domain:firsttoilthenthegrave.substack.com
orthoxerox
If you can read this, you're using a custom theme
31m ago
Gepards are not the only things that can shoot down drones. Tunguska is not exactly a cutting-edge product (neither is Gepard), but it works.
Crowstep
40m ago
TheDemonRazgriz
52m ago
Warfare was excellent, something really unique and special in the movie world. It comes very close to being an exact minute-by-minute recreation of the events it depicts and had some unique stylistic choices (most obviously the total lack of a soundtrack) that I think made it tremendously effective. My fiancée and I caught it at the tail end of its theatrical run and both loved it. I would highly recommend it to anyone with even a passing interest in the subject matter/genre.
aldomilyar
57m ago
I have always enjoyed the critique of Red Dead Redemption 2 along the lines of 'bunch of outlaws and brigands happen to hold perfectly progressive 21st century views on gender, race, consent etcetera'
Grauwacht
1hr ago
This seems like a lot of words to say "Islam is right about women". Maybe the Burka is the way to make the glow invisible? If women really wanted that, there is the solution. Why don't they use it? Probably because they actually like the myriad of advantages they get from the glow more than they dislike being seen as women first. I'm convinced that nothing would be more painful for women to just be treated like men all the time. Women, as is tradition, want to have their cake and eat it.
self_made_human
Grippy socks, grippy box
1hr ago
I think that a month is much too much, given how many right-wingers here get away regularly with breaking the rules and the ethos of trying to bring light instead of heat. Which I'm not blaming the mods for, given how much content there is to mod, but it's a matter of proportionality. I think a week would be fair. Giving him a month just feeds into the narrative that critics of the right are being persecuted here for being critics of the right, instead of just being modded when they are snarky and so on.
I have no particularly strong opinion on the ideal ban duration here. I'd be open to anything from a week to a perma ban. I did say it was provisional, and I'm happy to change it to a different value once the other mods chime in. If the others think a week is more appropriate, I can change the duration retroactively to make it so.
What concerns me, quite immensely, is that Turok has shown no particular signs of being corrigible. Even after multiple warnings from other mods, I can't make out any difference in behavior. Other people who have been banned usually learn to knock it off. If they don't, they earn a PB. For such people, gradual escalation from warnings to short bans to longer bans usually works! For people who don't seem to give a damn? I'm inclined to reach for the gun.
You can mod him for being repetitively unnecessarily inflammatory, same as various right-wingers are modded for that. If you ban AlexanderTurok for writing things that drive people crazy, you should also give WhiningCoil another ban for the same reason.
WC was just modded by Nara for his comment calling black orphans a "virulent invasive species". He wasn't banned, and did manage to come up with a semi-reasonable explanation for that choice of phrasing. You can review the mod log for details.
We didn't ban him for it, but that was absolutely a formal warning, and will be taken into account should he do so again. I'm not going to go into detail about our internal mod discussions, which happen to include concerns about our neutrality in enforcing moderation decisions as well as community sentiment, but rest assured that bans are very much on the table. Just not today.
self_made_human
Grippy socks, grippy box
1hr ago
The only thing worse than a bare-link is no link at all. Which is uh.. Now that I think about it, an empty comment. You're right, I'll retract that claim, in my defense I wrote it at 5 am.
I think that a month is much too much, given how many right-wingers here get away regularly with breaking the rules and the ethos of trying to bring light instead of heat. Which I'm not blaming the mods for, given how much content there is to mod, but it's a matter of proportionality. I think a week would be fair. Giving him a month just feeds into the narrative that critics of the right are being persecuted here for being critics of the right, instead of just being modded when they are snarky and so on.
I like Amadan's comment a lot, I think it's one of the best mod comments I've ever read on any forum and is very fair, but I think that "Maybe you really are sincere about everything you say, you believe you are making good, valid points, and your manner of expressing yourself is just so off-putting and against the grain here that it drives people crazy." is not really a good reason to mod people, since people really shouldn't be blamed for writing things that are "so against the grain here that it drives people crazy", which can apply to all sorts of good comments. You can mod him for being repetitively unnecessarily inflammatory, same as various right-wingers are modded for that. If you ban AlexanderTurok for writing things that drive people crazy, you should also give WhiningCoil another ban for the same reason.
