Some variations in full art:
You can buy the original prints:
To find art that looks similar or the same in different sizes, you can just copy/paste the picture in Google-Image Search and look what you get:
And if you find nothing, you can just try to enlarge the image with software.
Plenty of free "image-enlarger" that might work for you and try out.
- Registered User
Member for 12 years, 8 months, and 9 days
Last active Thu, Oct, 21 2021 07:53:53
- 2 Followers
- 5,544 Total Posts
- 988 Thanks
Oct 15, 2021TheOnlyOne652089 posted a message on Stranger things secret lair spoiler and upcoming secret lairsPosted in: The Rumor MillQuote from Ryperior74 »
Well the difference with stranger things and D&D
Stranger thing it looks like a mutant with a flower like head
D&D it has 2 gorilla like heads and a tail
In DnD 1E it looks pretty much like that.
Oct 14, 2021TheOnlyOne652089 posted a message on Stranger things secret lair spoiler and upcoming secret lairsMore partner ...Posted in: The Rumor Mill
yea cause that turned out so balanced and well ...
Oct 14, 2021Posted in: SpeculationQuote from Ferret »It would be nice to see some HP Lovecraft inspired things, but seriously, what would the Cthulhu card be like?
20/20 Trample, unblockable, vigilance, reach
When you cast Cthulhu, sacrifice ten creatures or Cthulhu is exiled
Thats basically Eldrazi
They are the entire eldritch horror HP Lovecraft inspired monsters, tentacles and all included.
Oct 13, 2021Posted in: The Rumor MillQuote from cyberium_neo »Wait a sec... so several PW involved in this ritual, including two of the old walkers (Teferi/Sorin), against a bunch of monsters who're likely weaker than Emrakul's crisis, and still the ritual failed? Am I missing something?
Sorin doesnt give a damn about the people anymore, they basically deserve all suffering by now.
Teferi is only there as a plot device as hes the "time-magic" dude.
The plane is full of vampires and monsters, theres actually no reason why "humans" have any higher ranking to be protected, if anything they could go for a mass-exodus of the plane, so all humans simply leave, Innistrad is super hostile for humans anyway, so unless you completely purge all vampires and monsters, they will suffer forever.
Oct 7, 2021Posted in: The Rumor MillQuote from Magiqmaster »LMAO... very well said! Despite what Maro has said many times, about the fact that each product is not meant for everyone, I can't help but think that it sounds a bit shallow, but rather a company quote he has to say in order to appease the crowds on that subject.
Its short for, we produce all kinds of products, throw them at the customer and wait what sticks.
Its also a lazy way to have an excuse for terrible product, as they can distract and simply say "Then buy the other".
Why quality control if you can just do that instead ?
Oct 1, 2021Posted in: The Rumor MillQuote from Dontrike »
Either? Choose two of one and one of the other? Again, back when blocks were a thing that's how it happened and yes both Innistrad 3 sets will be large sets, but the solution definitely isn't "here's another product."
The irony is that WotC produces these "issues" of not having a block of 3 sets anymore, then "fixes" the issue they produced with another product to sell the same cards in new packaging.
Its absolutely hilarious, but if just 1 person buys this product, it will embolden them in their path.
(They kinda did that in the past, like with the Premium all foil Shards of Alara packs, which had cards of all the sets in the block, so it was a 3-in-1 thing)
Sep 29, 2021So these packs are basically just glorified REPACKS of their own product ?Posted in: The Rumor Mill
Amazin ... a new low ...
Why spend time and effort making new cards when you can just put the old stuff in a new pack and sell it again.
Seriously question who exactly buys into these products, somebody clearly does, but absolutely everyone i know is only buying singles by now, as the sheer avalanche of product completely alienated the experience.
If you are a completionist and want a full set, Magic is more expensive then ever (and not by a small amount, but by multiple factors).
At this point you can only really buy into very specific stuff and ignore all the rest.
Sep 26, 2021Posted in: SpeculationQuote from Flisch »
The K stands for Japanese.
Its "Korean Popular Music".
People might put all kinds of asian pop-music into the genre still.
I would think they go just a bit more about technology and the human culture in here, and ditch the entire "spirit" part more.
There might still be a faction in Kamigawa that is more about their former religion, with spirits in the mix, but spirits probably wont be a major part anymore, as the Kami-war is over.
