Jump to content
Search In
  • More options...
Find results that contain...
Find results in...


  • Content count

  • Joined

  • Last visited

About Xcalibur

  • Rank

Recent Profile Visitors

215 profile views
  1. I agree. while the scale should be weighted, this shouldn't be used to exclude wrongthink. this is a tactic I've seen -- claiming that because some viewpoints hold more weight than others, only my side is valid and the other can be dismissed entirely -- that's going way too far. weight be applied fairly without bias or strawmanning, a point that's worth emphasizing. and yes, applying 'zero value' should be avoided as much as possible to prevent this issue. I disagree. if we're serious about open discourse, then anyone should be able to broadcast any opinion, no matter how objectionable you find it, as long as it's within the generous boundaries of free speech (such as no threats/incitement of violence, etc). let everyone present their ideas, and let discourse/debate reveal which ideas are worth their salt and which are not.
  2. yes, I agree, nuance is important. considering all sides of a controversy, and weighing them according to merit, can go a long way in achieving intellectual clarity. however, it takes discipline and rigor to do this. most people don't want to critically analyze their perspectives -- instead, they seek echo-chambers which support their assumptions. combine this with the tribal instinct of us vs. them, and controversial topics quickly degenerate into bickering, flame-wars, or even violence. for example, I've spouted unpopular political views on this very site, and was greeted with a fair amount of hostility for my wrongthink -- not that I was totally innocent, I did exacerbate it, but I still think that serves as an example. getting back to my first point, you must consider all sides, but also give them due weight. if one side is supported by consistent and reliable evidence, and the other side is flimsy, irrational, or unfalsifiable, they should not be given equal consideration. at the same time, we should not use this weighted approach to commit other fallacies, such as straw-manning the other side and dismissing unpopular ideas which may have merit. and so, there should be a sliding scale, but it should be weighted according to evidence and reason. global warming is a tricky topic. there is a scientific consensus on anthropogenic climate change, but uncertainties still abound. the earth's climate is a vast, complex system, with interlocking feedback loops, and it can be difficult for even our best minds to model it accurately. we know for sure that we've released alot of co2 via fossil fuel combustion over the past 200 years, and especially the past 50, and this is bound to have some sort of impact. on the other hand, there's the natural oscillation of climate (roman warm period, dark ages cooling period, medieval warm period, little ice age...) which indicates that we're due for a Modern Warm Period. there's also the possibility that an increase in the earth's albedo may offset global warming, as would the carbon cycle. will these offsets be enough to prevent the worst of global warming? it's not certain. given the scientific consensus, weight must be placed on the current models of global warming. but is the scientific consensus the absolute truth? no, because science is not based on authority; it's simply the best tool and method we have for making sense of the reality around us. in fact, science is anti-authority, in that anything can be questioned, tested, or overturned. that doesn't mean that some youtuber should be given the same credence as peer-reviewed publications -- once again, due weight should be applied -- but science is not Scripture. this is relevant to a phenomenon I've observed, which I call 'science-ism': the belief that anything a scientist says must be true, and that questioning science is akin to heresy. that's simply not the case, and goes against the whole spirit of science in the first place. we place greater credence on stronger evidence and people with greater knowledge and experience, sometimes that can be a very heavy emphasis, but it's not absolute. the theory of evolution is built on much firmer ground than current speculations on the climate (and the long-term influence of our co2 output). evolution presents a unified system which accounts for the entire history of all life on earth. yes, there are gaps and uncertainties here and there, the structure may be unfinished and unpolished in places, but the structure as a whole demonstrates rock-solid stability, consistency, and comprehensiveness. the only reason for denying such a well-entrenched, supported idea is to cling to a literalist interpretation of mythology written a few thousand years ago (that and just playing devils advocate I guess). anyone who 'reverse cherry-picks' an established concept and attempts to deny the whole thing on the basis of minor issues, while ignoring the mountain of evidence in favor, is almost certainly biased and agenda-driven. Holocaust Denialism is another example of this, it's like a crash course in logical fallacies, even moreso than Creationism (which already does quite a bit of mental gymnastics). this got pretty darn long. so, tl;dr: all views should be considered on a sliding scale, but the scale should be weighted in accordance with evidence/facts/logic. science is a great tool which deserves respect and due weight, but not unquestioning obedience.
  3. Xcalibur

    Diablo Immortal

    there are many people like this in gaming and the entertainment industry as a whole. you're not allowed to not like their crappy products, or else you're a toxic manbaby. it's absurd.
  4. Xcalibur

    Cynical hates on NIghtdive Studio

    ^I see. in that case, it sounds like there's no foul being committed here. while I disagree with clamping down on fair use/non-profit fan works, purging a warez version of the exact same game you're now selling is a different matter and totally justifiable. naturally, game companies need to defend their bread & butter, and it's not an overreach to do that.
  5. Xcalibur

    Cynical hates on NIghtdive Studio

    I'm not familiar with the situation, so I can't weigh in on the details. However, I will say that there's alot of foolishness out there, such as shady crowdsourcing and capricious cease&desists against fan-made passion projects. maybe there's nothing wrong with this situation, but given the history I mentioned, I can understand why you might be... cynical.
  6. Xcalibur

    Diablo Immortal

    Given the current state of gaming and entertainment media, I can't say I'm surprised by this. I wonder how long until they start demonizing the Diablo fanbase (no pun intended). personally, I checked out after D2, so I'm not personally invested. but I agree, mobile is not the right platform for this, and the overall approach to this is very tone-deaf.
  7. Xcalibur

    “Doom: The Fake Outrage”

    on second thought, maybe I won't comment on this topic.
  8. Xcalibur

    My Question 4.

    not exactly an expert, but Hexen uses scripts for customized events. either that or actor properties would probably be helpful to you.
  9. Xcalibur

    Share a random fact about yourself

    I can beat Battletoads 100% fairly (the game is totally fair, it just sets the bar very high). I have blond hair. I started posting here again on a whim after seeing the news about the EU on the wiki, and proceeded to piss ppl tf off without really meaning to. Hexen is one of my favorite games, and that's what brought me here.
  10. populism =/= fascism the collapse of large institutions takes time, and these systemic pressures have only come to bear recently. the breakup of the EU is a reasonable projection.
  11. I've laid it out properly. if you're not aware of the sovereign debt crisis, the migrant crisis, the structural defects of the EU, and how the populist uprising is in response to much of this, that's not my fault. all this stuff is well documented. with that said, I've been told that this community is averse to political debates, so I'd rather not continue. by all means, do your own research; I'm far from the only person pointing this out.
  12. it's nothing personal, just the conclusion I've drawn from the evidence.
  13. @Mordeth sure, there's been a drop-off in arrivals, but that by no means resolves the current tensions. I don't know how many years the EU has left, but I don't think it's going to last (for the reasons I stated). with that said, even if it's on the brink off collapse, articles 13 & 11 still have ample opportunity to make life difficult for us, unfortunately.
  14. my post was tangentially related to the topic. that's one possible way of interpreting this. be that as it may, the migrant situation is the most acute problem for the EU at present, on top of everything else I mentioned. attempting to curtail fair use doctrine is adding even more fuel to the fire imo.
  15. Xcalibur

    why was the master/slave thread closed?

    sure, I'm willing to respect the house rules. I just wanted to finish my statements, and now I'm done. I'll say no more on that topic.