Wait, Hal Jordan and folks have rings which are vulnerable to the color yellow again? They brought that back?

Actually, there's a surprisingly thorough breakdown of the show's faults. The show opens with a framing device which doesn't really have much of a point (Ferguson in the classroom, asking children questions and then seemingly ignoring what he doesn't like). Six virtues are listed as "killer apps", in a nifty…

Actually, there's a surprisingly thorough breakdown of the show's faults. The show opens with a framing device which doesn't really have much of a point (Ferguson in the classroom, asking children questions and then seemingly ignoring what he doesn't like). Six virtues are listed as "killer apps", in a nifty…

It may not be 100% crazy (Clarke's Law and all), but it is fallacious. To be specific, it is the fallacy of hasty generalization, when one draws one's conclusions about all members of a class based on experiences with but a few of its members.

It may not be 100% crazy (Clarke's Law and all), but it is fallacious. To be specific, it is the fallacy of hasty generalization, when one draws one's conclusions about all members of a class based on experiences with but a few of its members.

A few things: First, Kid Flash isn't applying the scientific method. He's not conducting experiments, he's just trying to deny the possibility of magic whenever possible (with the exception of when Miss Martian is concerned). The combined result of his explanations would suggest that Doctor Fate possess a wide variety…

A few things: First, Kid Flash isn't applying the scientific method. He's not conducting experiments, he's just trying to deny the possibility of magic whenever possible (with the exception of when Miss Martian is concerned). The combined result of his explanations would suggest that Doctor Fate possess a wide variety…

While I agree that that episode was a little hard on Kid Flash, I don't think it's really an attack on science, as the problem is more his unwillingness to entertain the possibility than the empirical method itself. This comes across as a bit idiotic considering that he runs around with a shape-shifting, telekinetic…

While I agree that that episode was a little hard on Kid Flash, I don't think it's really an attack on science, as the problem is more his unwillingness to entertain the possibility than the empirical method itself. This comes across as a bit idiotic considering that he runs around with a shape-shifting, telekinetic…

While I agree that the game in Digital Estate Planning was absurdly expansive, I think the show handled what is almost a necessity of the translation of a video game to television (watching most video games is actually rather dull, which is why "Let's Play"s often rely on strong narration) rather well, by using the…

While I agree that the game in Digital Estate Planning was absurdly expansive, I think the show handled what is almost a necessity of the translation of a video game to television (watching most video games is actually rather dull, which is why "Let's Play"s often rely on strong narration) rather well, by using the…

I am incredibly glad that the sprites actually look like something which might be produced (albeit by an indie developer), as opposed to the outdated "modern" graphics used in so many police procedural episodes.

Massachusetts, too, was hitting the 70s in January.

"The Heroic Weather-Conditions of the Universe" is a great name.

So… "The Lion and the Unicorn" sounds like Neverwhere if it was written by Steven King instead of Neil Gaiman? Huh.

Sounds like the whole idea of a work which represents a generation should be discarded, then.

I wonder: Do "White People Problems" include issues of human expression? Throughout this discussion, we seem to have defined WPP as regarding conflicts in fiction which do not risk either the life of a character or the livability of that life (such as potential homelessness).

I think it would help eventually. There would be a time in which both terms are in use, but if the new term can somehow triumph, I think the confusion could be cut down.

"Banning" was an overstatement, I agree, but how can you say we shouldn't object to whiteness when you say "We should object to whiteness"? Or are you shifting between the two definitions under discussion?

Oh! Also, I don't think "atrocities have been committed over a thing" can provide a rationale for the banning of that thing. Atrocities have also been committed over property, ideology, and sports, yet I suspect this is not sufficient grounds to ban them.