From day one of this battle between Epic and Apple, Epic and Tim have been max cringe level.

The way they campaigned against Apple (1984 like promo, and civil rights comparisons) weren’t because thats how they felt, its propaganda aimed at their young audiences. People young/naive enough to buy into their side.

It was…

epic games is not a small company, it’s great that apple is cutting their take from small developers and yeah epic’s litigation probably had something to do with it, but you know who isn’t going to benefit from this change? epic. which leaves tim’s boasting more along the lines of “guy who definitely just didn’t get…

“Listen I get it, Apple sucks, their fees are exorbitant, and they’re anti-competition. I’m on your side. Stick it to ‘em.”

Only in the sense of trying to claim “I fired a gun at a firing range. Now that I have done that, I know the deep and heavy feeling that the soldiers on Normandy beach felt at D-Day.”

Then you have been successfully fooled. 

I always wondered how the mooks end up on the bad guys team. 

Tim Sweeney, who is probably celebrating the small victory of Apple slashing their cut from App Store developers making less than $1million in half, does not know when to shut up.

yeah no this one makes sense, sorry.

Huh. Sounds like that misplaced energy in “struggling through long hours with 0 viewers,” and hate for a faceless corporation, could be used for literally anything else.

Ok I’ll just say this happens with a lot of marginalised or stigmatised groups: someone comes in, not directly affected by the issue at hand, and feels the need to offer opinions to those that are, on behalf of somebody who’s not even there and never asked for it.

What I want to know is why the AP style book should be brought up in any discussion about a cartoon or any show. AP style book does not command our everyday lives in any way.

For one big issue, in the news it’s going to either being dismissal of someone who actually does have a mental illness or a bit of hyperbole that would likely be taken as an allegation of mental illness. The former is unlikely and the latter impossible in a bit comedy show.

Expecting something to tickle the same funny bone one had as a child does, however, which is how this reads to me. The whole review could really be condensed down to, “Animaniacs didn’t change with me” which, while a valid complaint, isn’t really a fair one.

This is what happens when people get offended by just about everything.

It also runs aground with some outdated cultural norms; I watched these episodes on the same day that AP Stylebook, the journalism Bible, put out a notice that terms like “insane,” “crazy,” and “nuts” should not be used in a derogatory way (they’re ableist against people with mental health issues, and it’s generally…

But you and I, we’re the adults now.

terms like “insane,” “crazy,” and “nuts” should not be used in a derogatory way

There is a gulf of difference between portraying bouncing/swaying boobs and portraying sexual assault.

I’m always here for any comment that has to explain why *technically* a character isn’t under age.

3 - Maggie Simpson has been a baby for 31 years. Your argument isn’t sound.