安裝 Steam
登入
|
語言
簡體中文
日本語（日文）
한국어（韓文）
ไทย（泰文）
Български（保加利亞文）
Čeština（捷克文）
Dansk（丹麥文）
Deutsch（德文）
English（英文）
Español - España（西班牙文 - 西班牙）
Español - Latinoamérica（西班牙文 - 拉丁美洲）
Ελληνικά（希臘文）
Français（法文）
Italiano（義大利文）
Bahasa Indonesia（印尼語）
Magyar（匈牙利文）
Nederlands（荷蘭文）
Norsk（挪威文）
Polski（波蘭文）
Português（葡萄牙文 - 葡萄牙）
Português - Brasil（葡萄牙文 - 巴西）
Română（羅馬尼亞文）
Русский（俄文）
Suomi（芬蘭文）
Svenska（瑞典文）
Türkçe（土耳其文）
tiếng Việt（越南文）
Українська（烏克蘭文）
回報翻譯問題
討論區規矩與守則
檢舉此篇文章
When you look around and see Bad Things Happening and then, in frustration, ask "Why isn't anyone doing anything about it" it doesn't mean people are not actually trying to do anything about it...
But, as far as what can or could be done, the question must be asked - Are you empowered to affect change?
That's what you have to target, first. You can't just go out and say "imma gonna change that" without first knowing how you're going to get the power to do that.
The route to empower yourself may not exist, depending on your country and its ruling government. But, if you are, you're very lucky - You have an avenue to use to affect change.
Compare and contrast these:
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Ralph_Nader
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Greta_Thunberg
One of these two made choices that helped to empower them to make change and directly influenced a movement that ended with positive results, making things better for many people. (Even if they're a bit wacky)
The other became famous because she protested as a young girl, doesn't have an understanding of how one becomes empowered, and spends their time getting their picture taken while being arrested at protests. (Even though they'r clinically a bit wacky)
Make choices that empower yourself to be capable of influencing change.
Have the will to pay the costs that must be paid in order to affect change in the face of opposition. Dedicate yourself to pursuing avenues of approach that truly empower you, not that just make it "look like" you're empowered.
How you can go about doing these things truly depends on the society or culture that surrounds you. So, you must know how to navigate it. If you don't know how to navigate within your culture in order to influence people to make changes, learn. If you can't... you'll be lone agent for change with nothing more impressive than your Instagram page.
Wait for it to break.
So more complacency? I really don't see the merit in inaction- do you want to explain your reasoning?
Yes. If it isn't broken it will evolve with your output. A person cannot simply make change. When it breaks, there is a small window to interject before it is fixed. When all people agree on something it's like a reset glitch hack on reality.
The painting only hides the canvas. The paint being art created, the canvas being infinite potential for art more profound than the last.
Getting everyone to agree on something is never born from inaction- so how does something like that come to fruition in your example?
u goose
With every banned account that is surfaced, it only shows how desperate the moderation is to silence opinions and discussions like these in which they find politically threatening. Probably not the individuals themselves, but whatever company mandates have been put in place. Someone's probably breathing down their necks about people being persuasive enough to get others off of their asses
Well you are right in some means. Change comes from within. It depends on what you intend to inflict and on what. Outward or inward? The trick is to not inflict anything on anyone personally, by changing something physical, but to change a person's mind, afflict the etheral, and at that point of questionable logic...better logic will interject itself. It will do this because people believe it, they know it, they will do it themselves without effort. It becomes real by believing it.
Some people make movies, some people make music, some use propaganda, some use forums, some write books and magazines, some are journalists, some merely use their voice on street corners.
Enforced silence is contrasted by the freedom to speak.
Honk honk.
Count the banned accounts; inversely, count the number of (presumably bots, but I'll be generous here) people defending the enforced silence- doesn't appear like there's much freedom to speak when unnamed people get to decide what it is we speak about.
To me, that is the biggest issue- we don't have freedom of discussion, so we won't have freedom of ideology. I don't know how anyone who is capable of thought is defending the removal of rights- this leads me to lean heavily towards dead internet theory
It isn't valve's or any other companies job to facilitate your speech. It is up to you to either present it in a way that is suitable to their desire, or facilitate your own speech...which not everyone is free to do I'll admit, but they should be.
Definitely hitting the nail on the head of which I wish to change:
But just to be clear, it doesn't matter if there's a way to present it in a way they find suitable when they ban "topics that are inflammatory or likely to cause arguments" which is just semantics for "You can't discuss issues that actually need discussing, because that's not profitable for us"
I hope that people, whether they agree with me or not, can see the clear divide, silence and conquer strategies deployed by both Valve and the privately owned internet at large.
Your politics are just a game for them, and just like the Khajiit Caravan in Skyrim, they feed both sides to keep the fires raging the longest just because it's profitable. Politics didn't used to be so Left versus Right; these are grey issues, yet people still want to choose black and white solutions.
Hopefully people snap out of the Gray-Mane or Battle-Born / Stormclock or Imperial / Left or Right mentality; it's only harmful for actual discussion and intentionally presented this way to fuel controversy