Hell yeah, good luck the launch!

And people like you is why I advocate muting those comms. The odd person like you is still easier to block. Those subs and their communities, evidently, fail to grasp the concept of “disagreeing” or simply not wanting incendiary political discourse in their feed daily.

Blocking hexbear and lemmy.ml no joke removes 95% of shitposting and socialism/communism spamming. Should be done by default. Just block any overly political sub tbh.

I didn’t immediately recognise the mos so I googled and the first result is someone trying to ensure they get selected for it haha. I wouldn’t expect it to be fired from the drone but again I won’t guess why because others will speculate too and we’ll be crowd sourcing intel.

Part of my soul is sad to know that little guy won’t be able to live out his PHUNK KAWWWOOOOSSSHHHH KABOOM dreams

This had no right being as loud and satisfying as it was.

Better than getting teased by trying to bracket camels and taking bets on whether it would track.

This I would love to hear more about if you feel like it.

I think there is good tactical reason for it and I trust these guys have been doing it long enough to not waste ordinance. I can think of at least one advantage for use with UAV which I won’t speculate on here in the incredibly unlikely event that I might be right.

I’ll have to see if I’ve got a copy of an NDA I signed for play testing but that’s what I would have thought. It would be provisional on your participation not on an agreement like old school EULAs. As someone else pointed out it seems to be in closed beta or some form of early access, so maybe Valve won’t care and it won’t come back on them.

I’m-

RIP. Taken out by Valve legal team already, everyone bail.

And I’m not under NDA. I have signed no contracts, made no verbal agreements; I haven’t even clicked through a EULA.  This message does pop up when I launch Deadlock, but I didn’t click OK; instead, I hit the Escape key and watched it disappear.

I’m not a lawyer but I sure hope the writer of this checked with a lawyer before posting because that does not sound right.

Yep! Same for cats, both also fucking hate being ignored. Maybe not when they’re in a sassy mode. Even if cats are more independents (and it applies less) both generally like the approval of their owners/pack members. I’ve had both also recognise when I’m using a stern tone and when I give them the “what the fuck do you think you’re doing” look.

“People are too sensitive today” types are deliberately missing the point. Online is pretty much the only place where you can get away with spouting slurs or psycho shit. You wouldn’t do it in public or get away with most of it in public.

More to the point it’s just tiring having these types come into a lobby. They generally don’t (or can’t) play properly or fuck around until someone calls them out. They then start on that person or spamming the N word.

More often than not it feels like they try to frame it as “oh ho, people can’t handle my casual use of slurs, snowflakes”. When more likely is if you’re talking and behaving like that generally it means you’re obnoxious and disruptive to the game.

I have no idea what that is, from media seems to be republican speak for “not excluding anyone that isn’t white”.

I think more to the other person point is it being needlessly prioritised, seemingly at the expense of quality writing/characters.

Disco is a pretty choice example. The main character is frankly unbearable. Super unlikeable, overly emotional (despite being Vulcan) and frequently fucks up because she won’t listen or acts out of emotion. She is pointlessly insubordinate in an attempt to write her as strong but it inadvertently makes her incompetent and entitled. Everyone seems to cry, a lot, in the later season. The gay couple felt cheap and even unhealthy at some point, I think in the ep where one of them nearly dies, but unfortunately I can’t remember why. Didn’t really feel like ST just a show wearing its uniform.

Hey at least it was super diverse though. Although as you point out, it is largely the writing that boned disco. Just feels like these shows prioritise being as diverse as possible and then jump to racism the second people notice or criticise the shows for it or unrelated elements.

That’s fine and I’m saying that it is not a good idea to do so. I had figured my providing you with examples how intended voting behaviour can violate your proposed guideline would demonstrate that. Non English communities getting downvoted for… not being English is not intended or desired behaviour and deserves a more direct fix than a guideline.

No because that has nothing to do with why I downvoted the OP. Also, as I pointed out in an edit, my engagement with this post has likely driven it up in this specific instance anyway. Even if it doesn’t this went from being engaged by 2-3 people to a lot more real quick despite the OP largely neutral votes for the first hour, and now being -10 so clearly it doesn’t just drop the post off the face of the planet due to downvoting and probably other factors are considered.

Anyway, throughout this I’ve done my best to address every point you’ve brought up. Yet I’ve had multiple questions, some even asking for clarification, go ignored. So I think now is probably a good time for the old “agree to disagree”.

I mean if you want me to be specific then unfortunately I can do so. It’s more than I just disagree with you. It’s that I think your reasoning in the OP is very flawed and misrepresents the situation you are attempting to portray. Which felt dishonest initially but given your attempts to engage people who disagree I now assume misguided, sorry to say. Also I think people stating their views under the pretence of a question should be discouraged due to proximity behaviours like concern trolling (not implying that’s what you’ve been doing, just an example). Lastly, I super strongly oppose being shown content on a site like this that I can’t interact with. For your case it may make sense but I can super easily see it being abused by the cases in my example; where people can grandstand shitty politics(again as an example) but then the onus is on me for some reason to not engage with said content.

I appreciate the first part of your comment and the overall candour. However:

1. Which post? Because I only downvoted the OP because you essentially imply all people downvoting content In communities they aren’t in are doing so because they just don’t like it. I’m asserting people sometimes do with reason, like the flaming I mention. Also the OP isn’t really asking a question(imo), it’s stating your views with the question in the title as a means to do so. The rest, even you disagreeing with me I have not.
2. What assumption? My initial reply is explaining why people may downvote content when they aren’t in the community in cases outside the ones you’ve provided.
3. I don’t see how this is worth mentioning that I accept the reality that people don’t use vote mechanisms as they’re intended? Edit: if this is in regards my sports post on reddit remark that was me essentially saying “yeah sometime people don’t use it correctly which sucks” not “deal with it”. Though again said communities could avoid it by not allowing post that are just match titles etc.
4. Why would I when my issues with the OP still stand? Edit 2:
5. Definitely not advocating for downvoting content you just don’t like. For me content I don’t like doesn’t means it’s inherently “bad”. Bad for me means inflammatory, trolling, rule breaking, low effort etc.
6. The one vote against OP is offset by my upvotes of your other comments and engagement with the post; and is likely weighing it up more than down at this point.

I don’t view inane content as bad. So that rules me out for that case.

Me using functionality of a website in its intended fashion isn’t “policing”. I usually do that afterwards if it’s bad enough but usually a sub has to have a pattern of doing it before I filter it. I know sport subs that were just match/race titled would cop downvotes on reddit, which again sounds like an issues better addressed by the community it’s being posted too.

If I can see it and I view it as bad content it’s getting downvoted. Especially since such content usually is inflammatory political post from niche politic subs that have no problem espousing their politics in a “either you agree with us 100% or you’re wrong/the enemy”. The rest of the time it’s weird fetish porn.

I browse by all because it’s a good way to see communities/content I wouldn’t otherwise see if I stuck to a curated community list. Not being part of the community doesn’t matter because I’m still seeing the content and still behaving consistent with using the downvote button to collectively filter it out.

I think a better option is these communities opting for the post not to get sent to all. Which won’t happen because a lot of previously mentioned post; the target isn’t the community who already likely agree with them, it’s everyone else. Better yet these communities could implement rules against post that are clearly inflammatory/flaming but then where would they grandstand?