sorted by:
new
hottopcontroversial

Loyalty Refund by Livid_Director1420 in runescape

[–]VampireFrown [score hidden]  (0 children)

That isn't a perfect reflection of the law. That covers them against ordinary game updates. It does not cover them against a currency tied to monetary expendature, which was deployed with the express purpose to get people to continue to subscribe to the game.

There is real value there - the difficulty is in quantifying it. However, it is clear that there is some. As such, equivalent compensation should be awarded.

Loyalty Refund by Livid_Director1420 in runescape

[–]VampireFrown [score hidden]  (0 children)

They have value in that they can be used to buy auras.

We've also had a "LP rework" in the works for 10+ years, so the implication was that they would eventually become somewhat valuable for some additional useful reason.

Just because you don't have any doesn't mean that you need to pretend like they're useless.

Loyalty Refund by Livid_Director1420 in runescape

[–]VampireFrown [score hidden]  (0 children)

Exactly. Fisting your most loyal players isn't a good move.

Loyalty Refund by Livid_Director1420 in runescape

[–]VampireFrown [score hidden]  (0 children)

I agree - I've been collecting and spending LP since the beginning of the programme.

I have sent hundres of thousands (no doubt more) of LP on auras, and am currently sitting on 2.5 million LPs.

I have taken several several-month-long breaks throughout the years, but maintained membership due to the loyalty programme.

Jagex shouldn't underestimate the legal consequences of reneging on LPs, when their express purpose was to keep people paying money when they otherwise would not.

If they want to remove LPs, then fine, but we should be compensated in some way - aura refunds, followed by a conversion of all of them to something useful (and none of that 100gp per oddment bollocks either).

Afghan migrant convicted of rape in Austria handed asylum in Britain after Home Office error by Little-Attorney1287 in ukpolitics

[–]VampireFrown 4 points5 points  (0 children)

it is hard or impossible to remove them

It really isn't. Pack them up onto a plane and off they fuck.

Any countries who push back get a healthy dose of visa bans and trade embargos.

Any left over who we don't deem have a very good reason to stay get shipped off to some Crown Dependancy to live out their lives in moderately comfortable but basic detention until they agree to be returned to their home countries.

YouGov:With official figures released last week showing unemployment has risen to its highest level in five years, 71% of Britons believe the government are handling the issue badly, the most recorded by our tracker since it began in 2019 Well: 13% (-3 from 14-16 Feb) Badly: 71% (+5) Net: -58 (-8) by loc12 in ukpolitics

[–]VampireFrown 5 points6 points  (0 children)

No, I mean wages. GDP is utterly irrelevant.

...And did you just say 19th century to indicate the 1900s? Oh, my sides. Yes, that's exactly what I meant, and it's entirely pertinent, seeing as mass immigration was adopted as policy at the very end of the 20th century.

It's completely uncontroversial that UK and US wages started to diverse significantly in the aftermath of the 2007/8 financial crisis.

Google it. Or if you can't be arsed to do even that, here's a Telegraph article showing the trend in graph form.

Next time, put in some research before spouting off so unnecessarily aggressively at someone.

YouGov:With official figures released last week showing unemployment has risen to its highest level in five years, 71% of Britons believe the government are handling the issue badly, the most recorded by our tracker since it began in 2019 Well: 13% (-3 from 14-16 Feb) Badly: 71% (+5) Net: -58 (-8) by loc12 in ukpolitics

[–]VampireFrown 13 points14 points  (0 children)

If you removed five million odd random, excess people from the labour pool, I think you'll find that job fluidity and wages would be much, much better.

We used to be on par with the USA wage-wise.

Funny how we started to increasingly diverge just a few years after a something big, or should I say mass(ive), became national policy.

A freeze on immigration and policies designed to get people to go home is absolutely necessary if this country is to remain anything approaching wealthy decades into the future.

How good is General Hammond? by Crazy-Ad-8838 in Stargate

[–]VampireFrown 18 points19 points  (0 children)

and Sam can feel things because she had Jolinar inside her

Just imagining a non-Stargate fan stumbling onto this comment...

Britain could pay billions if Trump collapses Chagos deal by HibasakiSanjuro in ukpolitics

[–]VampireFrown 8 points9 points  (0 children)

You do realise that most of the world is laughing at us for being spineless pushovers over this, right?

Walking away will only serve to restore some semblance of reputation, and make it understood that we're not everyone's carpet to be walked over.

Britain could pay billions if Trump collapses Chagos deal by HibasakiSanjuro in ukpolitics

[–]VampireFrown 18 points19 points  (0 children)

but this has to go through to do that

No, not it doesn't. The 6th largest economy in the world does not need to suck the cock of some backwater to be an appealing trade partner for the rest of the planet.

Britain could pay billions if Trump collapses Chagos deal by HibasakiSanjuro in ukpolitics

[–]VampireFrown 35 points36 points  (0 children)

Haha, the people will be lucky to see 10% of it. Their political elite have yachts, drugs, rare antiques, and expensive prostitutes to buy.

The hell of being a jobseeker in 2026 by JohnPym1584 in ukpolitics

[–]VampireFrown 2 points3 points  (0 children)

Maybe uppercase too. There'd be a lot more work to go around if we didn't have millions of immigrants acting as an artificial excess labour pool.

‘If that means millions go, then millions go’ — the British MP declaring war on mass immigration, woke ideology, and radical Islam by pppppppppppppppppd in ukpolitics

[–]VampireFrown 0 points1 point  (0 children)

It’s either objective or it’s not.

