site banner
Advanced search parameters (with examples): "author:quadnarca", "domain:reddit.com", "over18:true"

Showing 25 of 287 results for

domain:slatestarcodex.com

Hlynka was a mod from back on reddit who took care of troublemakers and had a bit of a chip on his shoulder from growing up poor (like most of us who grow up poor) that he used to fuel the zingers he would level at troublemakers. But being the enforcer made him bitter (like it does to everyone who assumes that role) so at some point he stopped being a mod, but his former mod status gave him leeway to continue making zingers. But people were less willing to tolerate it when he wasn't using it for the good of the community and people started to feel like he got special treatment (he did). But I think to him he just felt like he was being the same person he'd always been, and it just kind of made him angrier and eventually he flamed out.

Ok, so we're back to all teachers being the problem then?

Yeah, one is banned from the digital world, the other from the analog world. Astral plane, mortal plane. Hard to tell which one hurts more to lose, soul or body.

Yes thé normies are indoctrinated- because they’re, you know, normies.

It's not the mockery. In fact, it's specially that it isn't mockery. It's a genuine, straight to the white viewer plea, so do something about Trump, because something must be done. The mockery I can handle. The "clown nose off" moments are when I turn off the TV.

He was a user who predated the Motte even on reddit. He stood for a particular kind of Ur-American conservatism and that made him stand out somewhat from all the Dissident Right people, but ultimately he was an evangelist here to save the lost sheep rather than a debater here to chew the fat. Like most of the evangelists we get here, he ended up eventually flaming out in fury that most people didn't want to buy what he was selling.

Well, that was fast.

I got a second game of Hands in the Sea in last night! We switched sides with me playing Carthage. I came out the gate swinging, cut off Roman supply out of Italy using my starting fleet of warships, recruited some cavalry to raze their colonies while I had them bottled up, and just generally kept the pressure on while I leisurely expanded. Won in 4 turns with an automatic victory based on being more than 25 VPs ahead during the scoring phase of a turn.

Rome's biggest problem was with supply being cut off, they could start a battle with Syracuse (which is a vital supply point in Sicily), but they couldn't reinforce the battle to win it which requires supply lines, until they disrupted my naval blockade. They wouldn't need to destroy my fleet, they'd only need to build at least one warship, and then contest control of the blockade. That's enough to re-establish supply for reinforcing a land battle. After they take Syracuse, they'd have a local supply point on Sicily and could have ground me down with their legions. Unfortunately, Rome was caught flat footed by the dire consequences of being out of supply, and instead of building a fleet and contesting control of the waters, spent time recruiting legions they couldn't send, and pursuing deck optimizations that lacked actual bite in the conflict. There was an attempt to finally break my blockade, and it bought Rome a single turn of supply in Sicily. But it was insufficient, and I sank their fleet in short order. By the end of the game Rome was drawing their entire deck into their hand every turn... without having valid or meaningful actions they could use all those cards on. Alas.

We're already planning another rematch, where I will probably take Rome again and need to resist the strategy I just absolutely dominated with. Wish me luck.

600 people per year being deliberately killed in a population the size of Canada seems significant to me, regardless of how many other terminally ill people are killed. (which I'm also uneasy about, although if they want to DIY it that seems fine, and certainly there are some cases where it seems like a mercy)

Typically there are 6-700 murders per year in Canada; these are normally considered undesirable and kind of a big deal. So you need to do some work to convince me that this new category of homicide is totally cool and no problem.

To be clear, I have never been nostalgic for Hlynka and have been glad he’s gone since the second he caught his ban.

Is this egregious by South Park standards? Didn't they regularly mock minorities in episodes prior to this one?

The illegal streaming website I looked at accidentally uploaded s1e1 in the spot of the latest season episode 1. While the latest episodes are funny enough, they aren't even close to what the series had at the beginning. Though I'm sure it's not all due to the Trump effect but partially just due to them running out of jokes and the series going downhill in general over 27 seasons.