FtttG
1hr ago
Yes, but it's a social realist drama where a big part of what makes it engaging is getting to know the low-rent ghetto drug dealers really well and understand their quirks and motivations. Per @WandererintheWilderness's point, I don't think an episodic murder mystery series set in the same milieu would be engaging: in a murder mystery, the killer has to be someone unsuspected, and solving the mystery has to be at least something of an intellectual challenge. "Low-rent ghetto drug dealer murders rival drug dealer by shooting him in the back of the head" is prime fodder for a crime drama, but probably not for a self-contained episodic murder mystery: there is no mystery, about the identity of the perpetrator, their motive or their method.
NunoSempere
2hr ago
Should have been https://www.chinatalk.media/p/xi-rumors , thanks
ArjinFerman
Tinfoil Gigachad
2hr ago
Quoting a tweet that "someone made on Twitter" without attribution or source is a... choice. If it was made with the intent of rules-lawyering our BLR guidelines, by not submitting a link at all, it was made poorly.
I might be missing something, but I thought the point of the "bare links" rule is to provide commentary (which he did in spades), and not just leave people with... bare links. So I'm not sure what rule posting, or not posting a link would supposed to be circumventing.
Celestial-body-NOS
Why should Man not rebel against Nature, when Nature herself is in rebellion against Justice?
2hr ago
One of those irregular verbs from Yes, Minister; 'I'm questioning received dogma, you're spreading misinformation, he's lying.'.
ChickenOverlord
2hr ago
Pay your pest control contractors or they'll murder your children.
phailyoor
2hr ago
Sure that is a valid interpretation as well. But if you heard that some right wing influencer posted it then it's more likely the former.
RandomRanger
Just build nuclear plants!
3hr ago
Goldbugs in shambles (if and when anyone actually makes fusion power): https://x.com/MasterTimBlais/status/1946291116954763388
Also some nominative determinist fun.
This is the last straw, Alex.
Barely a day ago, @Amadan gave you some rather clear operational advice, with his mod hat on:
There is a problem here, and the problem is you.
The problem, specifically, is that you post a lot of these kinds of sneering borderline kinda-making-a-point-but-mostly-just-sneering comments, and increasingly people are getting frustrated and angry and snapping at you, and then we have to mod those people (because you are not allowed to attack someone) and it's starting to look very much like this is your game.
Sometimes we ban someone not because any one post was terrible but because their overall effect on the community is so negative that there seems little value in allowing them to keep throwing shit. We don't like to do it; it's very subjective. We can't read your mind. Maybe you really are sincere about everything you say, you believe you are making good, valid points, and your manner of expressing yourself is just so off-putting and against the grain here that it drives people crazy. But we've warned you enough, and you keep doing exactly the same thing, that I suspect you know what you're doing and you're doing it on purpose.
So I'm telling you now: stop it. Or I will propose to the rest of the mods that you should be banned under our catch-all egregiously obnoxious category.
He said it well, I can't say it any better. Our (very weak, if it even exists at all) Affirmative Action policy for left-wing trolling is, shall we say, not up to the task of tolerating this any longer.
Quoting a tweet that "someone made on Twitter" without attribution or source is a... choice. If it was made with the intent of rules-lawyering our BLR guidelines, by not submitting a link at all, it was made poorly.
That's a minor quibble at the end of the day. You have been repeatedly warned to behave yourself, and you've clearly annoyed both the commentariat and us mods well past the point of being justifiable on merit. You are being egregiously obnoxious, and show no signs of stopping. We tolerate more from those who give the forum more. You're not there, quite the opposite.
Banned for a month. Consider this provisional, since the other mods are asleep and I've asked them for their opinions regarding a duration. Me? I'm open to the idea of a permaban.
mrvanillasky
Indo Aryan Thot Leader
3hr ago
Your agility and recovery declines first, even that's not noticeable very clearly unless you play some sport at a high level, strength keeps increasing for a long time. The real decline is when that stops too.
anon_
4hr ago
but acktually the media and journalists are spreading it, not witches on twitter ad 4chan
Or it could be both? It could be that the media, journalists and a large swath of the rest of society torched the integrity and trust in reliable institutions and now in their absence cranks have taken over.
Those two kind of are complementary theories.
Yeah, but gay rights activists are angry that MSM can’t donate blood, because they feel it stigmatizes being gay.
But I agree with you, people valuing defeating stigma more than protecting people from serious diseases is a really bad thing. I think the gay community has long been in denial about how seriously HIV/AIDS created rather than reflected stigma against gay men, and my understanding is it became something of a rite of passage back in the day — “I’m pozzed, so I no longer need to worry about it.”