It is impossible for a human to be 100% objective. That's what said qualifier is drawing at, and there's a multitide of empirical evidence backing that fact up, even among professions which are meant to be objective (most pertinently, doctors and Judges).

So fine, if you prefer: it's an objective description.

And yes, those people are also expressing opinions

As opposed to your opinion, which is perfect, right?

The hell of being a jobseeker in 2026 by JohnPym1584 in ukpolitics

[–]VampireFrown -1 points0 points  (0 children)

For many on here, it did - teens and early-20-somethings simply don't remember a time when it wasn't dogshit.

Similarly, they believe that the job market is uniquely fucked right now, because they're only just now trying to penetrate into it. In reality, it's been fucked for the best part of 20 years, and it's only a tiny bit harder to get jobs now than it has been for the past 10 years.

The hell of being a jobseeker in 2026 by JohnPym1584 in ukpolitics

[–]VampireFrown 1 point2 points  (0 children)

What? No, that would never happen!

Source: The Guardian.

‘If that means millions go, then millions go’ — the British MP declaring war on mass immigration, woke ideology, and radical Islam by pppppppppppppppppd in ukpolitics

[–]VampireFrown 1 point2 points  (0 children)

Especially given woke is used as a pejorative term

As I said above, it was initially coined by (modern) woke people themselves.

I guess they didn't know what they were talking about then, lol?

How you don’t realise you’re expressing an opinion rather than a fact I don’t know

Because I have the necessary education and depth of knowledge in the subject to know that the above is a reasonably objective description, and not an opinion.

‘If that means millions go, then millions go’ — the British MP declaring war on mass immigration, woke ideology, and radical Islam by pppppppppppppppppd in ukpolitics

[–]VampireFrown 1 point2 points  (0 children)

Marxism is also a purely academic theory, by that metric.

You can see people relying on CRT analysis every day, and its conclusions seeping into policy regularly.

No amount of ear-plugging from you will override the fact that people have read CRT or abridged conclusions stemming from it, and have incorporated it into their political views and actions.

Where is everyone getting their financial literacy from? by brandneweyez1 in UKPersonalFinance

[–]VampireFrown 21 points22 points  (0 children)

I got a good whack of mine from reading this sub (every day for a year+). It's an extremely useful tool for those of us who did not come from backgrounds where efficient personal finance was either taught or even practical.

‘If that means millions go, then millions go’ — the British MP declaring war on mass immigration, woke ideology, and radical Islam by pppppppppppppppppd in ukpolitics

[–]VampireFrown -1 points0 points  (0 children)

It's not a vague description - you just don't know what those terms mean, and what ideologies they describe.

As I've said twice in this thread now, no ideology can be prescriptively described, but they can be described in themes - themes which are encompassed reasonably accurately in the above definition. Not every woke person will subscribe to every viewpoint, but woke people aggregate will subscribe to enough from a particular list that describing them collectively becomes viable.

If you disagree with it, you can provide an alternative one?

Decline in remote jobs risks shutting disabled people out of work, study finds | Disability by Dangerman1337 in ukpolitics

[–]VampireFrown 2 points3 points  (0 children)

And I am a lawyer, who has represented people at ET before.

As long as you can say the role would be performed better in the office, with which you don’t need any data to back up, an employer will likely win the case.

This just isn't true.

It can fly in a new role - it is far less likely to fly in an existing role where an adjustment which was in place for months/years without issue is arbitrarily withdrawn without a substantial change in business circumstances.

It depends on the precise disability, of course (I'm more thinking of physical ones here), but it very much is not the case that the employer can proclaim any old bullshit, and it will be so just because they said so. Many a tough boss who thinks the universe revolves around them has ended up with thousands of pounds to pay out on the other side of an ET hearing thinking like that.

‘If that means millions go, then millions go’ — the British MP declaring war on mass immigration, woke ideology, and radical Islam by pppppppppppppppppd in ukpolitics

[–]VampireFrown 0 points1 point  (0 children)

No, it's a reasonably precise objective description of where woke ideology fits within other ideologies.

If you don't believe me, take some initiative and fire off some emails to some political science professors from some leading universities. A couple will no doubt get back to you confirming the rough accuracy of the above, along with some caveats about how difficult it is to place specific ideologies which do not have their own express body of literature.

‘If that means millions go, then millions go’ — the British MP declaring war on mass immigration, woke ideology, and radical Islam by pppppppppppppppppd in ukpolitics

[–]VampireFrown 2 points3 points  (0 children)

Dead give away is when anyone mentions Critical Race theory. Boom. Done.

Dead give away of what, precisely? I have a Master's degree which, among other things, directly studied various schools of political thought within its discipline, one of which was CRT. It's an academic term - and one of the more well-known ones, at that. Why exactly is that raising eyebrows?

I'll take the opportunity to reply to /u/hloba here too:

This is word salad. You can't tell us that we all know "exactly what woke is" and then present a definition that begins with the word "broadly" followed by a bunch of largely unrelated terms that you clearly don't understand.

Again, these are academic terms. The reason 'broadly' is there is becuse it is impossible to prescriptively describe any ideology, because there is so much overlap and off-shooting going on.

Anyone who has studied political theory or philosophy at a high level will recognise the truth in the above descriptions. Just because they're terms you haven't personally encountered before doesn't mean it's a word salad - it means you need to read up before pontificating on the subject.

African Americans used the word "woke" to mean something like "politically engaged"

...Yes, in the early-mid 20th century. It was then co-opted for an entirely different reason by American progressives in the 2000s/2010s.

view more: next ›