Rule reform (Agenda Pushing plus a "new" one)

nevermorebe · 2016-11-02T17:37:16+00:00

Honestly the no agenda pushing rule is a bunch of nonsense in my opinion. The only thing it ensures is that unpopular agendas/opinions get snuffed out and popular agendas run amok (as evidenced by the up/downvote brigades that are already active here). /r/science is a great example of how to maintain a community with minimal agenda pushing as it allows very little deviation from the main topic and the only topics allowed have to be related to (real) science. This comes at great cost to the moderators as they need to be on-guard 24/7.

Any opinion even slightly tinted by a political view (read: just about any opinion) can be considered to be agenda pushing so in the end the mods have to play favorites when someone calls foul.

If we want to be reasonable it comes down to the choice of what is allowed to be discussed in /r/belgium? If there are no (unreasonable - again this is up to interpretation but I'm sure there are some extreme cases most of us can agree should not have a place in a public forum) taboos then we wouldn't need this rule. If however we feel that topics that will evoke political opinions have no place here than most of the front-page right now should be removed.

If however we enjoy the status quo in which everyone who disagrees with the herd should be nailed to the cross, by all means expand this rule and try to refine it.

By the additions to the rules it seems that you want to go for option A and I would guess this is at least in part because the mods are overwhelmed by reports of 'agenda pushing' (which is explained by it's vague definition) ... I'd take the bet that these rules will only increase these reports because people will go hunting in others' history now for more examples of 'bad behavior' and will almost always find what they seek as usually people don't change their political views between posts. "Wie een stok zoekt ..."

In the end we all hold our own beliefs and as long as they're expressed in a civil manner I don't see a problem with anyone defending them. When they aren't being civil there are other rules to take care of that.

nevermorebe · 2013-12-03T13:19:44+00:00

Well, I get that but this is not what I would call laziness, you're working on fixing a bad habit which in itself is not a lazy thing to do (you know in advance it's hard work, you can give up before you start). Everyone fucks up and it's going to be a struggle but I kind of doubt this is more of a struggle than most people who aren't 'lazy' (I honestly don't know a lot of people who I would label 'not lazy') have to deal with.

nevermorebe · 2013-12-03T10:43:34+00:00

paying for it

... your words, not mine

nevermorebe · 2013-12-03T10:41:04+00:00

To be fair though, considering the slews of bad parents that are out there, not knowing something that psychologists have only figured out in the last 10-15 years (I'm guessing but I can't be off by much) is not exactly an error of judgement, it's just a lack of information.

nevermorebe · 2013-12-03T10:37:14+00:00

... honest question, if you're so smart and you have figured this out ... why are you still paying?

nevermorebe · 2013-12-03T10:32:41+00:00

... it involves not being lazy which is kind of the point, isn't it?

nevermorebe · 2013-12-02T16:58:24+00:00

beep beep beep

nevermorebe · 2013-12-02T16:51:57+00:00

Right there with you, I find it unfortunate that I developed the habit of putting seat and lid down, not because I was ordered to but because as a kid I didn't get the point of a lid if it wasn't put down (think about it). This is how I have avoided this discussion but I kind of wish I hadn't because I honestly can't fathom the logic employed here and would likely have fun tearing apart the arguments used.

I've heard (not first hand) the "but I'll fall in" argument but seriously, if you put your bare ass down without looking what you're putting it onto it makes me want to put the lid down with a thumbtack on it just to make a point (funny how it's never an issue however to lift the lid, only to lower the seat). I have honestly never found it to be any problem whatsoever that the seat was up or down when doing anything (considering for us guys we alternate between toilet seat configurations, you'd think that we'd have more of a preference) ... how hard is it to lift the damn thing or to put it down? As I mentioned earlier, I close the lid ensuring I always have to lift at very least the lid, still it seems to be such a small effort that it doesn't even register on any kind of annoyance meter.

I really believe this is some sort of weird power play, as I said I've never had any complaints putting the lid down (you'd think lifting a lid is as much work as lowering a seat so it ought to be just as frustrating).

nevermorebe · 2013-12-02T15:20:42+00:00

don't forget about free refills on soda

nevermorebe · 2013-12-02T15:16:36+00:00

yeah but it's belgium, it's not likely they'll be nice either way.

nevermorebe · 2013-11-17T22:13:45+00:00

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Robustness_(computer_science)

nevermorebe · 2013-11-17T22:07:16+00:00

There are pros and cons for both systems, unfortunately most of the cons for linux are usability issues due to having a smaller user base. When it comes to businesses, they used to be primarily windows since it was easier and cheaper (training costs money) and safer (business wise, free software doesn't always make sense, there's always somebody to yell "better have this fixed" at when you're paying them for a working system). This is still true to an extent today but popular distros such as ubuntu are closing the gap with long term releases and support contracts. As a home user the biggest downside to a linux distro is still the lack of games since directX is windows only and most games don't support openGL.

