Jams's forum posts

#1 Edited by Jams (2967 posts) -

@mellotronrules said:

so you're all telling me that it's unreasonable to disable comments if you're receiving death threats and threats of sexual violence, as well as attempts to hack your online identity (twitter, etc).? or to draw attention to this fact? of course not all the negative comments will be of this nature, but you can be damn sure giant bomb would take action if threats were made against patrick of a similar nature.

you don't get to have it both ways. you can't say she's a coward for disabling comments, and then a damsel for leaving them on and drawing attention to the troglodytes that were attempting to intimidate her. besides- we're talking about youtube comments...the last great bastion for those who enjoy ethnic slurs, noting good boobshot timestamps, and beliebers. not exactly a paragon of fair and measured discourse.

I never said it was unreasonable to disable comments. But if you're trying to incite changes in society and giving yourself a voice, why would you stop everyone else for trying to speak their mind? What if they bring something to the discussion that can help your cause or debunk it completely? You can still disable the shitty comments as they come. But what happens when she deletes all the horrid comments? She leaves all the well thought out counter arguments that make her out to be what she really is, a control freak that wants the world to be how she sees it. She'll name anybody who disagrees with her a misogynist or brainwashed or whatever. She doesn't want to initiate change, she wants to tell people what to do without the ability to say otherwise.

How does disabling comments help prevent people from hacking your social profiles?

The reason why I think nay, know that she's a charlatan is because she thinks women being sexual is sexist and that somehow man is to blame. Even when the women who are being sexuality love it and are happy with it, she blames sexism. I wouldn't doubt that if she had her way every woman would be wearing burka's and men would have their eye's and dicks removed from their bodies.

She's anti equality and that's why I no longer listen to anything she says.

#2 Posted by Jams (2967 posts) -

@sweep said:

I feel like they are just messing with us at this point. "Let's change it to a 6.3 next, that will really fuck them up!"

Then they'll take it down to 1/10 then bring it up to 12/10. Then just delete the whole review and replace it with a video of Justin McElroy masturbating while reading his own articles.

#3 Posted by Jams (2967 posts) -

That's weird, I thought they already opted out a long time ago?

#4 Posted by Jams (2967 posts) -

@andorski said:

I laughed at the one thread where the OP declared that there would be a "war" if GB and GS continued to collaborate together. A lot of people claim that fans of this site are blinded by their loyalty to the GB crew and defend them from criticism, but it takes stalker-levels of obsession to be in such a outrage when GB does something different.

That's pretty hilarious. I wonder who was making those claims?

#5 Edited by Jams (2967 posts) -

Dude's last two games were Ultima 9 and Tabula Rasa

ya, those were both reaaaaaaaaaally good games......

I liked Tabula Rasa a lot but it wasn't fleshed out enough at all. But yeah I put about as much trust in him as I put trust in myself not eating a pizza pie that steaming in front of my face.

#6 Posted by Jams (2967 posts) -

It would be better if I didn't have to ditch a bunch of high settings to keep the game running. I also noticed huge frame drops at 1/4 through the game for no real reason. It still looks a lot better than the console variations but not as good as it could be.

#7 Posted by Jams (2967 posts) -

The show was good. Carolyn and Kevin (the one with Jeff?) seemed a bit stiff. Chris Waters and Mass Effect-guy-whose-name-slips-my-mind were funny, even if the latter got a bit too info-happy. Everything involving Videogame Village was amazing.

It was rough around the edges. It needs some work. It's new live content that isn't taking away from existing QL's or other live shows. Watch it or don't, but don't ask for it to be gone, because it isn't doing any harm.

Because Flight Club and Random PC Game take Drew, Vinny, Dave and sometimes Alexis to sit around for 2+ hours, doing something that isn't their job and taking away from other jobs in the building. When those features are happening, no site support or design is happening, no video content is being filmed or compressed aside from what's happening on-screen, and no other QLs or shows can go on (effectively robbing the rest of the crew of their job).

They can't just sit down and spend that much time without first clearing it with the rest of the GB staff, because they need to make sure it isn't impacting anyone's schedule adversely. You have to understand that being on-camera and recording videos isn't Vinny's (primary) job, nor Drew's, Alexis' or Dave's. They're video crew and site techs, respectively.

Whatever. Those are just examples. If they can get the new Wednesday show to work for the majority of the community then great. If they can't get anything squared away then I'd rather they have nothing on that day. I'm not so desperate for content that I'd be happy for something that makes me want to tear my eyes out. But like I said before; if the show ends up sticking and I still don't like it then I'll just skip it all together. I'd prefer if they ditched it all together for something different, but that's just like... my opinion man.

#8 Posted by Jams (2967 posts) -

Plus, when even China agrees that NK is not doing the right thing, you know the North is gonna back off of anything.

That or send them over the edge.

#9 Posted by Jams (2967 posts) -

I've started playing SimCity 4 because of all this hoopla. Man even on easy the game is hard as fuck if you don't know what you're doing.

#10 Edited by Jams (2967 posts) -

@sergio said:

@mellotronrules said:
@brodehouse said:

with the comments disabled to prevent it from being a discussion.

in the interests of full disclosure: she was also the victim of a sustained harassment campaign by a load of cretins. that can be interpreted as a convenient way to stifle dissent- but let's be real- she had comments on at the start, and it's not like the discourse was predominantly civil nor astute.

Not all negative comments were sexist, and she could have disabled them once the vile comments started. Instead she left them so she could point at them and say people are trying to shut her down. That garnered her more contributions to her kickstarter. She actually was the damsel in distress.

Yeah. Look at Patrick. He gets a lot of hate on comments all the time too but he doesn't go around turning off comments. He's had some pretty hurtful comments thrown his way too. If she wants to show that she is strong and independent why would she hide behind control like that? Can't she be the better person and just ignore the bad comments and start discussions with the good ones? That would ultimately kill her whole purpose in life though wouldn't it?