Sweet Baby Inc detected closed - discussion

[IvanG77]

Hi guys, from what I understand. and from what I understand it is also due to massive reporting of users. which from what I see is a breach of user freedom to subscribe to any group they like if they want.

so in order to help with this, I am planning on working on a chrome extension that will provide the same level of information based on the steam page, unfortunately it won't work on the steam client but it is a workaround, what do you guys think?

[N∀WƎ˥⊥ᴚ∩⊥¯ᗡᴚ⅄]

Origineel geplaatst door VB✠Driver:

Origineel geplaatst door Minikin Cayuse:

That would be best probably. It's clear by now that evolution has failed us and it's only going downhill.

Evolution is a lie.

lol evolution is a theory, and a reasonable one at that. nobody will stop you from advancing the body of knowledge with a more reasonable one. reasonableness is objective, whether you like it or not, so dont be surprised when the public (deciders of objective reason) push back against the unreasonable.

[N∀WƎ˥⊥ᴚ∩⊥¯ᗡᴚ⅄]

Origineel geplaatst door Minikin Cayuse:

Origineel geplaatst door YouWillNeverBeAWoodsman:

lol ok. so should we not continue the species then?

That would be best probably. It's clear by now that evolution has failed us and it's only going downhill.

lol i appreciate your dark humor, and hope you are secretly more optimistic. in the event you are not joking, then cheer up buddy, we're gonna create some smarter generations that save the world.

[N∀WƎ˥⊥ᴚ∩⊥¯ᗡᴚ⅄]

Origineel geplaatst door lankaras:

Origineel geplaatst door Anas:

Isn't SBI Detected "Cancel Culture" incarnate lmao. What is the group doing if not trying to cancel any game associated with SBI. the cognitive dissonance is real

Origineel geplaatst door Mr. Smiles:

Careful, you'll ruin the illusion.

It's cute that you imagine yourself to have a point. Yes it's cancel culture, so what? I will happily cancel everything and everyone who has been infected with the woke.

i think the trouble here is that your hot take fails to acknowledge the contra-positive nature of highlighting the involvement of a so-called "woke" consulting firm's influence in game development. I see it as this: "woke" consulting uses past cancelling as a veiled threat to future releases, thereby gaining some creative control (or influence) over the release. those who are not in favor of influencing rapid cultural changes discover this influence and subscribe to a list of releases they should avoid. backlash ensues, not as a result of calls by the "anti-woke" to cancel releases, but as a result of the spreading awareness of underlying influence, and increasing reach of the message. this is almost anti-cancellation via public support of "un-influenced" releases by rejecting those which are influenced, and it scares the consultants because it threatens their business by removing (or reducing) the threat of cancellation to devs, and in the extreme, by endangering profits of their already influenced releases.

[N∀WƎ˥⊥ᴚ∩⊥¯ᗡᴚ⅄]

Origineel geplaatst door Altimely:

Origineel geplaatst door YouWillNeverBeAWoodsman:

late stage capitalism is a term exclusively used by the still coping punished bernie peeps. sorry you lost guys, i dont like hillary either if it helps alleviate the sting.

Imagine licking boot this hard.

imagine mistaking an olive branch for a switch.

[N∀WƎ˥⊥ᴚ∩⊥¯ᗡᴚ⅄]

Origineel geplaatst door The nameless Commander:

Origineel geplaatst door lankaras:

That question has been asked a gazillion times and been answered just as many. If you still don't know what it means, the reason is that you never listen. I stopped answering it a while ago and won't answer it ever again.

I don't have time to analyze dozens or hundreds of posts, I asked a few simple questions which if YOU cannot answer means you don't know the definition. I don't want to waste hours researching some sort of internet boogeyman forum dwellers are upset about. I want an ON POINT, easy to understand answer, not strawman arguments and walls of whataboutism.

none of the questions you asked are relevant to the action. the (compound) question you should be asking is: do i support the freedom of people to associate and inform one another about an issue which might impact their decision to spend their money, and does my answer change when i disagree with rationale underlying the decision making of the people in question?

[Vic]

Lol, do I support people saying that there are black people in a game so that their racist buddies can boycott it under the more civilized public face of being 'anti-woke'? No, they can go ♥♥♥♥ off. I don't support those people.

[The nameless Gamer]

Origineel geplaatst door YouWillNeverBeAWoodsman:

Origineel geplaatst door The nameless Commander:

I don't have time to analyze dozens or hundreds of posts, I asked a few simple questions which if YOU cannot answer means you don't know the definition. I don't want to waste hours researching some sort of internet boogeyman forum dwellers are upset about. I want an ON POINT, easy to understand answer, not strawman arguments and walls of whataboutism.

none of the questions you asked are relevant to the action. the (compound) question you should be asking is: do i support the freedom of people to associate and inform one another about an issue which might impact their decision to spend their money, and does my answer change when i disagree with rationale underlying the decision making of the people in question?