Some equipment is probably guaranteed, even simple commons just for limited.
Kamigawa also had a bunch of artifacts with effects, hopefully we get some interesting new ones here.
If they now go the route of 10 2-color factions just like they basically always do now, we might get a handful of cards for all kinds of them.
Sep 24, 2021Well, if your deck is only reactive with removal and does not do anything pro-active itself, then you are at the whim of randomness to "not lose".Posted in: Magic General
Its obviously a better bet to roll on winning than not losing.
If a deck has to draw its Doomskar just to "not lose" , its probably not a viable deck in that metagame.
If a mass removal is winning you a game that hard, you can pack 4 more in, and with 8 copies, drawing one has a pretty good chance, especially with mulligans.
And if a deck packs that many point removal and just reactive cards, it will struggle especially hard against variety of opponents, as the removal is not "catch-all" enough (thats why good control decks are tuned against specific decks in a metagame, and not against a field of very different decks).
If you dont know what your opponent is going to be playing, its much better to optimize your own game plan to be as fast and consistent as possible, thats why especially aggro decks do well in a format that does not have a fleshed out metagame of decks, as speed and consistency is going to win games if the opponent does not have a proper deck.
Sep 24, 2021Yes, having more generic mechanics and wording of mechanics to allow them to work with more mechanics is much better game design than parasitic mechanics that only work with themselves.Posted in: Magic General
They realized that with "Arcane" spells and the like, but today they embrace this stuff with the gimmick mechanics.
Rosewater especially is fully aware of the problems they introduce in game design, but hes just not acting to avoid them (or other designers just blatantly run in the same errors again and again).
I dont like it either, but in the end, they make a mechanic, print like a Commander deck with it as a theme and call it a day, Next set is just a blink of an eye away.
Sep 23, 2021In the past Magic was about Blocks , 1 big set, then 2 smaller expansions to that set.Posted in: Magic General
That way you had a story over 9 months, much more cards, much more time to play and collect these cards and everything was slower and cleaner.
Today, every set (with exceptions) is just 1 set, then you hop to another set, another story, the story itself is much less fleshed out, theres more product and variations of everything, so its much more of a "rush".
And WotC is chasing that "high" on full force, with their screwed idea of pleasing everyone a little bit, its easily overkill if you commit to much to all of it.
I personally resort to playing just on Fridays (and PreReleases on the weekend) very regularly, so its more of a constant and less too much of Magic (as you can totally burn out).
Current set designs follow somewhat of a checkbox sheet.
They very much tend to have at least 5 color combinations per set and often all 10 2-color pairs in some kind of theme for a set.
Thats super cramped up for a single set, to have basically 10-factions in some kind or another.
Planeswalker for a long time had the issue that they also followed some kind of template , 4-5 mana, +1 had to either make tokens or draw a card, -2 had to be some kind fo removal or produce some bigger card advantage, and the ultimate had to somehow win the game.
For the first bunch of planeswalkers thats cool new stuff, but when you get the 20th planeswalker with that design template, well, it gets super boring.
The planeswalkers that break out of these templates are either super bad, or pretty broken (playable 3 mana planeswalkers tend to be pretty overpowered).
Most set mechanics are mainly done for Limited play. Almost all cards in a set are just useful for Limited, draft, or sealed format, all the "bad" commons and fringe uncommons and otherwise unplayable rares.
In constructed just a subset of a set actually can be relevant, as so many cards are just flat out worse than the "mythic" in the set.
And the way WotC designs sets, they have a metagame in mind they are planning to see, so they are aware what cards are pushed in powerlevel and they basically pre-build some decks with the cards to guess what the metagame of standard might be.
A even smaller subset of cards is designed to be powerful or specific enough for other formats, like Modern.
And of course theres Commander / EDH format of people that want their fix too, so each set has to have some legendary creatures for them and some toys to play with.
That way sets can quite easily feel more and more the same, as they follow the same check boxes of card design variations.
Lately especially WotC resorted to "gameplay gimmicks" , like Dungeons, the Day/Night mechanic and stuff like that, which are much less card-design and put some element in the game that is alien and they design it in powerlevel much more conservative, so it wont completely shake up a format ... exception to that are the "Modern Horizon" and the other super premium products, as they push powerlevel of cards intentionally to guarantee the cards will influence a existing constructed format.
