this post was submitted on 16 Dec 2023
127 points (97.7% liked)

Games

16796 readers
973 users here now

Video game news oriented community. No NanoUFO is not a bot :)

Posts.

  1. News oriented content (general reviews, previews or retrospectives allowed).
  2. Broad discussion posts (preferably not only about a specific game).
  3. No humor/memes etc..
  4. No affiliate links
  5. No advertising.
  6. No clickbait, editorialized, sensational titles. State the game in question in the title. No all caps.
  7. No self promotion.
  8. No duplicate posts, newer post will be deleted unless there is more discussion in one of the posts.
  9. No politics.

Comments.

  1. No personal attacks.
  2. Obey instance rules.
  3. No low effort comments(one or two words, emoji etc..)
  4. Please use spoiler tags for spoilers.

My goal is just to have a community where people can go and see what new game news is out for the day and comment on it.

Other communities:

Beehaw.org gaming

Lemmy.ml gaming

lemmy.ca pcgaming

founded 1 year ago
MODERATORS
you are viewing a single comment's thread
view the rest of the comments
[–] wildginger@lemmy.myserv.one 12 points 11 months ago* (last edited 11 months ago) (1 children)

Fully applies here, because the legal documents that the charity has posted for the past decade are more than the ample amount of evidence to drop jirard like a hot stone.

Jirard claims the reason why he lied for a decade about donating the money instead of hoarding it like a dragon is sheer incompetence. Many people think that is a lie, and its actually a long con he was in on the while time.

But regardless of if he was actively evil or just horridly incompetent with the money of hundreds of thousands of trusting fans, both explanations are full reasons to cut contact with him on a business and personal level.

What company wants jirard the "10 year long charity fumbler" completionist as a partner? Who would intentionally advertise that they work with either the charity scammer or the guy who didnt realize his charity wasnt a charity for a decade?

So a completely rational business cuts ties with a bad business partner. And you respond by misreading an internet comment, and taking the game out of your wishlist.

[–] BumpingFuglies@lemmy.zip -2 points 11 months ago (1 children)

Yeah, and if you look further down, you'll see I was ignorant of that until another commenter informed me, then I changed my tune accordingly.

Regardless, there was nothing preemptive on my end. "Preemptive" means taking preventive action in anticipation of something possible in the future. I was reactive; I saw the content removal as morally wrong, and reacted with a small personal protest (which, granted, I didn't edit out of my original comment, but have since rescinded). Nothing preemptive about it.

Semantics are fun!

[–] wildginger@lemmy.myserv.one 4 points 11 months ago (1 children)

Yes, and so was the removal of jirard from sea of stars. Reacting to the knowledge that jirard mishandled his charity. Thats why it was funny. Because you mislabeled what they did while doing the same thing they did.

Im sorry, I didnt think that part needed spelling out.

[–] BumpingFuglies@lemmy.zip 1 points 11 months ago* (last edited 11 months ago) (2 children)

Still not preemptive, though. Do you seriously not understand what the word means? I even gave you an armchair definition in my last comment.

Here, this might help: https://www.dictionary.com/browse/preemptive

EDIT: I think I finally understand. You must've forgotten what your original reply said. Here it is:

Its kinda funny to criticize someone for supposed preemptive action by yourself making a preemptive action.

That doesn't jive with this in your most recent comment:

Because you mislabeled what they did while doing the same thing they did.

I hate to argue semantics - that's a lie; I actually love it, but I know most people hate it - but while the latter quote is correct in the context of my misguided li'l protest (I mislabeled a simple reaction as preemptive, then I made a simple reaction), it's an incorrect explanation of the "humorous observation" - that I mislabeled a simple reaction as preemptive, then I made a preemptive action.

I understand that appearing intelligent is probably very important to you, so you really should make more of an effort to reread your posts when somebody calls out a mistake you've made, rather than dig your heels in.

Learning from our mistakes is how we grow.

[–] wildginger@lemmy.myserv.one 1 points 11 months ago

..... Yes, which is why it was funny. You mislabeled their reactive comments as preemptive when they werent, while doing the same thing they did while calling it reactive.

Pumpkin, do I need to draw you pictures? Ive explained this for you 3 times.

[–] wildginger@lemmy.myserv.one 0 points 11 months ago (1 children)

Adding an edit hours after my comment is cute, but adding an edit where you detail misunderstanding my first comment is adorable.

[–] BumpingFuglies@lemmy.zip 1 points 11 months ago (1 children)

Yeah, I started to edit then got distracted. I have a life.

Do you get some satisfaction out of constantly lying? Or are you truly that dense? Either way, I suppose there's no point in continuing this.

You got more upvotes than me, so I guess that means you win. Your mother must be so proud.

[–] wildginger@lemmy.myserv.one -1 points 11 months ago

Jesus, you care about votes on lemmy? Im sorry to hear that bud

Ive repeated myself so many different ways for you, to help you grok the sentence everyone else got the first time. Its very cute you think the same concept reworded for you in different ways is what lying is.

Are you this big a dickrider for jirard? Or did I accidentally step on an insecurity of yours? If I did I promise it wasnt on purpose