I got my answer, you're late to the party. And the question was tangentially related to this thread and its topic, not directly. Appreciate the reply anyway.

[N∀WƎ˥⊥ᴚ∩⊥¯ᗡᴚ⅄]

Origineel geplaatst door The nameless Commander:

Origineel geplaatst door YouWillNeverBeAWoodsman:

none of the questions you asked are relevant to the action. the (compound) question you should be asking is: do i support the freedom of people to associate and inform one another about an issue which might impact their decision to spend their money, and does my answer change when i disagree with rationale underlying the decision making of the people in question?

I got my answer, you're late to the party. And the question was tangentially related to this thread and its topic, not directly. Appreciate the reply anyway.

story of my life, day late buck short

[The nameless Gamer]

Origineel geplaatst door YouWillNeverBeAWoodsman:

Origineel geplaatst door The nameless Commander:

I got my answer, you're late to the party. And the question was tangentially related to this thread and its topic, not directly. Appreciate the reply anyway.

story of my life, day late buck short

Anyway... the thread title is misleading. The curator page still exists, it closed its discussion board however, due to malicious spam. But the game list is still up.

[Kapitein Gnapmans]

Origineel geplaatst door YouWillNeverBeAWoodsman:

Origineel geplaatst door lankaras:

It's cute that you imagine yourself to have a point. Yes it's cancel culture, so what? I will happily cancel everything and everyone who has been infected with the woke.

i think the trouble here is that your hot take fails to acknowledge the contra-positive nature of highlighting the involvement of a so-called "woke" consulting firm's influence in game development. I see it as this: "woke" consulting uses past cancelling as a veiled threat to future releases, thereby gaining some creative control (or influence) over the release. those who are not in favor of influencing rapid cultural changes discover this influence and subscribe to a list of releases they should avoid. backlash ensues, not as a result of calls by the "anti-woke" to cancel releases, but as a result of the spreading awareness of underlying influence, and increasing reach of the message. this is almost anti-cancellation via public support of "un-influenced" releases by rejecting those which are influenced, and it scares the consultants because it threatens their business by removing (or reducing) the threat of cancellation to devs, and in the extreme, by endangering profits of their already influenced releases.

Yeah I was thinking it might probably not be exactly "cancel culture", I wasn't actually sure about that. I just didn't mind going along with it to make my point.

[RiO]

Origineel geplaatst door YouWillNeverBeAWoodsman:

I see it as this: "woke" consulting uses past cancelling as a veiled threat to future releases, thereby gaining some creative control (or influence) over the release. those who are not in favor of influencing rapid cultural changes discover this influence and subscribe to a list of releases they should avoid. backlash ensues, not as a result of calls by the "anti-woke" to cancel releases, but as a result of the spreading awareness of underlying influence, and increasing reach of the message. this is almost anti-cancellation via public support of "un-influenced" releases by rejecting those which are influenced, and it scares the consultants because it threatens their business by removing (or reducing) the threat of cancellation to devs, and in the extreme, by endangering profits of their already influenced releases.

This is actually an incredibly accurate assessment of the situation.
And bravo on capturing the crux so clearly.

I agree. The issue here isn't the fact that companies are employing consulting agencies to assist in writing better stories that respect the sensibilities of the zeitgeist of society. Focus group testing; market analysis; expert advice; etc. has more or less always been a thing in the creative business. Hiring a consultant to assist with the actual writing is just a natural extension of that.

The issue is with which agencies they are employing; and specifically - with the means those agencies are using to get their foot in the door and get their way.

Which in case of SBI appears to not actually involve verifiable numbers or methods, but rather boils down to subterfuge by self-declared experts. And if that fails, they enlist scaremongering through good old-fashioned terror of wrath of God, aka scaring the publisher out of their skin by selling them on a lie that the consumer audience will turn on them and sink their public image unless they agree to a series of proposed changes.

They're activists with their own agenda; and rather than professionals acting on due diligence and placing their client's best interests first, they're acting foremost on their own best interests.

[Doctor Zalgo]

Origineel geplaatst door hazydistance:

Origineel geplaatst door Doctor Zalgo:

Accenture literally oversaw Bernie Madoff run the largest ponzi scheme in history and they waited until the heat died down, changed their name and continued on BAU. Unless SBI did something worse than that, they're still going to get the same amount of business they did before.

Is that so, Doctor? I can't recall hearing about Accenture's alleged involvement with Madoff's "asset management" business until now. Furthermore, Accenture still operates as Accenture.

Perhaps you were trying to allude to the Enron bankruptcy of 2001, which saw Andersen Accounting go down with said client. Accenture, however, is the former Andersen Consulting, which had been spun off as an independent entity previously.

Perhaps this seems pedantic, but then again, you are presuming to edumacate us all about the finer points of the economic system. So it behooves you to get the culprit right when identifying notorious cases of malfeasance.

Origineel geplaatst door Doctor Zalgo:

For example: Ghostbusters (2016) wasn't a huge flop because it was woke. It was a flop because every single aspect of the casting, story and direction was very bad.