Sets are designed by teams self-contained , just a little bit of leeway between the sets and some "bridge" cards that combo with something from the new set (like you get a bunch of vampires in the werewolf set, "teasing" the upcoming vampire set).
With the old set design of 3 sets per block, interaction between the sets in a block was given by design, today thats not the case anymore.
That has the advantage, that if someone really does not like a sets mechanic, they will get a fresh one in a shorter time period.
On the same coin, if someone really likes a sets mechanic, they are basically guaranteed to not get more of it for the foreseeable future.
Especially during Covid i resorted to just buying the bunch of interesting singles of a set i wanted and nothing else.
Normally i play a lot more Limited, so you get to play a lot more of the cards in a set, not just the tiny subset of pushed constructed cards.
Sep 23, 2021The 1-game system of arena is pretty terrible for "competitive" decks , as you can just get thrown against basically all kinds of decks, as nobody has to win a bunch of games in a row, and if they are losing they can just give up and quickly start another (which produces a pretty annoying system to play against people that keep doing that all the time).Posted in: Magic General
As people fire up the next game so quickly they are much less committed to the single game, and in that way its more about simply playing a lot more in quantity than in quality (but increasing your quality certainly helps too, if you have enough experience to "intuitively" make the right choice, you can play much faster and make less mistakes).
For proper competitive tournament structures you want to win as much as possible, so your deck has adapt to a known metagame of decks.
You dont just build a random deck that you consider good, you have to know what you are up against or what the tier 1 competitive decks are, and then make your choices to beat them as much as possible.
Every deck will have some weakness against especially super fringe specific strategies like mill, you can just beat mill by surviving the mill, you have to be faster than them.
If they take like to turn 7 to win with mill, you need to win faster. If you are control, you need counterspells or answers to survive and even then you still need some kind of win option that beats them in a reasonable time frame if you cannot completely control the game.
The speed of a deck is a big factor in competitive magic in all formats at this point.
With the diverse strategies its basically impossible to have a plan against all decks in a control deck, against some opponents your win chance might be super low, which is fine, if your win % is high against the kind of decks you expect to see.
You are in a spot of casuals decks with a mild competitive mindset, as winning games is obviously rewarding and better than losing all the time.
That all said, your win % basically should be 50%, you lose as much as you win, unless you really get an edge over the metagame you play against.
Especially in Arena players just lose a game and dont really think about "why" they lost and what they could have played different.
Often players make some mistakes that lose them games, but they never see these mistakes or they simply dont know about a rules interaction or delaying a play, in paper form you talk with your opponent and they point out what happened or you might discuss with them, so its much more natural to improve simply by realizing what your options are.
In Arena playing with Full Control to decide when to play cards is a thing thats a bit annoying, but almost mandatory to have all the needed control to optimize what you would want to do.
If the game just auto-skips the turn as it knows you dont have any plays, the opponent will know that as well, as they notice the super fast skip. In full control you can have only lands in hand and still pretend to have something.
If you can record your games with a video capture or stream (even if its just you, simply to have it on video) , you can quickly re-watch a game like a replay and sometimes figure out some grave mistakes, or plays where you see, doing something different could have been the better play.
Regardless of that, current Magic set design produces decks that are quite "snowbally" , so they really dominate a game if they make their plays on curve and do what they supposed to do. If an opponent struggles a bit, even just missing 1 land, that can easily be a massive drawback. Over a single game that can be the deciding factor, but over multiple games, you might have the edge, they have the edge and the truly interesting games are the ones where its almost even and tiny decisions make the difference (or a lucky topdeck, but to get to the point of the lucky topdeck, you have to make decisions that allow you to win the game at that moment).
For some people its all just about winning. These people will resort to cheating to get the wins if they have to, and get angry if they lose, like they feel entitled to win.
Thats a very bad mindset to have, but in the end its nice to win, but not at all cost, you have to have as much fun as your opponent after all.
The true joy of competitive Magic is self-improvement.
To make your own plays more intuitive, see the "best play" ahead of time and know your opponents decks and their options to plan ahead.
Theres still randomness and hidden information in the game, so you cant win all games, but skill ensures you will win more games over a longer course of matches (and winning challenging or super close games is much more gratifying than steam rolling people all the time).
