WatDabney

That’s what I’ve used for years now, and I have no problems with them.

I actually have three of them, of varying ages, all of which still work fine. The older ones have simple switch shoulder buttons and the newer ones have analog triggers, and that’s pretty much the only notable change they’ve made over the years.

The only “problem” I’ve run into with them is that the buttons and/or the pad will accumulate dust over time and stop working dependably, so I have to take them apart and clean the contacts every year or two. Which is very easy to do.

I don’t think it’s the case that people are rewarded with power, then somehow turn into pstchopathic fuckwads, but that only psychopathic fuckwads are willing and able to do everything it takes to gain that sort of power in the first place.

Think of all the compromises someone has to make and lies they have to tell and asses they have to kiss and backs they have to stab to fight and crawl up the ladder to that sort of position.

No truly sane and stable and honest and empathetic person would or even could do all of that.

Agreed on both counts.

And on another note, I took a gamble there by just referring to “Bob,” and it’s cool that that worked.

“I can’t believe I used to like these guys.”

deleted by creator

I’ve long assumed that many (most?) of the tankies, and of hexbear’s userbase in general, are teens.

When did we start rewarding politicians for being angry and stupid?

Yes, and his name is Todd Howard.

The irony is that Beth pretty much set the standard for ambitious, weird and unexpected with Morrowind, and have been backing away ever since.

That’s what the voters have been trying to tell the DNC since 2016.

But the DNC’s ears are plugged with corporate cash.

Those who could do something about it won’t.

Those who would do something about it can’t.

For the purposes of the autocrats though, a group that isn’t really a group is the best kind.

If nobody’s a certain member, everybody’s a possible member.

Establishing that precedent just in and of itself would most certainly be more than enough motivation for anyone with a desire to manipulate or limit public discourse and access to the authority by which future bans can and will be implemented.

A motivation that hasn’t been mentioned yet:

Every successful attempt so far by the US government to control what Americans may and may not access on the internet has been rooted in pre-existing legal restrictions on the content, or on access to it. It’s just been things like piracy, CSAM, drug trafficking and the like - things that are illegal in and of themselves, so banning sites that are involved with them has just been a response to thecrxisting illegality.

This is the first time that the US government has succeeded in banning a site without pointing to violations of any existing laws, but simply because they’ve decided to do so.

That’s a significant precedent, and to would-be tyrants, an extremely useful one.

Yes.

At this point, copyright doesn’t exist to benefit creators, but to benefit rent-seeking corporate parasites.

That’s why I’m both for and against copyright - I’m for it as an ideal - as a tool to help ensure that creators can profit when others derive value from the fruits of their labors - but I’m very much against the current implementation of it, which exists solely to ensure that overpaid corporate fuckwads can profit off of the fruits of somebody else’s labor.