Allegro.cc - Online Community

Allegro.cc Forums » Off-Topic Ordeals » Beware the contributor covenant code of conduct

This thread is locked; no one can reply to it. rss feed Print
Beware the contributor covenant code of conduct
Chris Katko
Member #1,881
January 2002
avatar

Derezo said:

but rather that it's worth these minor costs to make an effort in that direction for the projects that would adopt it.

I wonder if you'd consider it a minor cost if you were the one being kicked out because some crybully got offended that you don't believe everything that they do.

[edit]

Perfect Ph.D. that hits to the crux of my earlier questions. What is it that neo-liberals are basing their entire thought-process on?

"Care."

Care for "victim groups."

And the sacralization of those victim groups.

And how when you sacralize something, that means there are "no trade offs" and you're willing to violate the other liberal tenets of “fairness, liberty, loyalty, authority, sanctity" if you need to.

video

All of it from a liberal Ph.D. Jew from NYU.

-----sig:
“Programs should be written for people to read, and only incidentally for machines to execute.” - Structure and Interpretation of Computer Programs
"Political Correctness is fascism disguised as manners" --George Carlin

Edgar Reynaldo
Major Reynaldo
May 2007
avatar

Just to chime in with my 2c, what is it with all the liberal labeling? Isn't that just a dirty word for democrat? I'm a democrat, and I consider myself liberal, in the sense that I am for change, but I am not what you might call a "bleeding heart liberal" in the same derogatory sense as everyone else here seems to be using it. </2c>.

Specter Phoenix
Member #1,425
July 2001
avatar

Well Democrats were the ones that wanted to pass bills that ban the sells of violent games to kids which would negate the whole point of the ESRB. The whole point of the ESRB is to rate games so retailers won't sell any games rated M to kids younger than 17 years of age. I'm Republican, but Democrats are the kings of making issues out of non-existent problems or side step the real issue to blame others (like mass shootings). Instead of focusing on mental health they want to blame the guns and gun manufacturers. Does that mean we need to blame pressure cooker companies for the Boston Marathon Bombers? Then of course it is also Democrats that say blaming mental health is a cop-out. No person of stable mind would think killing another human being was good.

This article brings up an important point. Games are an art form like any other and if developers are made to censor their work by cutting down violence, sexual content, etc. where will it stop? If you censor one type of art, then they will start calling for censorship of art, literature, et. al. Second article about the Sanders, Clinton, and Trump being anti-game.

Feminists have, in fact, called for censorship of games, comics, music, television, movies, and more. Two years ago they gave the exact same stance Aaron did about reducing them, but now, because some devs caved to them, they have become rabid and demanding complete removal of tropes they don't like, violence, sexual objectification, et. al. that "triggers" them.

Feminists have blatant double standards, they threw a fit over a Spider Woman art cover due to the stance she was in; screaming it was sexist, but they didn't see any issue with Spider-Man who has been drawn in the same stance for decades. Feminists get people fired for bullshit reasons and it is fine, but when a feminist is fired from their job for legit reasons they start claiming the company is sexist, racist, misogynist, or whatever label/buzzword they can throw at it trying to pressure them into hiring the person back.

How about the latest trend of Feminists claiming women can't be sexist and minorities can't be racist. If you say they can, they give the line "Reverse sexism and reverse racism doesn't exist." They are right, they don't because it is simply sexist and racist and they can go both ways.

How about when gamers started pointing out corruption in 2014 and was met with feminist critics publishing a slew of anti-gamer articles on gamer oriented sites? There were even archived instances where anti-gamer feminists would offer game codes for Smash Bros or other popular games if they would tweet sexist or racist things under a certain hashtag, but the media ignored that to sell gamers as sexist hate mobs that lived in their parent's basement with no lives or girlfriends.

Derezo said:

I don't think the argument is that these problems are non-existant, but rather that it's worth these minor costs to make an effort in that direction for the projects that would adopt it. It's not happening on a wide scale, these are isolated incidents (and not necessarily unjustified from what I've read).