For specific metagames the "interaction" can be on many different levels.
You want interaction inside of a game , they play something you play removal, or a creature on your own.
Thats a basic interaction you get in Limited formats all the time (so that might appeal to you a lot more).
In constructed formats you tend to get more streamlined extreme decks, one-dimensional decks are pushed to optimize something and that should win them the game, like a mill deck that only focuses on milling as fast as possible, while they have no interaction to creatures or anything of the opponent, all they do is bank on winning their way.
So the "interaction" with them is to put specific answers to their extreme strategy in your sideboard.
So yes, you might basically 70%+ lose game 1, but with the sideboard, you might be favored to win, so you can 2-1 them, as you play more games with your sideboard after all.
If a mill deck is very prevalent in your expected metagame, you might even put the sideboard hate in your maindeck to improve game 1 (especially if its a flexible card that you might be able to tutor, or a single card that you can afford to ignore).
So the interaction is on a meta-level of building the deck in the first place.
The deck choice itself gives you a % chance to win a match, just changing a single card in a sideboard might shift that % chance in your favor.
The less extreme the opponents strategy, the harder it is to find efficient hate cards for the sideboard against them.
The 1-dimensional decks are overall more "stupid" and usually people play them that want to think less about a metagame, or they expect that nobody expects their deck and has no hate cards against them, such a "Rogue" deck can win a tournament as it surprises them (but if its winning, more people might start playing that deck, and the metagame shifts again).
Having played a match a lot of times gives you experience of specific interactions, that might give you some win % over an unprepared opponent.
So competitive decks have a bigger focus on mastering knowledge about a metagame, preparing for that with your own mastering of your deck in these matchups and then opt for tiny changes that might give you an edge in the mirror matches.
People often just want to play everything on curve all the time and almost give up if they struggle just a little bit.
But over a lot of games, you simply dont curve out all the time, you will struggle, and the skill is to squeeze wins out of close games, thats the games you will remember, not the ones where you just steamrolled the opponent with no resistance.
- To post a comment, please login or register a new account.
Nov 30, 2017TheOnlyOne652089 posted a message on If You Can't Take Criticism of Jeremy Hambly, You're Part of the ProblemThe deal with being in public and somewhat called "harassment" (and i clearly distinquish between a from a court defined harassment and a person just feeling they are harassed) , is that its really different pieces.Posted in: Articles
As a private person you have no impact on public that even remotely justifies that anyone attacks you directly.
However, as a public person, like a politician or as we have here, a cosplayer that actively presents their body in public on public events to players, its in your right to criticizes exactly that, which is the body, its presented in a sexualized manner, so commenting in that way is not even inappropriate (might not be your personal taste, but thats a different deal).
If a private person gets mails from random persons theres zero reason or justification, so thats an entirely different matter compared to someone that publicly pushes themselves into public opinion.
Its a really important part of projecting this matter to the context its presented in.
If i see a women feeding a baby and i tell her "You are a 6/10, i wouldnt even rape you" , it would be an unbelieavable inappropriate thing to say , but to someone that in public makes money by presenting their body ? If i tell that to a stripper ? Inapprioriate for sure, but still an entirely different deal, as context matters, the environment matters and if you do not want to expose to that, you are not forced, you can simply not do that job.
If you go to the extreme and outlaw any potenially rude comment, you restrict language by a great deal, so much that people cannot express anything without fear somebody will feel hurt or insulted, and if that justifies that your social media gets permanently flagged and you suffer for it, its a way more extreme response than the "rude comment" started out as.
The adult option would be to point the rude comments out and keep it on a apprioriate level of response, you can talk stuff out and discuss it to proof a point without going to war directly , and still keep in mind, that no person is outright evil, for such things.
And yes, the real sick people are the ones that perform the threats, thats just downright cruelty and has no other reason than pleasing a sadistic pleasure, and that is absolutely nothing a society has to, or should accept, but its a completely different animal to a critic from an public figure.
I am on the side to promote that individuals are responsible for what they are doing.
Jeremy didnt incite harassment, he did poorly phrased comments sure, but thats hardly crazy evil, its just rude and if you talk to him about that, yes ofcourse he knows himself its rude, and thats about it, you can stand above it and realize that something thats already enough, realize you gone a bit to far and the moment you are told so, you can better yourself, problem solved ; the sick people that continue to threaten , thats what remains, but thats adults, responsible for their actions, and any adult that isnt insane should have enough intelligence to not even do that to begin with.