Right... so, off the top of your head, what would be an example of something that was "woke", but not "very bad" in the aspects you mentioned? To me it seems like there might be some connection...

Is this you admitting that woke just means 'bad'?

[Leonardo Da Pinchi]

Origineel geplaatst door YouWillNeverBeAWoodsman:

Origineel geplaatst door VB✠Driver:

Evolution is a lie.

lol evolution is a theory, and a reasonable one at that. nobody will stop you from advancing the body of knowledge with a more reasonable one. reasonableness is objective, whether you like it or not, so dont be surprised when the public (deciders of objective reason) push back against the unreasonable.

Evolution in and of itself is an observable fact in my lifetime, specifically with a species of bird and of course, micro-organisms.

[Doctor Zalgo]

Origineel geplaatst door RiO:

Origineel geplaatst door YouWillNeverBeAWoodsman:

I see it as this: "woke" consulting uses past cancelling as a veiled threat to future releases, thereby gaining some creative control (or influence) over the release. those who are not in favor of influencing rapid cultural changes discover this influence and subscribe to a list of releases they should avoid. backlash ensues, not as a result of calls by the "anti-woke" to cancel releases, but as a result of the spreading awareness of underlying influence, and increasing reach of the message. this is almost anti-cancellation via public support of "un-influenced" releases by rejecting those which are influenced, and it scares the consultants because it threatens their business by removing (or reducing) the threat of cancellation to devs, and in the extreme, by endangering profits of their already influenced releases.

This is actually an incredibly accurate assessment of the situation.
And bravo on capturing the crux so clearly.

I agree. The issue here isn't the fact that companies are employing consulting agencies to assist in writing better stories that respect the sensibilities of the zeitgeist of society. Focus group testing; market analysis; expert advice; etc. has more or less always been a thing in the creative business. Hiring a consultant to assist with the actual writing is just a natural extension of that.

The issue is with which agencies they are employing; and specifically - with the means those agencies are using to get their foot in the door and get their way.

Which in case of SBI appears to not actually involve verifiable numbers or methods, but rather boils down to subterfuge by self-declared experts. And if that fails, they enlist scaremongering through good old-fashioned terror of wrath of God, aka scaring the publisher out of their skin by selling them on a lie that the consumer audience will turn on them and sink their public image unless they agree to a series of proposed changes.

They're activists with their own agenda; and rather than professionals acting on due diligence and placing their client's best interests first, they're acting foremost on their own best interests.

I am confused though. How do they have so much influence if the majority of people hate things that are woke? There's a weird dual narrative here where they're both all powerful and yet vastly outgunned by the forces of anti-wokeness.

[Doctor Zalgo]

Origineel geplaatst door YouWillNeverBeAWoodsman:

Origineel geplaatst door Doctor Zalgo:

Do you think that the capitalism we have now is the same that our grandparents had?

https://www.businessinsider.com/who-owns-taco-bell-arbys-burger-king-2019-3

i reject the term "capitalism" as a form or system which presides over the governance of people, and would suggest that adam smith and karl marx are not talking about the same things. certainly there are problems with the present concepts of ownership, but those problems discussed by marx (more accurately hegel) were more or less fixed in the abolishing of primogeniture and the creation of the rule against perpetuities in the US. they have not stayed fixed, because the US is (more or less) self governing and adapts to the benefit of the present voting class.the major problem i see is the arguments for or against changing the rules instead of using them to fix the underlying problem. a good example would be the creation of antitrust, which led to the enshrining of privately owned public utilities. this gave a road map to future conglomerates seeking to steward the next public utility.

in all respects, we do not disagree that the rules have changed, however, i disagree with the insinuation that the west is governed by "capitalism," and generally with the proposed solution of seizure by central authority. (i understand you are not outright advocating for this, but others are)

I wouldnt suggest to know the solution to the problem, but i would say that identifying its source is key to solving it. the source of the problem is (in my humble opinion) the selective treatment of legal fictions (corps etc..) as people, where they do not have the natural limitations (mortality) of people, thus defeating the rule against perpetuities, and thereby avoiding the natural deterrent to monopoly, already baked into our scheme of liberalized resource ownership.

P.S. i didnt click the link, but i will take you at your word that your argument is well sourced.

This is a surprisingly nuanced take for the steam forums, I think we can actually agree on almost everything you've got ther.

I do slightly disagree that 'capitalism' (or specifically the mega corps that it enabled) are not 'governing' though. Regulatory capture and unlimited hidden lobbying are real problems, even if its not what you might call governing in a traditional sense. Just look at things like how Disney got away with nakedly manipulating copyright law for decades until they became part of the culture war and taking their money became toxic.

I've heard people argue that this is corporatism (not capitalism) and I agree its not the 'real capitalism' envisaged by Adam Smith which required monopoly busting and strong regulation, we're just quibbling over terminology with the people who call it end stage capitalism believing its the guaranteed end state in any form of unregulated capitalism.