Yes, I've seen everyone claim that while others were being removed from a project, but it becomes a completely different story when you are the one that is being removed due to false allegations of breaking CoC.

People have become so freaking babied that they apparently can't handle variable names now.

History shows us how minor issues, when ignored, grow to become huge issues, but why learn from history since it seems everyone is happy trying to relive it.

"Can't a man even talk to himself without being interrupted?" -Krull(1983)
"Through vengence I was born. Through war I was trained. Through love I was found. Through death I was released. Through release I was given a purpose." -- Specter Phoenix
"Programming == AWESOME the rest is just tools to accomplish it."
END OF LINE

bamccaig
Member #7,536
July 2006
avatar

Yes, I've seen everyone claim that while others were being removed from a project, but it becomes a completely different story when you are the one that is being removed due to false allegations of breaking CoC.

No need for a false allegation (I just noticed the irony of allegation, anybody else?). You can be legitimately "wrong" by the wording of the CoC and have done nothing definitively wrong. That's the problem with it. Political correctness is not a universal law that we discovered in the universe. It's just some group of ideas that the popular kids in class have decided are popular right now. Not just popular, but powerful. Not right. Just popular. Do I need to go over other popular ideas? Note, if you live in the USA "evolution" isn't one of them. Even if you don't, popular ideas aren't particularly good.

It's an easy snake oil to sell. "You believe female humans deserve not to be beaten to death with a steel penis, don't you? THEN YOU'RE ONE OF US, HERE'S YOUR STICKER AND BALLOON!"

There no room for, "Yes, but..." in the discussion. You're either "in" or you're out (it's much easier to be out than in, and much easier to become out than in, but I'm digressing). The problem with the Contributor Covenant as it stands is that its primary focus seems to be on required enforcement by law. In other words, if somebody can be argued to have breached the Contributor Covenant adopted by a project then the project may be subject to litigation to determine if the project acted appropriately in punishing that person. It doesn't even matter if you punish them. Presumably, they can target you even if they aren't satisfied with your punishment. I.e., if you didn't tie them to a wooden cross surrounded in firewood and ignited while chanting "girl power" then you failed to meet the requirements.

Again there's no need for a CoC to enforce rules in a community. Projects have existed for decades without a "Contributor Covenant" and have enforced rules. Surely anybody here that isn't completely new to the Internet has had the experience of coming to a new community, an enthusiastic virgin only to be scorned for poor behavior and reluctantly directed towards the FAQ or rules or whatever. No SJW's necessary to not be an asshole. Best yet, no overly sensitive people welcome either. Nobody on the Internet cares if your uterus is purging its lining from a failed cycle of receptivity. Have good ideas and respond in the appropriate format or be prepared to weather the beating. That's not an unreasonable expectation from volunteers whose time is very valuable. Fortunately there are typically various "tiers" of communication channels to give beginners a "safe space" to ask stupid questions. No Feminism required.

Our "industry", profession, and hobby houses some of the most rational minds on the planet by virtue of it's traditionally required secret handshake of being able to understand logic. Closed minds are unwelcome.

That's not to say that there aren't plenty of "professionals" in the industry that can't do the handshake, but strictly speaking you don't need to be in the club to start a business. Being a "professional" doesn't entitle you to membership. It's unfortunate that these people continue to fill contracts and it's arguably a failure of the industry that they don't wither and die.

From personal experience in gaming spheres, typically the "safe feeling" of sensitive groups comes at the expense of my freedom. In other words, the boy's club is no longer a boy's club. You can't tell a sexist, FUNNY joke because somebody might be offended. You can't use swear words because somebody might believe that spook will torture them for hearing it. Essentially take all of the fun out of games for non-neutered males. While they're at it they will try to police user content to be G-rated while playing a "mature" game. It's OK for their 7 year old to "headshot" a police officer, but Heaven forbid you say or type "damn" just in case they're playing.

What if the situation was reversed? What if I insisted that a hair salon play rap music and its stylists joke about murder and rape? That's essentially what is being done, but in reverse. I challenge you to qualify without subjective ideals why one is more legitimate than the other.

