Superman 64 Discussion Thread

[Quom]

I dunno, it seems like every Youtuber (including those that generally 'side' with GG like TB) have come out and basically said that comments they receive have had a massive negative impact on their mental health. I don't care how many high schools you went to, if everything you do professionally also allows someone to directly message you and tell you how shit you are then it's going to take a toll. I'd also say it's different to being a 'regular' celebrity, sure actors/models/singers/whatever will be judged by their peers but generally the people doing the judging are higher up the food-chain. Likewise regular joes might shit on them, but they're a step below the celebrity, they don't know what it is to actually be an actor/model/singer/whatever and most likely lack the requisite skills to do so. Whereas nearly everyone on Youtube admits that they aren't really removed from regular people and they basically just got lucky, caught traction and became popular.

I'm not getting the whole GG/SJW bullshit though. In all honesty both camps are filled with an element of incredibly toxic, equally ridiculous and hate filled people and it would be for the best if both fucked off. The weirdest thing about it all is that each group is giving so much attention to the other that weird arse people nobody would have heard of otherwise end up with their 15 minutes. Basically each party is having the opposite effect to that which was intended.

As far as censoring shit? Meh, does it really matter if xxxN0scope420 can't wish cancer upon somebody? Frankly I'm sick of 'this tranny is a paedophile lets get it' and '4chan is filled up with child porn lets get them' brigading bullshit and all the people who live and feed off the drama. Take the drama away and hopefully these people actually go out and get some fresh air and realise there is more to life than this bullshit. 

 

Edited September 29, 2015 by Quom

[SeanDMan]

I dunno, it seems like every Youtuber (including those that generally 'side' with GG like TB) have come out and basically said that comments they receive have had a massive negative impact on their mental health.

TB admits that it is his own fault that comments effect him negatively due to his attitude and ego and that he has talked with mental health professionals about letting things go and not taking them personally, but he is unable to.

TB is not what I would point to as an example of a healthy and functioning adult, dude podcasts in his bathrobe.  

[Rich]

As somebody who has recently been going through mental health issues it's comments such as "Generally, functioning, non-sheltered adults should be able to take criticism and not consider it to be harassment." that really irks me, it's this lack of mindfulness and compassion for others from the people making the comments which is pretty atrocious, if people are that bad at policing their own behaviour and treatment of others, why should we allow them to have free reign on their behaviour? If they can't act like generally functioning non-sheltered adults why should we expect the receivers of comments to act in such a way?

Honestly, I am really struggling to understand your stance which is essentially protecting the antagonist and not the victim  and blaming the victim and not the antagonist is appropriate (again in my opinion if I am reading you wrong).

[Benji]

Hey, noted semi-regular in this thread Ben Affleck, what is the internet for?

[Rich]

[Benji]

That's racist cultural appropriation and I demand you apologize to the UN.

[Rich]

Sorry, User Name

[Benji]

I meant Uhaa Nation :/

[Rich]

Who is that? Terry Crews? Apollo Creed?

[Benji]

No, Who is someone else entirely.

[FestiveJack]

Who is in jail, isn't he?

[Rich]

I thought that was [name redacted]?

[SeanDMan]

Steven Richards is totally a fake gamergirl.

[Pizza]

You're an odd one, Pizza. You decried the NDP's commitment to funding the RCMP, increasing the amount of police we will have, but in terms of giving the government the ability to police people's internet usage, you're onboard? You don't see those two positions as being at odds with one another?

I think the internet should police itself. I am mad that it has failed to do so. Gamergate is a big part of the reason why, and brought this upon the internet as a whole. I'm not a fan of the UN report. But it was inevitable. When people can't tell the difference between "I think your criticism is offbase" and "I hope you get raped and die you bitch, here is a picture of you being raped by Mario", things like this happen. 

Also, this is for a different topic, but I don't have a problem with policing, I have a problem with bad policing. We don't need more cops, we certainly don't need to hire 1500 people who aren't good enough to be cops today. We need the cops we have now to be better, and money should be directed at that, not at hiring more of them.

[Rich]

Ok case in point from today:

https://www.facebook.com/anonymousforjustice/photos/a.273927042756537.1073741828.273925916089983/538262562989649/?type=3

That link shows the picture of Martin Shrkeli, this man is pretty awful, this much can be agreed on, but in this post Anonymous have released personal information (whether it is correct or not is a totally separate discussion).  This post has been seen by a huge number of people and now this person has potentially had his life ruined even more than being publicly vilified, stopping people post information like this is so important for the well being of society let alone the individual, the sense that people can take justice in to their own hands is awful.  It's embarrassing that people think this is the way we can or should act in this modern society.

EDIT

If this post was blocked (read censored if you so wish), then there would be less harm for the victim, even if he is an awful person for other reasons.

Edited September 29, 2015 by Rich Manning

[SeanDMan]

It's also not correct, it's a different person with the same name.

And I've never advocated that I am okay with releasing a person's personal information and inciting a hate mob on then. That's criminal. That was criminal before any of this ever started.

[Pizza]

So are harrassment and threats. Whether it's online or not. This isn't about new laws. It's about enforcement of laws that already exist in a space that wasn't conceivable when those laws were enacted. I have problems with the content of the report, which I think is inept and shows a lack of understanding of technology. But acting like laws against harrassment and threats shouldn't be enforced because they're just words is dumb.

[Rich]

It's also not correct, it's a different person with the same name.

And I've never advocated that I am okay with releasing a person's personal information and inciting a hate mob on then. That's criminal. That was criminal before any of this ever started.

I'm not saying you disagree with the criminality of it, but do you not thing better controls and monitoring in place would stop people from suffering from the invasion of privacy have had that happen no matter what the punishment is, with the internet being such an accessible medium you can't apply the exact same logic to the two.  The reaction is to late, being more proactive and at the very least stalling and reviewing of such an event should take place.  Facebook can remove the post, remove the profile, but this is too late.

[SeanDMan]

If we had a tank full of psychics who knew when and where people were going to commit crimes, I'd be fine with government intervention. Otherwise, you have essentially two options: everyone lives in a police state where they monitor what you do 24/7, or we deal with crimes AFTER they happen.

[Rich]

So again, protecting the antagonist at the detriment of the victim, cool