Yeah playing original Starcraft with the PA folks has basically made me hate playing Starcraft online. I was pretty new and all I faced where rushes, reaver drops, barracks being built in my base etc. Getting your face kicked in over and over becomes not fun very fast.
When I started playing this and people online were proxying me all the time I thought it was very unfun.
But that added up and released when I was first able to beat one, and now I constantly take joy from it. (And beat proxies way more frequently).
It's not that they did proxy rushes or anything like that. It was just getting my face kicked in by much better players over and over again with no realistic chance of victory got old.
I guess that is pretty neat about the different leagues, I mostly get to play people I'm pretty equal with now. That's pretty nice. There are odd ones here and there that are seemingly way way better, but they might just have been practicing one thing and doing well with that one.
Yeah I mean if I wanted to play SC2 online I should have an easier time getting into it but at this point I don't have the time to put into it, so... I guess it's not for me.
Is coo. Maybe check it out when it's been out for a while and is cheap and nice, the campaign is pretty fun also. Though it is not fantastic by any means.
Well I bought it for the campaign, just haven't played it in a while.
logic, on the other hand, is totally a tool of the patriarchy to oppress women (not joking)
What? Like the concept of logic or the ideas surrounding logic, like men are logical and women are emotional?
Cause you can have your touchy feely librul arts women's studies discussions but you leave my buddy logic out of it.
Yes, positivist self-reifying logic as the only worthwhile practice and theory of knowledge is pretty oppressive.
It excludes emotion, privileges those who know its ways, etc.
How does that oppress women specifically and not, say, any emotional ignoramus?
I am trying not to run off feminist buzzwords and names here, but remember all those conversations we just had about women being seen as more emotional?
And no, I'm not joking Pony.
Then I'm going to have to assume you are using the word "logic" to mean some bullshit other thing, like you do with other buzzwords you misappropriate
Is she arguing that it ought to be (emotion > reason)?
If so, I have Hume's Treatise right here...
I don't think that's what she's arguing. I'll let her defend herself on her particular position.
I will point out a few flaws in the very question you're asking, though. First off, it assumes a diametric opposition between emotion and reason that does not necessarily exist. Secondly, it assumes that there is a generalizable superiority between the two in all situations rather than acknowledging that one may more more applicable than the other in some situations. Third, her statement was that "yes, positivist self-reifying logic as the only worthwhile practice and theory of knowledge is pretty oppressive" which means that it is a pretty egregious misreading that emotion > reason.
Feral on
every person who doesn't like an acquired taste always seems to think everyone who likes it is faking it. it should be an official fallacy.
the "no true scotch man" fallacy.
0
Options
VariableMouth CongressStroke Me Lady FameRegistered Userregular
logic, on the other hand, is totally a tool of the patriarchy to oppress women (not joking)
What? Like the concept of logic or the ideas surrounding logic, like men are logical and women are emotional?
Cause you can have your touchy feely librul arts women's studies discussions but you leave my buddy logic out of it.
Yes, positivist self-reifying logic as the only worthwhile practice and theory of knowledge is pretty oppressive.
It excludes emotion, privileges those who know its ways, etc.
It's the most basic and only airtight theory of knowledge. And as such, its applications are incredibly limited. Saying it doesn't account for emotion or privilege or whatever sounds, frankly, fucking crazy. It exists in a place that is wholly separate from constructs like that.
Donkey Kong on
Thousands of hot, local singles are waiting to play at bubbulon.com.
Posts
I was dropping the hamiltons.
Well I bought it for the campaign, just haven't played it in a while.
Then I'm going to have to assume you are using the word "logic" to mean some bullshit other thing, like you do with other buzzwords you misappropriate
like trans.
Because you don't know them.
I don't think that's what she's arguing. I'll let her defend herself on her particular position.
I will point out a few flaws in the very question you're asking, though. First off, it assumes a diametric opposition between emotion and reason that does not necessarily exist. Secondly, it assumes that there is a generalizable superiority between the two in all situations rather than acknowledging that one may more more applicable than the other in some situations. Third, her statement was that "yes, positivist self-reifying logic as the only worthwhile practice and theory of knowledge is pretty oppressive" which means that it is a pretty egregious misreading that emotion > reason.
the "no true scotch man" fallacy.
I can't believe no one else said anything
i pegged you as an otter man myself
I'm gonna grab some dinner and play tuftoo
I'm going to go watch a video on italian fencing and practice starcraft build orders.
I have to duck out of a fun conversation with Passer for this
The Swedish 20 has Hamilton Olaffson on it
Only he can't do that, because he spent the cdkey! So now we can start coercing him to play moar.
The other, Pony and _J_.
Things seemed balanced.
(2) P Assumption
(3) Q 1, 2 Modus Ponens
Feel that? Feel that oppression, women?
Yeah. Yeah you're so oppressed.
They scream, and cry. And then every adult within hearing distance (sometimes miles) will look at you WITH DISDAIN.
That's what makes it so hard to steal shit from a baby.
This is true.
But the point is that multiple bills are way cooler than single bills, which is why I was dropping the hamiltons.
i don't know whose side i'm on because people refuse to expand
On the black screen
That sounds dangerous. Will you perchance be using a machete?
hehehehehehehehe
It's ok, I'm abandoning ship too, for Minecraft and dinnercraft.
Be good to each other, [chat].
Except you, J.
Face Twit Rav Gram
Ctrl+F "Passer" Read nothing else.
It's how I stay sane when [chat] goes off the deep end.
Steam | Twitter
It's the most basic and only airtight theory of knowledge. And as such, its applications are incredibly limited. Saying it doesn't account for emotion or privilege or whatever sounds, frankly, fucking crazy. It exists in a place that is wholly separate from constructs like that.
So they ought to put a qualifier of stealing shit from a baby, when other people are around.
You and a baby, alone in a room? You can get anything you want from the baby.
Anything.
This isn't a thing, don't make this into a thing.
the "no true scotch man" fallacy.
Be careful!
Steam | Twitter
As long as you don't have good hearing.
On the black screen
as in I don't get what either side is saying.
Global warming's caused a price hike in Polar Light.
See also: Gödel
I / Pony maintain that modus ponens does not exploit / oppress women.
Arivia / Feral maintains that modus ponens exploits / oppresses women.
Rivs was all "positivist logic ignores emotions"
And I was all: "that is batshit what in the fuck"