Boys tend to be a bit more "raunchy" than girls. Nobody is paying the girls to show up to the gaming scene. If they decide to play the boy's games they have no privilege, right, or special power to change it. We have just as much say as they do. If there's more of us then we can just say, NO. We like it how it is. Very much. It is a boy's club. If you want to join then you better like that too or at least deal with it. If you don't then feel free to create your own group. Let the two compete and see where the majority of players prefer to play. Based on personal experiences I suspect the result won't be the PC one.

There are plenty of female gamers that embrace the "raunchy" community. They [appear to] love it the way it is. The few SJWers that are kicking around are hated and muted and only tolerated insofar as they can't hurt us once they're muted, but if they realize their ineffectiveness and try to hack us they are instantly banned...

Specter Phoenix
Member #1,425
July 2001
avatar

I can only speak from my experience in recent years with SJWs and I don't think there are many projects that adopt CoC that won't be subjected to SJW manipulation. The GamerGate controversy showcases their determination to ruin everything just to run their ideology.

Most people ignored the GamerGate controversy or blindly believed the press that claimed it was a hate mob. Now with the DNC Leak and the press trying to cover it up I'm hoping it makes some people re-evaluate the articles about the revolt and see that they are grossly one-sided and always arguing in favor of the feminist arguments. I've been pro-GG from day one. A lot of people stated that it was all just paranoia, that nothing was going to come from this new wave of people hating on games...

Proposed education curriculum for Juniors and Seniors in high school, sounds rather anti-male.
Gamespot has already had a game review that docked points for "offensive language" and "blatantly objectifies women".

Game journalists are so full of themselves that they truly believe they control the game industry. Last year I saw a series of tweets that made me wonder if they really do. After all the controversy around GamerGate, a games journalist tweeted to the hashtag with a series of tweets that basically stated "Who cares if what we said about you wasn't 'true'. In the court of public opinion you're [gamers are] ruined. We won." Then you have developers like Tim Schafer who took a shot at GamerGate during the GDC event by basically claiming all of the upset gamers were just a few people with sock puppet accounts.

The glimmer of hope is that more and more developers like Bethesda are starting to blacklist the very game sites that published the ~18 anti-gamer articles and even more are ignoring or refusing to make comments to them due to their unethical and untrustworthy behavior.
This article is the first one I recall that didn't attack gamers.
Quite a few articles talk about the effect of feminism on gaming.
Brianna Wu and some feminists have actually talked about burning the industry to the ground and rebuilding it the way they want it to be [more women, fewer men]. Some meant it figuratively, others meant it literally.

Was Googling and found that feminists LOVE CoC...Found a few links.

Though, while doing that I stumbled upon this and died laughing: C+=, A new language for feminists.

People all for CoC.
People against CoC.
Blog about why one person doesn't want CoC.

The first link highlighted why CoC is potentially bad. Over the years, beginners asking the same question over and over got to where the veteran Allegro users replied with "RTFM". According to the CoC that would be viewed as talking down or treating lesser experienced programmers poorly. So if Allegro.cc had a CoC and you replied to a beginner question with "RTFM" it could be grounds to remove you from the site or place restrictions upon you. Instead you would have to either ignore the question or bring yourself to answering it as politely as possible or, in several cases, hold their hands through the entire process. For some on here, that is a Herculean task.

For your viewing pleasure on Feminists and Google's Anti-Harassment campaign. It starts over at the mid way point because the backup uploader starts posting pictures of other data to support the Youtuber's claims.

video

The most interesting part was that Zoe Quinn claims to want to end online harassment and bullying, but when a African American woman, Candice Owens, came wanting to start Social Autopsy, Quinn started begging her not to start the site and actually defended bullies saying "She didn't believe they were bad people". Oddly enough Owens started being attacked by people claiming to be GamerGate even though Quinn was the only person she had gave her personal email to. Doh!.

"Can't a man even talk to himself without being interrupted?" -Krull(1983)
"Through vengence I was born. Through war I was trained. Through love I was found. Through death I was released. Through release I was given a purpose." -- Specter Phoenix
"Programming == AWESOME the rest is just tools to accomplish it."
END OF LINE

Dizzy Egg
Member #10,824
March 2009
avatar

I prefer junglists.