Racist comments are a special kind of deal, just as gay-topics etc. etc.
Its highly controversial to many people and especially your work place is a context with special meaning here.
If i make a racial comment in private, thats it, nobody cares. If someone is insulted they can sue me, i get appropriate punishment, and/or we settle the topic before it escalates, thats the potential for discussion and understanding that is much more valuable than taking every little comment and blow it up like its a death threat right away ; its clearly not.
In your context part you clearly see context matters so much.
Context is key for this here.
All the screenshots are mostly out of context and look entirely different if you get the big picture.
Yes people are offended a lot, but its undeniably a thing you have to be able to deal with if you have any kind of public job, or open yourself up to that (and if you cannot deal with it, its simply the wrong job for you, as theirs issues with lots of jobs and you cannot just blame others for that, self-responsility is a thing, its not that others are always to blame for anything you do and anything you do will have an effect on others, if your job is in public, thats a given).
I think america in special a lot of people are highly influenced by what some special individuals say , so they build up some form of responsibility for what they say, simply because of that.
And i think, it again depends on context and what group you talk to.
In the case here the group of people is the magic community, people that watch Jeremys Channel, thats already a very small subsection again and people that enjoy trollish comments, so they are already open to that and have their own problems why they cannot control what they are doing (as no sane person would write a death threat email to anybody, but lots of people do, especially in heated discusions and extreme topics).
But here Jeremy cannot be at fault for what individuals end up doing, the targeted audience are adults, and should totally be able to control themselves.
Your last part.
I also think he could be much less rude in his comments and from his latest comments he acknowledges this, as often you have to be told you are going over the edge, and if its good to think about it (but again, its about critic and staying on a non-extreme course, you want discussion and not open war).
Lots of stuff i can relate to and the topic is simply overblown by extreme margins.
In the end, people said some mean things and others reacted to them ; thats actually all that happened, thats rude at best, but its not downright evil.
This topic would much easier and smoother be solved in a much smaller circle, or in private between these two.
Pulling it to public just makes things worse, by a lot and it doesnt serve anybody, be they right or wrong, in the end, this open warfare just damages the community and people will bunker themselves into even more extreme sides and become even more unable to discuss anything without directly insulting each other.
But one thing is guaranteed, this will be a hot topic for the rest of the week and probably the next one, and at some point, nobody will care anymore and just play Magic again.
Nov 30, 2017TheOnlyOne652089 posted a message on If You Can't Take Criticism of Jeremy Hambly, You're Part of the ProblemThe fact that a comment makes someone feel harassed doesnt mean it is harassment.Posted in: Articles
Just because someone feels insulted, its not automatic evil in nature.
Most important, he never told to her directly, you literally have to seek out his channel to see the comments, so you actively have to search yourself to see negative comments about yourself.
The indisputable issue are the sick minded individuals that go over the top and do exactly that, email directly, twitter to her directly etc. They do the harassment, they are 100% guilty for it, and they qualify for it, as they indeed take a sadistic pleasure in doing that, its among the most harmful type of troll.
Then theres a difference between private people and people in public.
As a private person nobody has any public interest in what i do and so comments about my person would be out of context.
The moment what you are doing is part of a community, like cosplay at a grand prix and doing pictures of that etc. You present yourself in public and so comments about exactly that are clearly presented.
That alone is no harassment and its just as important to clearly draw a line between what people truly say and what is casually said, simply put, if you are talking to a group of people for hours, chances are you will say something stupid and someone will feel insulted ; so it has to be viewed in context and not just "oh god, look what he said" , and finger point exactly that and ignore anything else.
And especially for Jeremys channel, its clearly a form of topics and talking that you might easily find offending, others do not, some think hes right about a bunch of stuff, and i believe you can easily see he has a bunch of points.
All the so called harassment can be put down to context that gives it a background, so that is what makes the topic a lot more slippery than just believing its all crystal clear.
The idea of thinking its downright crystal clear and theres only black/white in it, is already short sighted, as you have to see more of the picture to get a real glimpse of the actual truth.