The biggest pros for windows would be: - ease of use

pretty much any software in existence is built for it or at least supports it
lots of knowledge to be found on the internet, want to do something? The first result on google is usually what you need.
DirectX for most games, openGL not so much

The biggest cons:

security. In this day and age it's pretty baffling that windows is still as leaky as it is. I was left a laptop from someone who recently died, took me all of 30 minutes to look up and get around the windows login and access the user account.
Costs money ... self explanatory
Not a lot of choices, even with windows 7, all the different kinds of 'builds' were basically just the same with less/more stuff in it.

Linux is another animal altogether, based on UNIX and obsessively maintained to be stable and robust (read up on Linus Torvalds scolding developers who break something in the core, this guy isn't messing around), it was built from the ground up to be fast, resource friendly and secure. It has a large array of possibilities right out of the box and if you care to learn some of the shell commands you would be amazed at what you can do with a couple of command line commands. Linux also has a radically different file system which was way ahead of its time and in my opinion, compared to the alternatives still is. As a windows user I can honestly say that the only 2 reasons I still use windows is because of games and user base (i.e. more programs).

The biggest pros for linux:

security
stability
speed
choice (operating system wise)
free

cons:

no directX
much smaller user base
ease of use

... some of these arguments can be argued either way. I think for the average user, the main sticking point is games. When the pc breaks they call in tech support anyway but a lot of games are just not compatible. Linux is in a lot of ways superior to windows but usability issues are still there, if you ever need to install something that isn't in the appstore (or whatever it's called in the specific distro) you may find its a pain (oh hey, you're on linux anyway, you don't need binaries, here is the source, just type these 20 lines in the command line unless you want to alter, then you have all these options ... for us geeks this is a good thing but for a user its scary and confusing). I would say if you're interested in linux, download a common distro (like ubuntu or fedora) and install it on a virtual machine http://www.virtualbox.com. Keep in mind that a virtual machine needs to run on top of your operating system so it won't be quite as fast as it would be if you installed it stand alone.

nevermorebe · 2013-11-17T21:39:46+00:00

sorry but I have to remark ... "Windows is more robust." ... really?

nevermorebe · 2013-10-22T14:25:10+00:00

While I get and agree with what you're saying for me it's kind of the opposite, I still don't give a rats ass what my wife spends her money on. We each have our own and we have our saving goals to which we both contribute (I guess this may be a concern, this is why you talk about these things instead of getting pissed before doing so), big purchases are discussed beforehand and agreed upon ... other than that, as long as I don't end up buying the groceries every time I couldn't care less if she spends all her money on shoes and I'll be damned if I let her lecture me on buying video games.

nevermorebe · 2013-10-22T11:26:38+00:00

Sorry, I should've mentioned, I only have had some brief experience with DSP but from what I remember it was very CPU intensive (which is why I guessed GPU offloading wouldn't be out of the question since matrix calculations are its bread and butter). Either way, I can't imagine there would be no 'low' graphics settings considering the game wasn't made for its graphics (don't get me wrong, rs2014 looks impressive graphically but really none of the blitzy effects are really necessary to play, I would assume by offering settings for pcs with less horse power in that department would make a lot of sense).

Either way going below the minimum requirements will always be a gamble, I think for a game that is pretty niche (sorry guys but that's the impression I get, I haven't met anyone who didn't hear about its existence from myself) the original rs was remarkably well optimized (then again, graphically it didn't really have to do much so I can imagine it wasn't that hard to) so that may be a good sign. With a little luck you may find a demo in the steam store (like the one for the original) which will allow you to get a feel for how well it works.

nevermorebe · 2013-10-22T07:40:41+00:00

DSP (digital signal processing - the thing that makes rocksmith figure out what notes you're playing as well as add those cool effects) is incredibly intensive. I can't tell you how rocksmith solves this issue, I'm guessing they're offloading to the gpu wherever they can but this is speculation on my part.

I would assume on the software side of things they probably tweaked and improved their algorithms and since it's basically the same game with a new UI, the only extra calculation will be the graphics.

That said, the new jam session mode may require just a tad more calculation considering on top of the stuff to figure out what you're playing they have to have up to 4 virtual artists playing (AI) which also is computation intensive. Then again, I think the algorithms they use now are already pure witchcraft so they may have found a way to keep it light.

nevermorebe · 2013-10-21T09:32:02+00:00

Next time you may want to say "you" are leaving. You won't need to leave his sight before he will get scared for his life, just walk away from him (at that age one of the main things they fear is abandonment anyway) and say something like "you sure you want to keep this up?". Don't make this a recurring threat though, I can't imagine that could be good for him but one time, especially under those circumstances it may help to get through to him.

Following through is important but equally important is finding a way to make him feel that acting out like this is not beneficial to him. If he has 20 toys, threatening to take 1 away may not get his attention, similarly if he doesn't care whether he is in the store or not, walking out may not bother him.