----------------------------------------------------
Please check out my songs:
https://soundcloud.com/dont-rob-the-machina

torhu
Member #2,727
September 2002
avatar

Basically, this is how the SJW's think society works... ;D
{"name":"job-privilege-comic.png","src":"\/\/djungxnpq2nug.cloudfront.net\/image\/cache\/0\/f\/0f4482bf31ad7a0a92ff6334db93c1bf.png","w":1160,"h":420,"tn":"\/\/djungxnpq2nug.cloudfront.net\/image\/cache\/0\/f\/0f4482bf31ad7a0a92ff6334db93c1bf"}job-privilege-comic.png
http://redpanels.com/200/

Chris Katko
Member #1,881
January 2002
avatar

Watch that video I posted. Over 40% of liberals outright admitted they would discriminate against new hires who were openly conservative.

The group whose biggest mandate is "elimination of discrimination" openly discriminates. And they justify it as "Well, those people are 'bad people (xenophobe/bigot/racist/backwards/stupid)' therefor, it's okay."

AND I'M NOT EVEN A CONSERVATIVE. I'm anti-lying. I'm anti-cheating. I'm anti-bullying--no matter WHO the victims and attackers are. I'm what a liberal should be: fair.

-----sig:
“Programs should be written for people to read, and only incidentally for machines to execute.” - Structure and Interpretation of Computer Programs
"Political Correctness is fascism disguised as manners" --George Carlin

Erin Maus
Member #7,537
July 2006
avatar

Liberals believe conservatives [are racist/bigoted/xenophobic], damn those liberal crybabies!

---
ItsyRealm, a quirky 2D/3D RPG where you fight, skill, and explore in a medieval world with horrors unimaginable.
they / them / their

torhu
Member #2,727
September 2002
avatar

I'm also leftish and relatively liberal. Might be interesting to see where people fall on The Political Compass.

This is my result from a while ago:
{"name":"610473","src":"\/\/djungxnpq2nug.cloudfront.net\/image\/cache\/f\/8\/f865362a94303d3b8dd8ed8c4c8f50a4.png","w":480,"h":400,"tn":"\/\/djungxnpq2nug.cloudfront.net\/image\/cache\/f\/8\/f865362a94303d3b8dd8ed8c4c8f50a4"}610473

Erin Maus
Member #7,537
July 2006
avatar

I'm somewhere around (-8, -9).

It's only a marginally less useless metric than the one-dimensional 'left-right' scale.

---
ItsyRealm, a quirky 2D/3D RPG where you fight, skill, and explore in a medieval world with horrors unimaginable.
they / them / their

torhu
Member #2,727
September 2002
avatar

Hm, that would make you basically an anarchist?

Erin Maus
Member #7,537
July 2006
avatar

No. Although leftist anarchists would fall in the same area as I do, I believe the state is a necessary buffer to prevent chaos, and very well could always be necessary in spirit, if not practice, regardless of technological advances.

---
ItsyRealm, a quirky 2D/3D RPG where you fight, skill, and explore in a medieval world with horrors unimaginable.
they / them / their

beoran
Member #12,636
March 2011

Well, suddenly a lot of discussion which I appreciate.

I took a fe smaller actions for myself. I wrote my own alternative to a code of conduct, a text name WELCOME, which contains an invitation to anyone to conribute, some basic rules (no spam, behave like an adult, don't try to argue aout the project's goals) and a prominent disclaimer that no, you can't sue me for me failing to let you contribute my project or if I don't follow my own rules. And I moved my active github repositories to gitlab.com which seems to have somewhat more reasonable policies. I hope they don't DDOS that too... :p

Specter Phoenix
Member #1,425
July 2001
avatar

It's hard to believe people have rights if everything we do is expected to be directed by the government. I'm just waiting for the asshole law that dictates a fine or jail time for a person being an asshole.

Wanting the government to control everything is just a new form of dictatorship. Instead of having one single person until their death, you get to elect in your dictator.