Nov 30, 2017TheOnlyOne652089 posted a message on If You Can't Take Criticism of Jeremy Hambly, You're Part of the ProblemYea, if people truly think theres just 1 problem at hand, and that others, but ofcourse never themselves are a part of it, thats just ridiculous, as it is the kind of finger pointing that just wants to make someone else responsible for what you think is bad.Posted in: Articles
If someone truly feels harassed, seek the police, file a claim, prevent the harassment, thats what you can do as an adult, theres a little bit of responsibility for your own too.
Its not your job to defend your wife, if you truly want fairness, she can do that on her own and she should be absolutely able and willing to do so (and if she isnt, that is a problem you have to start working on).
Its always a big question mark, if you have to drag your personal issues into public.
That just makes everything worse, much worse, as you are suddenly exposed to people that choose sides and over dramatic defend it, no matter if it effects them at all.
The adult way to solve the issue would simply be if she started out to simply ask to stop exactly what she thinks is bothering her. Any responsible adult will accept that and change behavior if its reasonable, and if they dont, you file a claim against them, so they get judged by a neutral court (or you are proven wrong on your feeling of being harassed, thats also an option and as an adult your have to live with it).
Nov 30, 2017Theres critic and just phrasing opinions and as a form of entertainer and content provider he has a form of talking that a lot of people find offensive, but there is plenty of comedians i find offensive, but that doesnt make them in any way problematic.Posted in: Articles
Comments can easily be in bad taste and thats undeniable the case for Jeremy, but the real core of the issue to discuss is the small amount of truly idiotic people that take it to a true harassment and violent form of threats ; and the question to discuss would be if you as a content provider are truly responsible for what some sick individuals do , given they are adults, these people are the actual problem, and thats not Jeremy.
The same kind of sick individuals exist on the other spectrum too, some of them Social Justice Warriors that somehow feel Jeremy has to be "utterly destroyed" and death threats against him are "totally fine".
Seriously, its the same kind of sick individuals and its the CORE of a true problem which puts every little issue into full on overdrive roadkill.
It serves nobody and its a form of discussion that is very prevalent in the internet.
Its a culture of trolls and social justice warriors that simply cannot keep their actions behind a healthy line that keeps a minimum of civilized discourse alive.
If people get famous they undeniable have to have a tougher hide. The more people you know and the more people respond to you, the more bad comments you will accumulate.
Thats natural, and people will either like what you do or they will not.
Some of the sick people will downright hate you for whatever you do and this leads to the exact problem of people that think they have to act themselves , right now and fight what they think is the evil, everyone thinks they are in the right to do so and so nobody is able to self-reflect and see they are going over the top.
If matters settle down you could easily see Jeremy seeing himself that a bunch of stuff crosses the line , but bad taste comments and actual harassment should be dealt with in court and absolutely not in public for people to just judge and start their little lynch mobs in every corner burning whatever victim they just found.
So there is more than just one problem.
A lot of problems and everyone is part of some problem, if they see it, know it, or still deny it.
Nov 30, 2017Theres plenty of "good" men that started wars and killed people in the name of what they thought to be somehow the right thing.Posted in: Articles
The reality is, there are no "evil" and no "good" men, just opinions and people that push these ideology with violence over the other, who ever wins will be in the right, the other side clearly must have been wrong.
Its not the job of people to start a lynch mob and "destroy" other human beings and its downright pedantic to think that is in any way what "good men" should do.
Any problem has to be discussed and solved on the appropriate level.
Pushing topics in public only serves the trolls and media hype , people calling out for a single entity to be blamed for everything they think is bad.
The reality is, theres not a single bad person and everyone is usually to some degree responsible for what they do or do not do.
People really like to give small problems horrific names so they sound like much bigger problems, that leads only to despair and misery, it has no positive benefit for anybody, just pampers the ideology of people that really think they are the only legit form of judgment call, self-administered justice isnt the way to go and if you ever get in the situation to think someone is the personified evil, you are guaranteed wrong and simply ignore the other standpoint (so you become evil yourself, just to pretend to defend against evil, thats in no way a solution and only leads to a conflict in which everyone can blame anyone to be in the right and suddenly there are no good men left anymore).
Nov 30, 2017A very big issue is that different topics are brought together, while they simply do not fit.Posted in: Articles
Nazi and troll posters are two very different things and should never be put together, just to fuel a cause, thats selling your own arguments cheap and makes them one-dimensional black/white thinking again, which is good for nobody.