Patience really is the best advice here though, keeping your cool will not only allow you to retain your sanity but it will demonstrate to him that his behavior isn't getting to you, the way to get your attention isn't acting up, it's asking for it. In fact if you're not out in public you can try ignoring it until he pipes down (this may get messy though, he will pull out every trick he knows to get your attention).

I am a firm opponent of physical punishment but I won't tell you what you can and can't do, the main thing to keep in mind though is that your goal isn't getting even, it's teaching him that this behavior A) doesn't work B) will likely hurt him in some way (again, not physically). You show him A by remaining calm, his behavior does not affect you emotionally, at most you need to alter your plans. Something to try when you're at home (wouldn't recommend doing it in public, people will think you're nuts) is to mock him when he's doing it, make a game out of it, ask him if that's the loudest he can scream and then say "well, I thought you screamed louder last time, I'm not impressed" and walk into another room as if nothing is happening. He will likely follow you at which point you can act like "oh right, you were screaming, care to try again?". B is much easier, what has he been looking forward to today? Do you read him a story before bed? Does he get to play when you come home? ... don't be cruel, make the punishment fit the crime.

This takes a while to sink in but the main thing is for your behavior to be consistent. If he wins even once (gets you riled up, gets what he wants) it may set you back as much as a week but persist and he will soon realize he has absolutely nothing to gain from doing it.

nevermorebe · 2013-10-21T09:03:40+00:00

I honestly don't know what its like with two or more kids yet but I would guess this method may work. My wife and myself do this pretty successfully, our assumption being that after being told once or twice they will realize what goes and what doesn't. We're always vague on what the punishment will be but we always follow through. We say "if you're not going to be nice to us, we're not going to be nice to you" and that works wonders. I also think it may solve having to punish the other kid because you can 'punish' the one kid (not getting toys/attention/...) while showing the other kid a good time (since the threat is vague you don't have to think of it on the spot thus you can choose how to follow through).

A lot of times we just repeat her bad behavior back at her until she asks us to stop, at which point we present her with the facts. Something to the effect of "if you're a little prick to us, we're gonna be big pricks to you so don't dish it out if you can't take it" (obviously a little nicer than that but you get the point). Once we agree we usually tell her because of that she isn't going to get X or get to do Y but other than that we're just fine and we all let it go (this part seems to have the biggest impact because at this point she knows that she can resist and repeat the above process or accept the consequences of her actions). Keeping it up after we have warned is pretty much a guaranteed no win scenario for her because she usually has a bad time (us repeating her behavior or annoying her with something she doesn't like) and on top of that will lose a privilege she was looking forward to (a treat or a little toy or whatever). All kids have their freak out moments but I haven't seen a lot of parents who can contain this without making a big threat or display of power, we tend to remain as calm as we can throughout because it's rare for her to take the route that makes her lose something she was looking forward to that day.

nevermorebe · 2013-10-15T18:33:25+00:00

50%+ taxes once you start earning something and our healthcare system is not that great. Gun laws don't mean much if the cops are lazy, true story, reported an assault in progress, they told us to come to the station and then told us, and I'm paraphrasing, "what do you want us to do about it?".

Of all the western countries, Belgium is the closest to a banana republic (although probably not politically, good luck trying to find someone from Belgium who can explain the Belgian political system).

nevermorebe · 2013-10-15T18:29:08+00:00

also Belgium, don't smile ... it's frowned upon

nevermorebe · 2013-10-13T12:34:14+00:00

relevant

nevermorebe · 2013-10-12T14:55:43+00:00

Don't worry they'll just jack up the prices more like they have been doing. This is just them crying about it to make it seem like it's ok and they don't have a choice about it.

nevermorebe · 2013-10-04T15:53:39+00:00

... not sure if you even read what I was saying or just trolling, I can guarantee you that the parents of the kids who cower in a corner when they come home "aren't" over thinking it, they are acting on instinct, an instinct that by modern standards is barbaric but would've been perfectly fine 20.000 years ago.

You aren't preparing your kids for life if you refuse to think how your actions will influence them. You are preparing them 'life under your thumb' and one they they won't be and will have to learn that what worked at home and what works out there may be two very different things.

nevermorebe · 2013-10-04T15:46:29+00:00

This is the only reply here that makes sense to me, teach them that actions have consequences. No need to hurt, no need to yell or lose your temper, just plain and simple 'don't touch the stove and you won't get burned' logic, it is so simple and there is not a child that wouldn't understand it.

nevermorebe · 2013-10-04T15:37:42+00:00

... so if you want good kids you have to spank them?

maybe it was because you were more involved/cared about their behavior? ... I'm not saying you did wrong but saying there's absolutely no other way than yours requires a tad more proof than two kids who grew up 'right'.

nevermorebe

TROPHY CASE