There is actually a huge reason: if something DOES come if it, and the public disclosure points to him knowing before the election, he’s going to be crucified. He isn’t in a good position either way.

Thank you.

Fun fact: nutritionally, it’s hard to beat a steak.

You’re missing the larger story. Yes, the overall investigation was badly managed...but we know of the incompetence, because it was recorded. We can trace back to the specific incompetence.

Having played it many times, the predictability is a non-issue. You can generally assume that the ties will hunt you, but part of the rules allows them to “miss” most obstacles (it’s less unfair than it sounds.) So no trying to fly them into obstacles. Plus, there are a lot of them.

Right? Blast from the past.

Yup yup. I don’t begrudge them their fun (I was a terror on Activeworlds before the subscription cost jumped by a factor of 10), but it’s not something I care to relive.

I went full geek on one of those. Ran out to the middle of nowhere. Built a massive obsidian cave, with the only exit being washed down with water that you couldn’t reach. To enter, you had to teleport in, but in this server you supposedly had a monopoly on teleport and building rights wherever you set your base stone.

Did it ever fix the issue of spending 30 min for 2 min of gameplay? Because I loved the concept, but in practice it was just too damn boring. Spawn, die, wait ten minutes, repeat.

It’s not that sponges exist, it’s that every enemy is, regardless of their type. Borderlands bosses were sponges. Some of the enemy types were too. Other enemies, who could still deal a lot of damage to me, were not. Some big, terrible enemies who could nearly OHK me only took one or two shots. Variety keeps it…

The thing is, I fail to see how it would be any better if he did it during his. “Oh look, I won a medal, now I get the girl!”

I haven’t played this game in possibly a decade, and yet I perfectly heard this entire conversation in my head. What a gem of a game.

That’s the rub, right? If I’m taking about general, societal value: diversity is great! I’m on board! But is it really an ethical matter if my personal tastes aren’t diverse? By all means let people know that diversity is probably better for them...but phrasing it as a moral judgment is a bit off.

Siege has an awesome concept...that fails miserably when you have to wait 10 min to get into a game that is essentially ruined 70% of the time by people leaving. It just required way too long of an investment, with little actual gameplay, to become good. Love the concept. Love the execution, really. Just doesn’t work.

It’s worth noting that this mentality is pervasive; society generally (and Gawker specifically, but that’s just a humorous aside) fails to empathize or afford rights to those who it assumes are “guilty.” The assignment of guilt varies wildly, of course, but that’s a separate issue from the lack of empathy for the…

That’s...exactly when I killed him. Oops.

I actually totally understood what you meant, because I do this. Except then I became what I pretended to be in order to disarm people, and now what talent and drive I once had is gone and I’m commenting, yet again, on a Jezebel article.

Sometimes I ask myself why I still read Gawker media. And it’s this. This beautiful, hilarious, terrifying piece that reminds me of how everything else is so, so much worse. Here’s hoping you land a $300,000 salary to write takedowns like this every week.

Why “except?” My statement is consistent with yours.

That version of “safe space” has been around for awhile and I doubt there’s any large resistance too it. It’s basically status-quo for education. The “safe space” that is currently a buzzword has genesis in both the idea (real or imagined) of censored instruction to prevent triggers and this asinine concept of…