Also, there will be critic and negative critic as well, that has to be acceptable.
Nobody is forced to be overly positive about anything.
If you truly dislike something you can say so, and its value to the discussion that this is expressed and not just ignored, or even outlawed as something terrible wrong.
At the same time its very valid to criticize something and not come up with a solution on your own right away. I can critic a cook and not be able to make it better, thats totally fine and it must be legit to do so. The point of critic is that you should never need to justify for it, the receiver can take the critic and see it as an issue, or they dont, thats their cup of tea and its what an adult has to learn to deal with.
But here again, this changes a lot if someone is in private or its brought up in public and presented to a mob of people.
If you just honestly dislike cosplay and say so, thats fair, nobody forces you to like anything.
The "locker-room-talk" is a topic entirely for its own. Its something that is widely accepted and always was. Women to the same about men, they even do it among each other, it might just be more subtle than the direct approach of actually saying it out loud, even if its just in the "locker-room" (or in this case a youtube channel, or a bunch of twitter posts).
Its fine on its own.
What really pushes the topic to become a real issue is how stuff completely gets lost and out of control incited to be way bigger than what it really is (and yes, thats a terrible huge deal with the amount of media and the very real interest of media to promote topics into "highlights" and further push the mob to generate more horrific events to report about, its almost a self proclaiming prophecy, so its very difficult to truly say what amount of discussion is healthy and what is just talking it to bits and pieces, as many if not all topics will be seemingly super hot for the moment and meaningless the next week, as there is no real issue beside the illusion of talk at all).
How would an adult deal with bad talk about them in private ?
You confront the person and actually tell them to stop as its not ok for you.
Solves the issue, unless the person is actively not recognizing your problem.
In public it changes a lot.
Theres either somewhat anonymous people that jump on a topic train and pick sides, which very often leads to extreme reactions, way over the top (any threats via mail or any form of actual harm is absolutely no-go, no matter what the topic is, theres never a reason to choose violence to solve anything.
So if you talk in public, it will have an effect on people and it will polarize the people more and more. Thankfully lots of people can distinguish between a topic that truly effects them and just a rat catcher lynch mob , but some cant, and the poster shouldnt be responsible for these individuals, as almost anything could be seen as an incentive for violence, if the individual has some sick mind, theres an entirely different problem of its own (and yes, you have to ask yourselves why so many "troll" people exist and no matter the topic, they are harmful and actively ignore any productive discussion).
For the topic at hand, the first problem that ignited this into a public *****-fest was that it was brought to public at all.
Solving these kinds of issues should have been a thing between Jeremy and Sprinkle , in private or by her actively telling what bothers her, its just fair to do so, as it solves most issues and avoids outside people to intervene.
If that doesnt work out and somebody is not taking your arguments, you can take it to the police and to court to actively stop what bothers you with something like a protective injunction suit, which again should solve the issue at hand, instead of putting it up for debate to a lynch mob that just wants blood, no matter from who.
Its a very clear picture if a topic is just instantly brought to public, avoiding any legal options (or doing so later, in hopes the public opinion boosts your side).
See, if a topic is discussed in public, it will never be fair.
People pick side right away and defend it for whatever the cost, even if it doesnt effect them personally at all ; which brings the Social Justice Warrior term to fruits.
Yes thats a problem just as trolls.
Its good to have empathy, but its bad to jam ideals and ideology into a topic and mix topics entirely, just to proof a point that has nothing to do with the topic at hand.
Believe it or not, neither Jeremy nor Sprinkle are somehow "evil incarnate" , they arent and they arent "toxic" to the community.
The kind of topic and how much its media-hyped and exaggerated , thats an entire issue of its own and overshadows the problem they personally had to solve between each other and makes it like a community issue , which it isnt, the community is fine, theres very rare cases and problems to deal with and they shouldnt be ignored, but also not exaggerated into spheres they arent fit for.
And this is, about a game, a hobby, people enjoy playing the game and enjoy being part of a community, if this is taken to a level of social criticism it doesnt serve a purpose for the game it just harms the experience for everyone, as it puts a stigma to the game, that it neither deserves or justifies at all.
- To post a comment, please login or register a new account.