HEGVA to talk at DNC: http://higheredgames.org/wp-content/uploads/2016/07/HEVGA-2016-DNC-Press-Release.pdf

The comedy that is Anita Sarkeesian:
{"name":"CoZRCOIUAAAxJsW.jpg","src":"\/\/djungxnpq2nug.cloudfront.net\/image\/cache\/8\/a\/8a1230c143d59bcde02535dc76ceb9a6.jpg","w":594,"h":378,"tn":"\/\/djungxnpq2nug.cloudfront.net\/image\/cache\/8\/a\/8a1230c143d59bcde02535dc76ceb9a6"}CoZRCOIUAAAxJsW.jpg
If you do this, she will make a video or tweet attacking you for making them either too sexualized or not fleshed out enough for the game. You can't win with them.

Feminists have become so disconnected from reality that they are fighting for fictional women instead of real women. That is how much of a joke Feminism has become.

"Can't a man even talk to himself without being interrupted?" -Krull(1983)
"Through vengence I was born. Through war I was trained. Through love I was found. Through death I was released. Through release I was given a purpose." -- Specter Phoenix
"Programming == AWESOME the rest is just tools to accomplish it."
END OF LINE

Edgar Reynaldo
Major Reynaldo
May 2007
avatar

Democrats are the kings of making issues out of non-existent problems or side step the real issue to blame others (like mass shootings).

Just wanted to call you out on this. This is a very broad statement, with zero evidence given to support it.

Specter Phoenix said:

Instead of focusing on mental health they want to blame the guns and gun manufacturers.

So arms manufacturers are not responsible for what people do with their products? What about nuclear bombs? What about chemical weapons? What about assault rifles? These are not civilian weapons we're talking about. These are weapons of war. Do we really want people to have weapons capable of such massive destruction in the hands of Mr. Joe public? That's exactly the reason why the shooting in Orlando was possible, because assault style weapons were legal. You're trying to take the blame away from the people causing the problem by blaming it on mental health issues. It's not possible to track every person with mental health problems. There will always be people with mental health issues. But what is possible is to ban high power, high capacity, high ROF assault rifles that have no business being in the hands of the public. You don't need an M-16 or a Sig Sauer to go hunting.

http://www.denverpost.com/2016/06/12/the-gun-used-in-the-orlando-nightclub-shooting-is-becoming-mass-shooters-weapon-of-choice/

Quote:

Of the 79 mass shootings since 1982, 63 were committed with guns purchased legally.

If you read the article I just linked, it clearly points out how many different attacks over the years were carried out with completely legal weapons. Tell me the law is not at fault and I'll tell you you're full of it.

There will always be persons with mental health issues. But we don't have to legally arm them with assault rifles. Those are only made for one thing. Killing lots of people at a time, and doing it quickly.

I have schizophrenia. Do you think I should be legally prevented from obtaining a firearm to defend my own home? I am a responsible law abiding citizen, but you would take away my right to defend myself (reasonably, with a reasonable weapon).

And don't give me some argument about how we need to form citizen militias. Because no one is invading our country, and our government isn't a dictatorship.

bamccaig
Member #7,536
July 2006
avatar

Needs more dimensions! >:(

Quote:

Economic Left/Right: -5.63
Social Libertarian/Authoritarian: -8.0
{"name":"610474","src":"\/\/djungxnpq2nug.cloudfront.net\/image\/cache\/6\/8\/6850483a10a0ee6738dea76e1df09fac.png","w":480,"h":400,"tn":"\/\/djungxnpq2nug.cloudfront.net\/image\/cache\/6\/8\/6850483a10a0ee6738dea76e1df09fac"}610474

Chris Katko
Member #1,881
January 2002
avatar

One of my favorite things from that video I linked. According to liberal ideology, they SHOULD be the ones who are against abortion.

After all, liberals are the ones that are supposed to care about unprotected / disenfranchised, and are willing to curb other's liberties in order to protect them. (Including even animals, but laughably not 6-month old fetuses.)

