I’m really having a hard time understanding why people keep saying this, despite the constant evidence we get that propaganda does work, and not just on those that some would consider “low educated.” Further, it doesn’t have to work on everybody, just enough.

There was no hyperbole in my post.

USD and Steam Credits don’t burn down a rainforest for every transaction.

“Why does everything need to stay un-financialized?”

If you’re annoyed by Wordle results in your feed, why not just mute “Wordle”?

Why is that “all but guaranteed”? We’ve had games where you could “financialize your in game assets.” They universally sucked, because in order to make that a thing, you have to make the rest of the game worse for everyone else.

Nope. We know that it’s not the lack of web3"tech” that has been blocking this. Web3 wouldn’t change this if the publishers themselves don’t want it.

Oh, so close. You’ve almost got it.

While I agree that such a law wouldn’t be as simple as “No scalping consoles,” laws against ticket scalping have been on the books for quite a while. I can’t see why it would be similar.

This reminds me of the jackass who tried to set up an automated system to make reservations at restaurants so that he could then sell them. Or the other jackass who wanted to do something about the wait times for calling the IRS... so he made a system to flood the IRS phone lines, and would sell a place in line to…

I mean, everyone who has used the phrase “job creator” in a non-ironic context is a complete piece of shit, so I guess that fits.

It’s crazy how many people think that the only reason you’d think these things are dumb is because you “don’t understand,” when those who mock them are the ones that demonstrate the greatest understanding of the technology and the problems with it, and those who defend it can’t come up with anything but “You don’t…

No, you can't. With those things, the only way to get the physical item is to buy it. I can't get the action figure without someone buying it. I can get the pictures the en eff tee points to without buying anything.

They don't talk about any potential positives because there are none.

Dorothy Lynch?

Those people are the absolute worst. “I don’t think you should be able to exist here. Wait, why are you getting divisive? Why can’t you be civil to me, after I said you shouldn’t be able to exist here?”

I mean, you’re refusing to look at what the moderator actually said. They claimed that any discussion of queerness is “politics”. You’re ignoring the fact that many queer people are banned from being who they are because of these shitty “no politics” clauses that only affect queer people.

Yes, they were, because being queer was considered “politics”. Being straight isn’t. And no, I am NOT talking about people being “defined solely by their sexuality.” I am talking about people who choose to be up front about who they are, so that they don’t end up starting a game on a table only to find out later that…

Way to purposefully miss the point. Again, you get to be straight, assumed to be straight, and not have any of your straightness considered “political”. You can talk about celebrities you find attractive and things of that nature and not face backlash for it. LBGTQ+ people cannot. Their very existence is “political”,…

“Munn had no background in gaming prior to G4. Munn is *literally* an actress by trade.”