Also doesn't help that it's a super long multiple-episode arc, which I think isn't always the best. Alot of gags felt repetitive and filler-ish like the face, dogs and the debater gags. They were funny once but then pretty whatever after they do it 3+ times across the episode.

A post ban edit 5 days after you got banned? Must have really struck a nerve

I’m not offended, more genuinely curious- what makes you think my politics are similar to Kulak’s?

but otherwise, no, I can only despise the "morality" you advocate.

On what grounds? Your idea of 'manlyness'? You're generally liberal, but the sex stuff is your achilles heel.

Also, your example is of someone being unjustly and arbitrarily executed, not someone being justly punished for his actions.

Right, but I don't think Hlynka thinks he's been justly punished for his actions. Personally I don't consider most of the permabans the mods hand out justified.

but my confidence was fairly low then and remains a bit shaky even now.

Can you explain why? Similar to you, I also thought that it was Hlynka four months ago, but with much higher confidence. What convinces me then as now is the last point from my post: TequilaMockingbird talked in the way someone deeply familiar with this forum, its history and connection to Scott Alexander would.

There plausibly are many other people with beliefs similar to Hlynka, so TequilaMockingbird having exactly the same views (and rhetoric! seriously, the Steve Sailer thing isn't the first time he's let his old ticks shine trough) on every single issue as him isn't dispositive. The fact that an account with such beliefs is created three months after Hlynka's ban and immediately participates in discourse as an old regular would, even calling out specific users' post histories and ideologies, is though, especially when no other well known long-time poster was missing/banned at the time. It was very, very obvious that he was Hlynka from the start.

Was this when we were all nostalgic for Hlynka and he was joking that Hlynka might be JD Vance? Because I thought he basically came right out and said it lol. I thought everyone else had already figured it out and known for ages.

He was a former mod, greatly respected by many members and absolutely hated by many others. He was eventually removed as a mod for being too antagonistic towards people he despised, and then when he wouldn't amend his behavior, he was banned entirely.

I mean, sure, but, we're talking about being banned from the Motte.

No. Hydro has been around for a long time, and he and Kulak are entirely different people.

If you really believe that begging might save you, there is an argument for it, but otherwise, no, I can only despise the "morality" you advocate.

Also, your example is of someone being unjustly and arbitrarily executed, not someone being justly punished for his actions.

Yeah, that's true, but did they really have anything to say about that? If I recall, that episode still ended with the "real" Kathleen Kennedy coming back and her viewpoint being mostly vindicated. I'm just throwing this out there, but I feel like maybe their worldview these days skews towards, leftists are right but take it too far, and conservatives are just wrong.

There is a bunch of research out there suggesting that OTC and milder agents are just as good as stronger agents for managing acute pain. Example:

Yes, I'm aware of the risible drug warrior shit research. The drug warriors would love to eliminate legal opiods entirely, and they will lie about this being no loss, because they're drug warriors and do not care about pain as long as they can fight drugs.

They're just going to remember you as a whiny, blubbering coward.

Pure vanity. A grave injustice and your life hang in the balance, this is not the time for such superficial concerns. If morality requires you to cry, you cry. If your duty requires you to die despised, then you swallow your ego and holler like a bahamian.

Btw, I don’t know, and thanks to mods’ I won’t know, but I’m pretty sure that Hlynka, as the NCO law-order-honor-type, would not back my defense at all, which I find amusing. As is tradition, since I’ve always maintained he should not be banned, even though he himself was the most pro-censorship of the mods.

Hopefully I haven't made a wrong turn somewhere, and we're still talking about euthanasia, rather than anesthesia.

It's true that my view of doctors is rather mixed, but your argument leaves my scratching my head. I imagine most of them don't perform such procedures.

A school near me has one of the highest reading test pass rates of any school in the state. I recently got into an argument with a parent whose children attend the school. She is adamant that the scores are fake and that the school is just cheating—in precisely the same way that Mississippi is “cheating”—by holding back any students who don’t pass the test. Like you, I think that argument is insane, but I know a sizable minority of parents disagree with the school’s approach.