And Ayn Rand, who wrote Atlas Shrugged, the GOP Bible? She was in SUPPORT of abortion because it exemplified a woman's freedom of personal choice--a very conservative notion. The freedom to smoke, drink, and damage ones body.

Of course, conservatives are insane too and don't bother extending personal freedom to "illegal drugs", but smoking and drinking are somehow the embodiment of Patriotism.

Also, super-hilariously. Feminists no longer believe in choice... unless it's choosing to have an abortion. Feminists no longer believe it's okay to work as a sex worker, or as a porn star because even if it's empowering for you, it's damaging to women overall therefor you're a bad person if you enjoy having sex for money. You're also a piece of shit if you choose to be a mother and enjoy staying home with the kids, or pick a job field like nursing that's typical for women (you know, because you like it, you cislord scumbag.) Also, if you make a "choice" that feminists don't like, it's secretly because you're being "subconsciously pressured by the Patriarchy" into doing it (you stupid brain slave!).

http://theconversation.com/no-feminism-is-not-about-choice-40896

Talk about a sharp contrast to the true liberation of the 60's. Now it's all about taking sides and proving your loyalty to large groups. Because large groups always ensure the best for your individual creativity and unique desires!

-----sig:
“Programs should be written for people to read, and only incidentally for machines to execute.” - Structure and Interpretation of Computer Programs
"Political Correctness is fascism disguised as manners" --George Carlin

Specter Phoenix
Member #1,425
July 2001
avatar

I have schizophrenia. Do you think I should be legally prevented from obtaining a firearm to defend my own home?

In my state the answer is yes, wife has a cousin who is married to a guy that is paranoid schizophrenic (thinks everyone is out to get him) and he is red flagged and unable to buy guns due to mental health.

So which is it, are they weapons of war or tools for self protection?

Every time I see a mass shooting I see someone using tools of protection as their tool of destruction. Go ahead, pass laws to restrict guns, but don't be surprised when it has zero impact on mass murder as there are more weapons of mass murder. A guy in Florida was arrest last year by an undercover FBI agent because he told him how to build a bomb with intent of doing an attack on the 14th anniversary of 9/11.

Want to sue gun manufacturers and hold them accountable because someone used the guns for murder instead of protection? Then let's sue every company that makes products that are used for bomb making instead of cleaning. Let's sue knife manufacturers for every person that kills another person with a knife. We are no longer putting blame on the person for the crime, rather the creator of the tools.

@Chris Katko
Yeah, Anita Sarkeesian, currently considered the Queen of Feminism, appeared at a panel where she pulled some Butterfly Effect shit about women like you stated; the whole personal choice affects women as a whole. Then went on to say "Everything is sexist. Everything is racist. Everything is homophobic. And it is your job to point it all out." With that view of the world you are seeking confirmation bias because you see things as sexist, racist, et. al. even when it isn't.

"Can't a man even talk to himself without being interrupted?" -Krull(1983)
"Through vengence I was born. Through war I was trained. Through love I was found. Through death I was released. Through release I was given a purpose." -- Specter Phoenix
"Programming == AWESOME the rest is just tools to accomplish it."
END OF LINE

Edgar Reynaldo
Major Reynaldo
May 2007
avatar

So which is it, are they weapons of war or tools for self protection?

Assault style rifles are weapons of war. Handguns are small arms. There's a big difference. And no, people shouldn't be allowed to have clips with 17 rounds in it. But they are legal, and they've been used, as the article I linked to states.

I believe we should keep weapons of war out of the hands of the public. This includes assault rifles such as are the typical weapon of choice in mass shootings. I'm not talking about small arms. I'm talking about semi-auto assault style rifles with huge clips and high accuracy. Those belong in the hands of soldiers, not civilians, which should be clear to anyone with any sanity at all. This isn't about protecting your second amendment right, it's about protecting the first amendment right, the right to liberty, freedom, and equality. The right to live a life free of fear of being gunned down by weapons that don't belong in the hands of the public.

Specter Phoenix said:

Want to sue gun manufacturers and hold them accountable because someone used the guns for murder instead of protection? Then let's sue every company that makes products that are used for bomb making instead of cleaning. Let's sue knife manufacturers for every person that kills another person with a knife. We are no longer putting blame on the person for the crime, rather the creator of the tools.

