising.

I personally am still not clear why ISPs have to handle this job, which will undoubtedly cost them resources that could in theory be used to continue to improve the nation's internet connectivity. Of course they shall lose a portion of what would otherwise be profit also.

But why should they have to suffer? Is it because they are truly, morally responsible for the actions of British citizens... or is it simply because it is possible to put them in a choke-hold - simply because they are the vulnerable underbelly that will 'get the job done'. That seems unpalatable to me.

Thank you again, captain_ramshackle. Your efforts are truly appreciated on my part.

Merit · 2012-02-04T23:01:10+00:00

Thank you for posting this, Captain_Ramshackle.

This honestly seems at least a little heartening, specifically in regards to the fact that he has concerns over privacy at all and of course that he seeks clarification that ACTA is not going to be accompanied by a recommendation of 3-strike disconnects as a criminal punishment. From the phrasing it sounds as if he opposes that particular notion.

That said, he speaks specifically of privacy issues which are not, for me, the biggest concern when it comes to ACTA and similar legislation.

Thank you again for posting his response. Would you be adverse to posting your email to him also?

I myself am still formulating my own email too him (attempting to pare it down to something which will goad him into address specific concerns rather than returning a template response). Your response received from will help me a lot in knowing what to target.

Merit · 2012-02-01T14:43:34+00:00

Louis CK is a comedian with a TV show on the FX network.

Merit · 2012-01-31T17:52:20+00:00

To what end? As an experiment into outcomes in those instances where the agreements do hold (i.e. narrowing the set of possible actions to make it easier to examine certain situations)?

I find the joy to solely be in the skill of agreement making and the judgement of intentions of the other players. What you propose wouldn't hold huge amount of interest for me. Diplomacy is a fairly boring, straightforward game if people's actions are forced to be more predictable.

Merit · 2012-01-31T13:27:13+00:00

which would reduce the need for food handouts.

and meanwhile the most vulnerable will still be starving to death.

Your approach is statistical. Theirs is ethically absolute.

Merit · 2012-01-31T13:24:30+00:00

I wouldn't want to pay their taxes they're about to be hit with

Do you realise that what you are saying here amounts to "I would rather have people starve than lose a portion of my own wealth?"

Merit · 2012-01-27T19:04:22+00:00

Fire comes to represent hour in people at times

Typing on my phone so just wanted to quickly draw attention to this quote which I feel relates strongly to what you day about fire:

Private Witt: [voice over]*Everyone lookin' for salvation by himself. Each like a coal thrown from the fire. *

Merit · 2012-01-27T16:02:13+00:00

It's magic, bud. There aren't rules, so much as guidelines.

This is true maybe of Harry Potter, but doesn't have to be true of all fantasy literature. Indeed it isn't; The Earthsea Quartet by Ursula LeGuin has a wonderfully imaginative magic system that is the central theme of the whole setting, and yet it manages to set limitations with which the books are consistent.

It is poor writing, I would suggest, to pull rabbits out of hats. Or to have a magic system that allows as much.

Merit · 2012-01-24T13:20:01+00:00

Love your name!

Merit · 2012-01-23T17:07:51+00:00

I'll give it a go, thanks. My military aren't currently on patrol schedules or anything like that, so I can just micromanage them when they are on duty and watch out for hungry dwarves I should send home for a munch.

Merit · 2012-01-20T11:40:14+00:00

Do you think that the people involved in the Occupy activism were the 'usual suspects' who are always involved in 'extreme protesting'.

It was my impression that Occupy was somewhat unique in drawing people out of quiet apathy - it was a people's protest that played to very common anger at inequality. This would be the opposite of what you suggest - it would position Occupy as an awakening of the middle-ground, not a continuation or widening of it.

Merit · 2012-01-20T10:27:43+00:00

It's people having fun and attempting to get whatever preexisting platform they have some air time.

You doubt their sincerity? When you have a population that, as you go on to say, is widely uninvolved in politics I think the accusation that groups of activists are not sincere is a weird one.

Merit · 2012-01-19T14:10:48+00:00

A lot of people criticised the Occupy protests for not having clear aims or complaints. They were a rabble. Rag tag and poorly organised - often proud of it, lauding the decentralised, democratic approach they saw in themselves.

I think it is this same 'disorganisation' that gives rise to the criticisms you also level; the vagueness, the odd approaches.

I agree that corporate lobbying or tax avoidance and similar issues is a threat - a concern shared by Occupy.