BahRamYou
4hr ago
I just watched "Wheel of Time" and it's so, so bad in that regard.
Like, it's a major part of the worldbuilding that the world is fragmented. Every country has its own description and way of speaking. You can easily tell where someone is from. The main character, especially, grew up in a super isolated small town, and everyone looks at him weird because he has red hair. It's very obvious that his mother was an "outlander" as they call it. Big plot hook mystery what happened there.
Meanwhile that same town has two black women and... no one bats an eye? No one asks questions? Huh, OK. And of course they just happen to be the two women with the most power in the town. In fact, their role has been cranked up even larger than it was in the source material, stealing a lot of important scenes away from the main character.
The same pattern seems to repeat endlessly, with every single person of authority made to be a black woman, amping up their power and authority, and no one seems to question how this came to be. It's somehow both a post-racial utopia where noone mentions race, but also one with extremely clear racial boundaries.
It actually makes things pretty confusing. To be fair, it's a long book series with way too many characters, so I can appreciate how they have to cut a lot to make it work for television. But they put so much emphasis on the black characters that the white characters are left kind of pointless, with nothing to do. They just take up space on screen and make it harder to remember everyone's names.
ABigGuy4U
4hr ago
I’m not saying there shouldn’t be any roles for Extraterrestrial-American actresses. I’m just saying these roles should be where historically and dramatically appropriate. Playing a genetically engineered creature in Morgan? Yes that’s a perfectly reasonable role for an ayy. Queen’s Gambit? It’s a bit of a reach, there were no ayylmao chess grandmasters back then. But given how much covert extraterrestrial involvement there was in the Cold War it doesn’t seem too ridiculous. But we don’t need to go cramming an ayy into a movie set in Scandinavia in the 11th century. It’s intentional human-erasure. And they clearly take special glee in casting her in romantic relationships with Earthmen. It’s about as subtle as a pornography video from PROBED .com.
CrispyFriedBarnacles
4hr ago
pied piper of Hamelin
To be honest, I don't recall the details of the actual tale. I was just using the phrase in its usual metaphorical sense - I just double checked Wikipedia, about this, and it suggested that "The phrase "pied piper" has become a metaphor for a person who attracts a following through charisma or false promises.".
Skimming the Wikipedia page for this makes the tale, and its history, sound pretty interesting in its own right, but I don't have much to add to that.
Perhaps to you. How would you define a quadroon? In Japan the term used is (quarter) クオーター which refers to a Japanese person who had one grandparent who is non-Japanese (in other words, if they had a non-Japanese parent they would be half (ハーフ) thus the non-Japanese grandparent splits it more finely.
I have always found this odd because, in the same way as the terms you list above--which I have only ever used in reference to black influence on whites--in Japan the terms are only used for white influence on Japanese. In other words when a child has a black (or otherwise non-white) grandparent or parent here they are typically not referred to as half / ハーフ. Or if they are, there is a specific mention of 黒人 (or black) or maybe Chinese or Korean or whatever (but these people are typically just referred to as Chinese or Korean, regardless of Japanese parentage.) In conversation if you were to hear someone say "She is haafu" you would assume that her mother or father is white. Not black, not Southeast Asian, Pakistani, or whatever.
I'm curious how you personally use the terms you list, if you do use them. I haven't heard the words (quadroon, etc.) uttered out loud unironically ever in my life, and I was born and raised in more or less rural Alabama, and both sets of grandparents regularly used the term "nigger" though notably (to me) neither of my parents ever said the word within my earshot and wouldn't allow it said in the house (by me or my brother.) Of course we couldn't swear, either, and get away with it.
I'm also interested in your claim about babies. Is that from a sociological study? If so, could you produce it? I have noticed many--not all of course, but many--on this site are quick to reject all sociology (or other soft science) as hookum, until of course a study pops up which reinforces an idea that is not a progressive talking point. The conclusion itself, in any case, would not be particularly surprising, and I'm not sure what it is you are suggest that, if generally true, it indicates. After three years living in the Kalahari I remember looking at staff photos and having a mild jarring sensation when I saw how much my own white face stood out, how clearly different I was in appearance to my colleagues. I would imagine the starkness of difference would be relevant to the babies with whom this study was conducted. In other words, could you show a Japanese baby a Korean woman or, to get a bit further afield, a Nepalese woman, and have the baby "respond differently"? I assure you many Japanese would consider the Korean and Nepalese a different race entirely to Japanese. Though you are of course free to argue with them.
More options
Context Copy link