Yes, I want to sue them, when the products that they produce are made for one thing and one thing only, mass murder. And we do regulate bomb making chemicals. Are are you unaware of that fact? Ever heard of fertilizer bombs? Oklahoma Federal Building? Ring a bell?

Specter Phoenix said:

A guy in Florida was arrest last year by an undercover FBI agent because he told him how to build a bomb with intent of doing an attack on the 14th anniversary of 9/11.

As well he should have been arrested. What do you expect? That people with plans to bomb people should be let go scott free? Of course not.

Specter Phoenix said:

In my state the answer is yes, wife has a cousin who is married to a guy that is paranoid schizophrenic (thinks everyone is out to get him) and he is red flagged and unable to buy guns due to mental health.

I have undifferentiated schizophrenia. Basically, it's a bunch of excess negative thoughts. They do not control me, and my medication controls my symptoms. Do I not have the right to defend myself?

bamccaig
Member #7,536
July 2006
avatar

I generally agree that assault-weaponry should be prohibited among the civilian and law enforcement population. Very few law enforcement agents would be qualified to possess or wield such weaponry and they too should require special training and licensing to do so. Extensive training.

Of course, you should absolutely also consider disarming your armed forces. Or at least, significantly restricting their access to armament. For the past 15 years they've been declaring war on whoever is politically advantageous and going to town sending kids barely out of diapers overseas to terrorize alternative cultures. Not only is it doing significant harm to the psychiatric health of your own men and women, it's also doing significant harm to the psychiatric health of the oppressed populations you terrorize in the name of "anti-terrorism" and fueling the "terrorist" "soldier" factory machinery while you're at it. And on top of all of that, your own law enforcement and armed forces can be considered a viable threat to your own population.

If the US government decides that it doesn't like the American people waking the fuck up then it's likely going to do whatever it has to to remain in power. I don't think it's a significant reach to say that they'll use military power against their own. We essentially already saw this happen with Boston occupation for the marathon bombers. An entire city was placed under martial law to find 2 or 3 guys who were bad boys! That's insane. If there's an argument for the American people to be armed with assault rifles it's to have a fighting chance to stand against that kind of tyranny. Of course, assault rifles don't do much against surface-to-surface missiles and armored tanks. Ultimately, there's no point having assault rifles for that because you're significant outmatched. On the other hand, destructive weaponry would destroy the very land they aim to control... And there's more of you than there is of them, at least until your brethren sellout to be on the winning side (it's all they know).

I think that the only sane course of action is to slowly dismantle your military entirely. That would send the message to the world that you aim to adopt this "foreign" concept of "peace". It would also strip certain physical power from your government. Obviously your government itself will require refactoring (and mine does too, believe me, and I'm doing what I can to enact those changes).

America cannot change overnight. It will probably take a century at best. But it's better to get started sooner than later. The planet is facing some pretty big hurdles and we're going to need everybody cooperating. We can't very well do that when one of the largest and most aggressive military powers is still being guided by the voices in its head.

In any case, I forget how we got steered from the Contributor Covenant to gun rights. :-/ I don't normally mind thread derailments when a particular conversation is over, but I don't feel like the COC discussion is over (plus the gun one beats a whole old unresolvable beaten dead horse).

raynebc
Member #11,908
May 2010

This includes assault rifles such as are the typical weapon of choice in mass shootings.

That is incorrect. Maybe you meant to say semi-automatic long rifle? I've said it many times before, but "assault weapon" is a meaningless political bogeyman that endlessly morphs to suit whatever set of features the left wants to focus on. Too many people conflate that made up term with "assault rifle" (which has a specific definition).

Facts are that hand guns are used in more gun deaths, and the vast majority of the gun deaths in this country are suicides. The anti-gun politicians would love to claim they aren't going to take away the public's guns, they are just going to ban all the most popular types of guns, magazines and ammunition. If that happens to take peoples' guns away, they don't give a damn.