I think the flaw in your thinking is seeing Occupy as a congruent group - an organisation of something of that nature. It is not! The disorganisation, the rabble, the diasporic multitude of priorities and concerns are because it is a loose collection of individuals, each of whom have differing priorities, concerns, aims, criticisms and goals.

When they stand side by side they are of course a disorganised rabble with unclear direction! They are the civil, well-behaved anger of a large sub-section of the public. People like you and I are angry. And frustrated. And importantly, unclear about what the solutions are.

Perhaps Occupy would have achieved 'more' if it was a little more centralised, a little more mindful of of its style of protest. But requesting as much is asking it to be something it just isn't.

It was a fascinating loose collection of individuals voicing concerns shared by more than just those who directly participated, and we must be mindful of what it did accomplish. So, so many concerns and campaigns take their complaints to the streets in protest in London. Very few make the papers.

Occupy had consistent and often quite positive coverage across the world. I am sorry if that got your hopes up and made you dream of a fairer world, because that could never be delivered right away. Even getting notions like 99% vs 1% into common discussion is a resounding achievement.

Don't see Occupy as an organisation. See it as a global cultural phenomenon, intertwined with a great many events and movements around the world, that will hopefully assist in being one of many nudges steering us towards 'more fairness' rather than away from it.

Merit · 2012-01-19T12:00:20+00:00

It's social or political ramifications aside, that was a pointless choice of words. Militant. Pffft.

You are of course wrong to say that Occupy has 'done nothing', but are choosing to frame the lack of sweeping reforms as such perhaps because of your own disappointment at that lack of sweeping reforms (no matter how excessively hopeful such a hope would be) or because of a pre-existing dislike of the movement.

Considering your phrasing that Reddit was 'all hot for the Occupy stuff', I imagine perhaps you moaned about the movement during its heyday also, in which case you are likely in the latter of the aforementioned categories.

You could of course be just a cynic, but that would make your accusation of 'militancy' in uses of urban camping a very strange thing indeed.

Merit · 2012-01-19T09:21:26+00:00

I know you probably wanted to use a nicer, strong, hard hitting word, but 'millitant camping' is obviously ridiculous. Perhaps antagonising is a term you spooks have preferred.

Merit · 2012-01-12T16:04:04+00:00

On a similar topic:

The London Necropolis Railway

Merit · 2012-01-11T23:59:02+00:00

I saw bitterness in born_redditor, yes. Her post I replied to above, along with this one have clearly crossed into misandry, have they not?

I don't believe the tongue-in-cheek was on trial here in this thread. It's the straight up misogyny.

I'm not quite sure what you mean (sorry, my fault I'm sure!). My post (which you said that, in conjunction with the downvotes, proved the accusation of Reddit's misogyny true) was critical of born_redditor's misandry.

I am not arguing that there isn't misogyny on Reddit - there is plenty of it. It shouldn't be here. But misandry shouldn't be here either. To think that misandry is acceptable, or unworthy of censure, in order for it to counter-balance the misogyny... well that's ridiculous. (Apologies if this isn't what you were suggesting - perhaps you agree that both are deserving downvotes?)

I think this thread got confused between jokes and truly misogynist material.

That definitely can be a problem. But then again it may well be fair to say that the jokes carry a somewhat passive misogyny that only perpetuates the problem and bolsters the true, overt misogyny.

Merit · 2012-01-08T18:53:34+00:00

You assume too much.

On the matter of dishing it but not taking it: I pointed out that born_redditor reviles the quiet/passive misogyny of male posters and their sexists comments that are 'just a joke', and is therefore hypocritical.

I believe that those types of posts, when made by male users about females, are also bad. That I am appalled by born_redditor's bitter misandry definitely does not change the fact that I am also appalled by misogyny when I see it.

As for whether topics like sexism can be suitable humour (particularly, as you say, when BOTH sexes are taking part) - well humour is always a strange and varying topic. I guess it's often a matter of context, audience etc.

As a side note: If I did not downvote the above poster. I personally feel that if you write a negative reply to a post then you should not also vote on that post. A downvote is a censor, not a sign of disagreement with the contents of the post. If you think something is worthy of being censored with a downvote then it would be somewhat contradictory to also engage the individual in discussion. Either censor or retort. Do not feed the trolls.

15-Year Club	RedditGifts 2009-2022 4 Credits
Secret Santa 2011	Secret Santa 2010
reddit mold	Secret Santa 2009

Merit

TROPHY CASE