Quote:

the products that they produce are made for one thing and one thing only, mass murder.

Are you serious or are you putting on some kind of ridiculous persona right now? If you are serious, put aside your misconceptions and study the issue with a clear mind instead of buying into the anti-gun hysteria.

bamccaig said:

If the US government decides that it doesn't like the American people waking the fuck up then it's likely going to do whatever it has to to remain in power.

Entirely the point of the second amendment.

Specter Phoenix
Member #1,425
July 2001
avatar

Sad part is that historians and constitutional scholars can't even agree on how the second amendment is supposed to be translated. One group says it means all firearms can be bought by citizens while another group claims it only applies to militia members. There could be a second Civil War if Dems try to take guns after so long of using the former.

CoC is a roller coaster because you can easily find people for and against it.

Feminist logic via Twitter:

Quote:

Video games biggest road block to becoming a "respected art form" are the people who play them.

Ò¿Ó¬ When games make more than movies and music and has actors jumping to voice them I think it is as respected as any form can get. Of course, these arguments are coming from people that think trash is great modern art.

@Chris Katko
Found the video I was talking about (UPDATE: Found one that covers all her claims I stated in an earlier post and then some):

video

"Can't a man even talk to himself without being interrupted?" -Krull(1983)
"Through vengence I was born. Through war I was trained. Through love I was found. Through death I was released. Through release I was given a purpose." -- Specter Phoenix
"Programming == AWESOME the rest is just tools to accomplish it."
END OF LINE

bamccaig
Member #7,536
July 2006
avatar

raynebc said:

Entirely the point of the second amendment.

That point is already moot because (a) Boston occupation; your people had their chance and took it in the ass without lube instead of resisting; and (b) they have fucking tanks and planes and missiles and armor and grenades and tactical training and you're fucked even if you all have AKs and were trained to use them.

Case in point, the "enemy" in Afghanistan and Iraq had guns and explosives and it appears to have been pretty much like fishing with dynamite for the Western forces. If you really want a fighting chance against your government then disarm your government.

Erin Maus
Member #7,537
July 2006
avatar

One of my favorite things from that video I linked. According to liberal ideology, they SHOULD be the ones who are against abortion.

Bodily autonomy for the living is more important than bodily autonomy for the not-yet-living.

The issue has quite a bit more to do with bodily autonomy, and power over one's body, than it does about a baby. That's why abortion isn't generally allowed in late-stages regardless, because the baby is now viable (i.e., its organs are fully functional and can live, even if it requires more support than usual, outside the womb).

Quote:

Feminists no longer believe it's okay to work as a sex worker, or as a porn star because even if it's empowering for you, it's damaging to women overall therefor you're a bad person if you enjoy having sex for money.

Think of it like this:

Using drugs, or possessing drugs, isn't bad. Using drugs is at best a health problem when an addiction develops or you overdose. However, selling drugs--that's a problem, because generally it often involves things like trafficking, smuggling, violence--even murder, rape, slavery. So even for dangerous drugs (e.g., meth, cocaine; not marijuana or LSD or others so much), ideally, possession/usage shouldn't be illegal, but selling should be. For not-so-dangerous drugs, selling shouldn't be illegal, either.

In the case of prostitution, selling sex is like the drug trade: it's rife with despicable things, even if the simple idea (consenting adults making a transaction) isn't necessarily despicable. Human trafficking is still a major problem in places where prostitution is legal. Furthermore, prostitution is often only viable a job where there is no better options and therefore is taken out of desperation more so than a willing interest, even when it's legal. You can see this reflected in poor communities with strip clubs, for example.

To be absolutely clear, I think prostitution is more of a moral dilemma; by buying sex from traditional avenues (red district when it's illegal, brothel when it's not), you are supporting an industry that most often is incredibly evil, regardless of its legality. I think having prostitution on an individual level legal, while buying sex in a non-personal sense and/or having a third-party organizing prostitution should be illegal, is the best compromise at the moment.

---
ItsyRealm, a quirky 2D/3D RPG where you fight, skill, and explore in a medieval world with horrors unimaginable.
they / them / their



Go to: