Total topics: 397
The current theory that Incel-Chud (AKA Wylted) has constructed assumes that people will answer honestly and accurately to a test that hasn't properly wagered uncertainty against suffering with certainty.
I am going to construct his same theory differently in the questioning to see if his theory is correct but questions are merely flawed.
Please answer the following as follows:
1.........strongly the former option
2....moderately f
3...........slightly f
4................slightly latter
5.........moderately l
6..............strongly l
IT SHOULD BE NOTED THAT I DO NOT AGREE WITH HIS THEORY, instead I agree with something he suggests later on (that authoritarians, not conservatives necessarily, will score higher except I have done this test backwards so authoritarians will score lower).
I have designed my test to continuously juxtapose certain safety with uncertainty at the benefit of potential greater gain.
1. A lover you have partly lied during the entire relationship about her (or his or their) feelings, would you rather they crush you swiftly and privately and that both of you keep the drama relatively low
or that he/she/they keep(s) you in a state of uncertainty, stringing you along so that the let down is softer on your end (as you end up wanting it less) but a longer even for the both of you that most likely ends up more drama-indusive?
2. A pandemic disease has reached and spread throughout your nation and the options have ultimately become an ultimatum; restricting freedoms for certain safety of the populace
or letting them be free to mercilessly and randomly die at the hands of a disease that kills and infects with varying severity, the only certainty being it goes gentle on the very young who have no underlying issues?
3. You are given an offer from the defense on a case where you personally feel certain of the guilt of the perpetrator but rather uncertain that you can convince the Jury of their guilt. The offer is that the defendant will plead guilty but get away with it because they will snitch on another 'bigger fish' in the eye of law enforcement, at most getting community service as their penalty. Everybody in the media will believe their guilt and you will have won on a superficial front. The crime is severe, two people close to you were mutilated and abused before eventually getting killed.
Do you take it or push forth with the uncertainty on a case where your lawyer himself/herself/theirselves is advising you to take the deal? If it goes wrong, the person may get off completely innocent.
4. There is an election between two candidates well-known for their corruption. One was secretary of state previously and proved effective but somewhat war hawk like despite keeping good relations between your nations and even their worst enemies. She is also female and her winning will set a certain precedent that your nation is open to female leadership. While her record is somewhat tainted, she is provably an effective leader and will maintain peace between your nation and the world during her term.
The other is a chaotic chauvinist who is overtly anti-establishment and has espoused a lot of disciminatory and brutally offensive remarks about people of cultures that are known to immigrate to your nation, he is loathed by many internationally already and is well known to be a scumbag with playboy/infidelity tendencies and holds very little family values but is the only hope that the conservative movement in your nation has at success.
5. Rather than copy the D&D type quiz where you are pitted with a lucrative risky job and stable, boring job, I will make more clear about the ultimatum here and make the choice even more close/cutthroat. You are offered a job in the field you've always wanted to work, a lot about it is ideal but it will be brutally demanding on you in terms of not just hours but effort. You are practically guaranteed to love it but also guaranteed to be tired and need to put in 100% effort to maintain it. The wage is slightly lower than the other being offered but definitely is livable for you.
The other job seems better for you in terms of working hours vs pay and also is more recognised in general (can easier show it off to family and be prouder of it on a CV most likely) but your satisfaction at it is uncertain and the crowd there just don't quite seem your 'vibe' or type of people at a first glance. You would most likely succeed at it putting in just 72% effort and it's a very nice stepping stone for your career with only joy/satisfaction being the real risk.
6. Do you feel ultimately more comfortable in situations of conflict between two people that are allied/close to you in different ways when it is very clear who is in the wrong, allowing you to firmly take one's side
or where it is unclear who is in the right/wrong leading you to potentially piss both of them off or potentially keep both and please them?
Created:
Updated:
Category:
Politics
You may think I am kidding and that this is satire...
YOU CAN'T MAKE THIS SHIT UP.
Created:
Updated:
Category:
Politics
Why are all the companies except AstraZeneca having absolutely 0 liability? Government sworn to secrecy and paying full lawyer bills, Argentina has military bases as collateral to Pfizer.
Created:
Updated:
Category:
Politics
I will like to discuss Trans-Exclusionary Revolutionary Feminism (TERF refers to the feminist who believes in this).
It is a very taboo topic these days if you want to survive as a left-winger and I could get cancelled for just typing this no doubt. I ask you this, if being a woman means nothing more than slapping on make-up, having hormones and saying 'I am a woman' then what is the struggle that Feminism is fighting against? If a woman can take hormones, present butch and then say 'I am a man' then is all her struggle as a female beforehand negated in the eyes of affirmative action quotas and other such official measures taken to safeguard females against sexism?
At this point in time, most of the T under LGBT as well as the Q under LGBTQ have found harmony with most feminists because they share many common enemies politically but the volcanic eruption will come at some point, JK Rowling has already clashed with Hermione's actress Emma Watson (Watson on the cancelling side, Rowling on the TERF side). This is a real clash, a genuine complete battle of viewpoints.
I am not being transphobic, I am being what we can call trans-skeptical here. If I tell you tomorrow that I am a woman, did I grow up with all the setbacks in my life that a girl who becomes a woman had? If yes then feminism is defeated, if no then transgenderism has limitations that need to be concrete and admitted.
Remember, feminism fought sexism not genderism, it's very important to understand that lexicality as it's not just 'playing with semantics'. I have no issue with a male acting feminine or a female acting masculine, as long as the true sex is able to be something discussed and known. There will come a true clash eventually and I am quite curious which side of the battle that the Conservative right-wing will join.
Created:
Updated:
Category:
Politics
Scumbag traitor, this is a callout thread,
But you're too laissez-faire to lock it like a rasta's dread,
You ditched the debating community as it screamed and fled,
Don't let your president position get too far into your head,
You're the one to lead your people but when they're bleeding, you're in bed,
Snake-ass motherfucker, bled populace is shed,
You're quite honestly emotionless, robotic as it gets,
Always out for power, you're a coward with your bets,
Strolling in when the site's at its weakest to make the meekest of threats,
As Ramshutu said, who the fuck is this man to not invest for all the profit that he gets?
You made a mockery of policy, 'gold medal' cheated, you owe so many debts,
Better pay up on your way out or understand a scorned DART never forgets.
Created:
Updated:
Category:
DebateArt.com
A vaccine is what AstraZeneca and Johnson & Johnson are.
Pfizer and Moderns are not vaccines. The entire scientist community has lost its marbles.
Created:
Updated:
Category:
Science and Nature
I will like you to discuss this.
Created:
Updated:
Category:
Religion
This user signed up January 16th and will be voting Airmax. I do not 100% know it but I can guess very effectively due to kfc image and you will fine that quite a few more accounts like this:
and others, which I won't reveal or specify yet so they are not sure what I have kept track or or am onto, are going to fradulently ruin the election by voting Airmax by signing up last minute.
On DMs, whiteflame told me this about Airmax's side doing it:
"As long as they're actual individuals and not instances of multi-accounting, they have the right to vote."
This is 100% in-context, on this topic, if need by I will screenshot.
On DMs, supadudz then warned me this:
"Just gonna let you know now if you are planning to recruit people from other sites to vote for Max, that's a violation of the rules and will get 3RU7AL disqualified"
This is sheer corruption and double-standard to the highest degree.
Do not worry though, I am not some dumb fool. I would never say shit as a candidate doing any of this and am aware both candidates are smart enough not to either. The question is about standards and fair play.
Created:
Updated:
Category:
DebateArt.com
If you are voting Airmax and want an Axolotl profile pic, answer the following:
- Why Airmax?
- What kind of image do you want?
- What vibe?
- Cartoony or Realistic?
Created:
Updated:
Category:
DebateArt.com
This is NOT a callout thread. I am EXPLAINING my stance, this is not a subliminal.
~~~~~
I want my previous supporters, most of whom are either abstaining or heavily considering to vote 3RU7AL due to familiarity, to stay with me here and understand why I've endorsed Airmax1227. I was not 'played' which may make you think there is some kind of game going on, I want you to all fully understand my stance. Ignore all toxicity towards me, ignore the tone or words (don't have to ignore it but just asking you to for this thread) and pay attention to the situation, the platforms and the agendas at play.
Agendas as RM perceives them
RM - Make the site grow by stopping big bans by more gradual intermediary moderation as well as a general 'clean up the site' approach to induce harmony and repel less users away.
Wylted - Stop RM doing that. Increase freedom, keep the mods in check and push hardcore freedom of speech and expression. Main motive beyond stopping RM is to stop the site dying.
3RU7AL - Push for more quantifiable rules, apply them uniform.
Airmax - Don't give much of a damn clarifying stance on moderation, push for the site to grow incredibly much but only if he wins.
TheHammer - Oppose Airmax for the luls, hey RM I will vote for you in good faith.
Now, I want you to watch something that happens when we analyse these agendas.
There are 3 users trying to stop the site dying:
RM, Wylted and Airmax and based on prior track record from years ago I can tell you that Airmax is equipped to stop a dying debate website from truly dwindling, he was overcome by brutal adspam and lack of admin access to the website. At least that's my understanding.
There are 2 other users;
3RU7AL and TheHammer.
I don't know a politically correct or polite way to say that TheHammer is running as a joke candidate, your vote to TheHammer will be wasted in my opinion, sorry to say it. I based this both on public and private discourse and a bit of knowledge about the user from the past. If I am wrong and Hammer is sincere then I do apologise.
3RU7AL wants to do something that can't be achieved by a President (make qualitative rules become quantifiable) as this is a moderator-only capacity to change. Furthermore, with regards to pushing for the site's popularity or event, I doubt this user will use their powers at all.
This here is a summary of why I unironically and genuinely dropped out to endorse Airmax1227.
I encourage my previous supporters to see this as a necessary evil (that they are appeasing a user who for all intents and purposes will not help the website nearly as much if he loses the presidency and I would go as far as to say it's out of spite).
I do not like Airmax, I respect his ability to make a site stop dying, specifically a debate website. It's that simple.
Created:
Updated:
Category:
DebateArt.com
I drop out, officially.
I endorse Airmax1227, semi-regrettably and want to say the full reasoning why you (my solid support base) and even you (my extended support base who are bit 'maybe, maybe not') should vote Airmax1227 this election.
The President role really is useful for 2 things:
- Stopping mod abuse
- Officially holding site events
At first, I was really skeptical about his return, why did he come back now right? Just to win?
And yeah, if you ask me he kind of did, he has a 'thing' for being in power on an Internet Fiefdom perhaps.
Then, I ask myself what happens if he gets into the President's seat? Honestly, it doesn't matter to me that he's there, the President has only 2 functions and I feel he'd do function 2 with events quite well given his latest promises in the thread he just made.
So, I am left wondering now, what good would happen if I won? The DDO guys will get upset, leave and say 'fuck you RM'. How does that benefit the website? The whole reason I ran was to make it alive. The reason I think it's dead is that so many threads and posts are so toxic and undermoderated that it becomes a horrible wasteland appearing unpleasant for others to join but if Airmax can counteract that by spreading awareness of this website far and wide, then I'm all for it.
The only thing I don't get is why he never did that for the past 3.5 years, why did he ditch us until power came his way like blood to a shark's nose?
If you ask me, there is a blatant power thing for him, even an ego thing and if you properly read the fine-print in the Presidency even though it says 'more than 1 successful term' it's actually 2-term limit, not a 1-term limit because that's a criteria stopping you running for site president, not a criteria overall (so 1+1 = 2 duh) and we're looking at 2-year President here.
I need to accept the reality that my supporters do like me, I chatted with a few of them privately about me dropping out and they were disheartened. It wasn't campaigning, I didn't break a rule, it was a genuine question. I will like to say that 3RU7AL doesn't deserve to win a Presidency election against either myself or Airmax1227, it's not a position for someone as socially uninvolved as them (profile doesn't specify gender, so using 'them' pronoun). 3RU7AL is a fine user of the website but wouldn't properly do either function, especially not function 2.
To my supporters, I want you to know that I have remembered all of you, by username. I know you would have stuck by me through to my defeat or victory and I owe you even though I dropped out.
To name the ones that I mean:
Oromagi, Zedvictor4, Intelligence_06, Outplayz, Polytheist-Witch, Lunar108, FLRW and I kind of presume Reece101 was a supporter as well.
If I left your name out, I totally get if you're offended and am truly sorry!
I also appreciate EtrnlVw and Lemming for implied support though it was just asking me about what I'd do or certain things about me, allowing me to further advocate for myself.
I also want to thank IlikePie5 for being an honest opponent who ended up screwed over by several events during this, I'm not going to name names as honestly Airmax himself is to blame for Wylted dropping out, despite Pie having himself dropped out due to Wylted running.
Do not vote Hammer (I frankly think it's a joke campaign) and do not vote 3RU7AL.
Please listen to me, my supporters and vote for Airmax1227. It will be a genuine benefit to the website even if he is a little power-hungry.
Thank you all, this was a wonderful event that made me thrilled and perhaps a little anxious but certainly stimulated throughout.
Yours faithfully
~ex-candidate RM~
Vote Airmax1227
Created:
Updated:
Category:
DebateArt.com
Just so that people are aware, you are not actually electing the winner yet, you're nominating and the top 3 nominees then make it into the general election stage.
What's about to come up is a nomination, not the actual election.
Created:
Updated:
Category:
DebateArt.com
There is a criterion to run for President that one must have a gold medal, so the user DuhHamburgler spammed as much as possible to get Airmax1227 the 'mentioned' gold medal while Lunatic helped along the way within the main campaign thread.
This is direct spam, evading (thereby devaluing the sanctity of) the gold-medal rule and nobody is being punished.
What part of that is freedom of speech? Why are the mods not enforcing it?
If someone did that for me or someone else they'd enforce it.
Click inside to see.
Created:
Updated:
Category:
DebateArt.com
This thread is the official campaign thread of RM for president.
You are free to acknowledge a previous thread or such by me but this is my official thread during the campaign period.
Currently, I see a 'witch' (not an insult) posting about a rivalry that the mods are ignoring. Do you know what my main opponent, ilikepie5, would do? He'd say 'freedom of speech' and leave it at that. Though, in another reply to Oromagi, he's shown to understand the importance of stopping harassment so perhaps he'd do the same as me and push the mods to respect the boundary.
As somebody who both personally and, by observing others, has both felt and seen the impacts of harassment, I would use any sway I had as president to push the mods to respect and notice interactions that drive people off of the website or alternatively drive them to act more hostile.
There is this idea that 'special snowflakes' should just suck it up and toughen up but this is a website we use to pass the time with many intellectuals on it who have unique sensitivities and often were bullied IRL and teased for their odd ways. It's not an ordinary person who comes to a debate website, that just isn't the niche market this goes for.
What you want in a president is a guy who has been pushed by trolls in the past to act hostile, first hand, that will completely defend and understand you every step of the way.
If you block me, I can't do that and as I won't be an official mod I doubt anything physically on my account will stop the block function from working (I wouldn't want that anyway, there's some I'd rather keep blocked but when/if they need my defense or counsel as president I'd unblock).
Consider this thread itself as an official thread where if you need my counsel and are blocked, you can post to it and I will unblock you.
The president isn't just for moderating issues, they're also here for fun. I will work with the active debaters, who sporadically show up because they're scared of losing rating, and set up unranked judge debate tournaments like has been done once before. I'd be happy for any suggestions on this, it will be official and put you down in the site's history books if you win and also will be a great thing to mention if you run for President next term, even as a judge.
I am not certain of the term length of a president on this website, is it 6 months or a year? Either way, I'm a user who no matter how busy IRL shows up every week at least, or definitely every 2. I won't flake, I will stick it out because that's how I roll. I will defend this website, make it entertaining and a pleasure for a variety of eccentric users who love debating to coexist peacefully.
Defend, Entertain and Unite
This is my motto.
Yours sincerely,
~Vote RM~
Created:
Updated:
Category:
DebateArt.com
Created:
Updated:
Category:
DebateArt.com
I really do.
Created:
Updated:
Category:
Personal
Created:
Updated:
Category:
Politics
state that you are running, campaigns should already be out...
Created:
Updated:
Category:
DebateArt.com
The main reason to get vaccinated during this time is that the science supports it, not just politicians (if you aren't in a group that will be risky with JJ or AZ, I recommend them instead of mRNA if you are a conspiracy theorist about mRNA).
I think it is easy to assume that all tyranny is inherently 'wrong' as in worth fighting but sometimes it may be the tyrant wants what's best for us. Not all strict parents are giving their children bad orders, it comes down to the 'why'. In my opinion, vaccination has strong why's at this point, the only debate is if mRNA is worth the risk of what it can do to our cells in the long run.
I disagree with the approach of recommending the riskier vaccines that are using brand new science that hijacks cells to make us immune (mRNA). What do I mean by 'riskier' well, even if it has the higher efficacy rate in being protective against Covid variants and even if in the short-term it is showing less side effects for the non-allergic to its ingredients, mRNA vaccines like Pfizer and Moderna are actually riskier from a skeptic's perspective no matter how much your jab nurse will try to talk you out of it (UNLESS YOU ARE of a particular capillary and any kind of blood related issue or allergic issue with ingredients in AZ/JJ)don't listen to the 'logic' because that isn't how probability works.
You can't say the risk is greater because the bad of the other option isn't knowable yet. After enough boosters with gradual alteration to body cells then by around booster 6, then we may begin to see really what's happening as enough will be altered to even get a hope of a glimpse. We are barely on booster 1 for the older population, we don't know a thing about mRNA's long-term ability to damage the body.
Thus, I ask both sides, why they don't go for the oldschool vaccines like AstraZeneca and Johson & Johnson, you cannot really be losing out you can at worst gain not much vs delta and now omnicron variant but at least vs Covid-19 you are immune to high degrees, following your second jab of AZ or first jab of JJ (JJ is less good specifically because it's only a single jab but that's a debate for another day).
I will like both anti-vaxxers and pro-mRNA to tell the logic of their stances.
Created:
Updated:
Category:
Politics
What I'm seeing from the left-wing is major hypocrisy, double standards and bullcrap going on right now.
They are saying Kyle, who I agree was very unwise to have been there, deserves to be convicted of murder because he brought the situation on himself and they use the fact he had such a big gun to prove he knew he was seeking out potentially lethal trouble.
They also accurately note that he probably is a white supremacist because the Proud Boys helped bail him out instantly, an act they would not have done had he not in some way been aligned, as far as I know.
The focus seems to be entirely on Kyle Rittenhouse, who is one guy in a situation where he definitely defended himself on both counts. Even people close to me IRL have become delusional with this case, calling me a right-wing supremacist/sympathiser for daring to see Kyle's side of the story as valid.
I don't really understand why nobody is focusing on the issue of guns. Guns were the issue. This entire same scenario would never have happened had everyone been unarmed, including that Kyle wouldn't have had the guts to be there alone and without backup in the first place.
I don't condone anything the rioter scumbags did, including their past offences but I also think suggesting it's okay for Kyle to kill someone for their past offences is equally stupid. The focus needs to become if ultimately America is better off with guns or without them. Idk what's happened to everybody but this isn't about Kyle nor about BLM, one of the guys who threatened Kyle's life yelled the N-word... How can be be a BLM protester when as a Caucasian he uses the N-word?!
Created:
Updated:
Category:
Politics
Fuck the illuminati, whether vaccinated or not. This is a terrible fucking example of how to keep your populace happy during a traumatic time.
Created:
Updated:
Category:
Politics
Something that occurred to me is whether or not one supports Kyle Rittenhouse or the 2 dead men in terms of morality, one must definitely be horrified at guns and America's easy-access culture regarding them.
In any other highly developed nation, it would horrify everybody in the society that somebody as young as Kyle Rittenhouse could just so easily grab an AR-15 and, on the other end of the spectrum, that the rioters could all be possessing pistols fully able and ready to hurt people (Rosenbaum couldn't get one because he's mentally unwell and I guess didn't want to risk getting one illegally).
The fact that guns themselves are so easy to access, as well as the fact that the possession of an AR-15 via cross-state methodology for Rittenhouse to end up possessing it doesn't warrant any legal penalty, makes me wonder what exactly Americans consider 'too far'.
At what stage, after how many incidents of either mass shootings or back-and-forth killing scenarios between criminals (Rittenhouse wasn't a criminal before and perhaps after this but the back-and-forth element was there, no matter who we support it was about to happen possibly with Huber and the guys, I'm not denying that)?
I am not making this thread to talk bad about Rittenhouse, something deeper that's an issue is how gun-happy American culture in general is. There is something deeply disturbing about the fact that events like this don't make people hate guns but instead be fervently proud of how they were wielded instead.
Created:
Updated:
Category:
Politics
- Why was someone who blatantly is affiliated with white supremacists (ones whom paid instantly to get him bail and have been socialising with him frequently before and after he was inititally arrested) at a BLM protest? If he was there to 'defend' then who was it who requested a 17-year-old to carry an AR-15 across state lines in order to 'defend' something? Isn't requesting that illegal?
- Why did he murder Rosenbaum? I am aware of the things Rosenbaum has been found guilty of and that he was very high asking to be shot but nobody in their right mind would presume that the right action would be to literally kill him just because he's asking to be shot.
- Do you agree that if (and it is the case that) the 'mob' only set on Rittenhouse after the Rosenbaum murder on an unarmed man, then it suddenly becomes much clearer who was the fundamental attacker vs defender in the aggression that ensued. Huber was proactively trying to get Rittenhouse to disarm and not escape so thata) he can't go on to murder any othersb) cops could arrive before he's gotten away, to arrest him for the Rosenbaum murder
- After he'd also murdered Huber instead of surrendering, what exactly is he using as his moral high ground?
Created:
Updated:
Category:
Politics
"It's appalling the way AstraZeneca has been treated. I wouldn't blame them if they were thoroughly fed up and decided to bow out of the Covid vaccine business."That was the view from one of the biggest institutional investors in the UK.It's not a view the pharmaceutical giant and its talismanic boss Pascal Soriot would have expected to hear, having developed a safe, effective vaccine at breakneck speed, signing contracts to deliver nearly two billion doses and doing it all without making a profit.Mr Soriot could be forgiven perhaps for thinking he would be getting a medal.Instead he is getting brickbats from EU politicians like Belgian MEP Philippe Lamberts, who has accused the company of dishonesty and arrogance, in the way he alleges, it has "over-promised and under-delivered".Some are suggesting that the whole endeavour has been more trouble than it is worth.AstraZeneca has foregone over $20bn (£14.5bn) in revenue, while becoming a household name in the EU and the US for all the wrong reasons.Some investors have even questioned Pascal Soriot's position as chief executive.Astra has become a political football in a European blame game.One minute his compatriot, the French President Emmanuel Macron, is describing the vaccine as "quasi-ineffective", and the next, President Macron is volunteering to have the jab himself and backing a move to block exports outside the EU.
Based on what I read, AZ is worldwide the best option, especially for poorer nations. If you have issues either with blood clotting or blood retention then don't take it but otherwise it should be fine. I am not here to speak against Pfizer and Moderna but I'll do so against Pfizer if need be as I deeply resent how they've been blackmailing countries to take liability and cover their (Pfizer's) full legal fees even having military base locations as collateral (yes, really).
Why are some countries so anti-AZ?
Created:
Updated:
Category:
Politics
This is an entirely optional survey for everybody on DART to participate in. If you don't want to, that's totally fine.
- Are you vaccinated (or getting vaccinated very soon, no need to specify which), whether you are or aren't please state why (if it's a 'no' due to rare immunodeficiency disease you don't need to specify which just say health-related)?
recently/soon, yes but until very recently I wasn't open to the idea. I have been continually pressured/encouraged by close family members to get it and while I personally am not in a group or status that will die from Covid (very sure of that, though my family said otherwise out of paranoia), I am someone who reacts terribly to the fatigue and tax-on-body that brutal disease fights take. I'm a tough guy, don't get me wrong, however my quality of life would significantly go down if I had the 'long covid' kind of effects that people can get who don't die from it.
I already suffer from chronic fatigue (not officially diagnosed with CFS but without caffeine and a mild antidepressant I'd be a groggy, bitter/tired guy all the time, I don't think that it's curable, it's just how I was wired post-puberty, I didn't need caffeine to function well or cope before I turned around 18-19 but at 19 it really hit me and has remained with me since). I don't want that kind of suffering of not being able to go for a walk without being exhausted, I have a minimal level of health to not be called useless/unhealthy but I'm not at all a very fit guy, I live mainly on computer (both for work and play) and I would hate that if even that tired me out significantly, life just would be a pain to live through.
- Which vaccine, why that vaccine?
Astrazeneca
The reason why is because I'm paranoid about mRNA but want to protect myself, I'm actually in an age band and health status that I'd be recommended to get Pfizer and/or Moderna rather than that.
AZ was actually developed in a university for motives not related to corporate profit entirely at all (but partly profit-based, yes). It is also far more liable than Pfizer and Moderna for what can happen to it legally and officially if its vaccine is proven to result in severe harm that could have been foreseen.
- Do you support vaccine mandates?
I am moderate/neutral on mandates for professions that directly deal with customers (for the employees) but for the general population beyond that, I am absolutely against mandates. I believe that anyone who is pro-mandate ought first to make all politicians and their bodyguards take the vaccine then and prove it by showing their app-verification or certificate or something. This will help alleviate paranoid people on why the powerful aren't proving they took it.
I do not support the mandate on a legal level (as opposed to company-level), regardless.
- Do you believe Covid is a left-wing conspiracy?
No, I think China is hypercapitalistic in fact and that if anything was involved it was right-wing oriented entirely.
Created:
Updated:
Category:
DebateArt.com
If you are zones 6-10 start like this:
0,0,0,4,3,2,1,0,0,0
If you are the inverse, 1-5, just flip it:
0,0,0,1,2,3,4,0,0,0
If the opponent attacked your zone 7 or alternatively your zone 3 (the one you had a default of 3 in) or upward in points (zones with 4 or 5) at any point in the game, you are already 100% safe. If not, you are still at risk. Note that them attacking your zone with 3 doesn't lose them the game if you don't play correctly, it does however increase the odds you and them tie at worst (for you) significantly due to how the leads and incomplete information of where to allocate per Round works (you have more chaos on your side, they are more predictable as 3 of theirs have been spent in a way you already cancelled out which you didn't do in reverse to them).
It is important to know which of the two has occured because you are always fundamentally thinking like an attacker or defender, never neither.
If you are in defense-mode still, pay attention to any spot where the opponent has +1 or +2 on you but not +3, add 1 to these spots in the next round, not more and not less. Even if it's +2, add only 1. Any spot where you've gained +2, add 1.
Any spot that's tied, add 2, any spot that's +2, add 1.
The things I just said apply to all zones, even ones where you have 4 or 5 if they attacked there.
If they have +3 on you anywhere, surrender the zone. You will be able to tie it later if need be.
If they have +4 or more on you 100% surrender it, they've lost the game already.
In Round 3, pay attention to how they went about approaching your Round 1 moves. Did they react strongly to something? If they did, add 3 to it the next Round. If they didn't, add four 2s as you see fit.
Never ever, at any stage here allow yourself to potentially be +4 or more in any zone that you weren't already by default.
Aim to be +2 everywhere in conflict but don't worry about risking being +3.
From this point on, Round 4 and onwards, change the algorithm to aim to add nothing to zones where the enemy is +2 and instead keep adding +3 to zones where they are +1 and adding +2 to zones where you're tied. If somehow this isn't possible to be considered optimal due to a rare approach by the opponent, add 2 to all zones under conflict on your Round 4 AND Round 5 turn, ignore anything happening that suggests otherwise. 7 doesn't divide by 2 so add 3 to one of them, don't add 1 anywhere in a scenario where the prior split doesn't leave you with 0.
By Round 6 you've either already won the game or are going to be playing for a tie.
At this point, assess if overall you're ahead or not. If you're ahead, stick to where you have a lead and maintain a +2 lead there. Anywhere the enemy has a +1 lead, contest it for a tie. If the enemy has +2, potentially add 1 (never 2) to it if you have any spare because such a scenario means everything is deep and you want to make their lead more shallow.
In the final 3 Rounds, if you have played as recommended here, you actually never need to split. Do all-in moves, if the enemy guesses wrong you win if they guess right you tie. You have no capacity to lose if you did everything correctly.
Created:
Updated:
Category:
Forum games
I just wanted this known. Idk who reported it. I didn't know he'd be that vulgar but I didn't report for the sake of it.
I appreciated the support.
Created:
Updated:
Category:
DebateArt.com
There are scenes in later episodes where I literally shed tears. I am not ashamed about admitting that but I will tell you that for me to do that, a series needs to really be powerful. Another series I have shed tears during that's big and on Netflix is Lucifer (but you need to watch many episodes and some seasons in before really getting to where it began to get that deep).
Squid Game is epic, genuinely, I have almost never watched something that made me feel so many emotions at once.
Created:
Updated:
Category:
Show business
Created:
Updated:
Category:
Miscellaneous
To avoid this being labelled a callout thread, I will specify that this is attacking an idea, not a certain individual who keeps using the idea.
The idea is exacerbated due to Covid targetting the obese harsher in its symptoms and lethality, similar to the elderly and those with lung and heart conditions (actually heart conditions and obesity are closely linked but can be independent).
In Japan, South Korea and many 'western' social democracies today, you will notice something extremely shocking when you compare it with the general people's body proportions in a nation like the US or the upper class in less developed nations; there are becoming less 'fat' people amongst the wealthy in these nations.
Why is that? It is perhaps, if extremely cynical, to do with campaigns and policies of 'taxing sugar' etc that certain governments carried out over recent years to help (according to skeptics who propose this idea) to reduce costs on the socialised or partially-socialised healthcare. If that's true, why don't proponents of this idea support the US doing that then?
As in, why don't proponents of the idea that obese people would drain the economy too much if healthcare were socialised, instead support information programs and policies on fast food (the same meal name in Europe is around only 60% as unhealthy as the same meal in the US, I am not exaggerating, this is due to strict EU policy regarding 'how unhealthy a single meal can be' in Europe which is a law that simply doesn't even exist in US), Japan and South Korea also healthier but that is more cultural (if it was purely oily and greasy fast food there, they'd not visit it much as they have much healthier 'fast food' outlets, focused on strips of meat and/or fish with decent amount of vegetables and only easy-to-digest starch formats like rice, etc).
If you would observe what a culture can do if it begins to positively (not negatively or abusively) pressure the obese to make healthier life decisions, as one whole society (rather than individuals teasing and having spite for one another) you would see a much more exponential transition towards a healthier populace. You can call it Orwellian, even I was not a fan of the sugar tax (I love sugary treats now and again and am a slim guy myself) but ultimately it's about the 'greater good'.
If more people end up less draining on society and happier+healthier, these policies can be optimal for the society. It's all based around that metric. Stop screaming 'freedom' and then going 'oh no not everyone uses their freedom so wisely'. You don't matter enough on your own for your 'good life decisions' to outweigh the bad ones others can/will make without guidelines and restrictions. You're not the only citizen of your nation.
Created:
Updated:
Category:
Politics
Just as with the other one it ends up reaching a point where either I accept it as a chore or pay to cover my relaxation (neither is desirable).So, ironically, I can see the flaws with it that Mesmer mentioned earlier. It doesn't fit very well into anyone who has a busy lifestyle and who then doesn't want to spend much on a game.The core issue is that games like this require consistent effort and dedication from the player. This, of course, is by design and makes it a very stimulating pastime, except that when you factor in how many hours are in every day, how much energy you have and the emotions of real life vs even the game (yes, it gets emotionally intense, it's a social clan game with drama and rivalries) it amounts to a grind, where the grit required is something that acts against the pleasure from the game. There is no pleasure from spending money on a game in itself, the pleasure if from the progress but if you constantly feel like the progress is requiring you to either work your ass off in the game or in real life to pay, it amounts to the game not being a game, it's a chore. Thus defeating the reason you played the game in the first place (to have fun as you let off steam from your chores).I do see the appeal of these games and could even see ways each could be refined and/or improved but ultimately it doesn't matter how you design a real-time strategy game that is based around clans and building, either it becomes a chore or it becomes a bore... I know it rhymes but that is indicative of the irony of it all.Eventually, of course, it becomes both but at that stage you feel so invested into it all that you don't want to quit and let all your time, effort and actual money go to waste.This doesn't make me at all say that I see particularly how this type of game is worse than any particular game franchise that is pay-to-play, since this is actually free to pay and all payments are your choice but I do see the problem with the structure of it, you end up trapped and don't know a way out. It may take your phone breaking (but then you have emulator, however it will still factor in) or something along those lines for you to start to see the issue.I happen to be someone who both can get 'addicted' to these games and yet can remain resolute with how much I spend etc (I guess it's upbringing that plays into this though, since I was always raised to understand what any cost really means and stuff) so I don't personally notice the 'predatory' aspect of these games as too brutal or harsh and don't see these companies as particularly immoral, compared to any sort of 'pay us to get pleasure' service. However, I can somewhat see the issue given the social elements of the game (you're in a clan etc) and how it keeps you stuck, afraid to wither away and lose all your progress. It doesn't matter how mentally disciplined you are, the quitting feels horrible at worst or dull/numbing at best. I would say that one thing that could improve these game types is if there were 'levels' and I don't mean newer servers because that's already there and is fair enough. There could be 'levels' to the servers and you move up or slide down the servers based on your progress, this would be far, far fairer and superior even helping you with matchmaking for the clan wars. The reason they don't do this, which is justifiable, is that this would also force you out of your clan and make you stuck in a whole new server, interacting with all new poeple who are just as powerful or even slightly more powerful than yourself.
Created:
Updated:
Category:
Gaming
Aside from two friends, one happened to login while at the other's house etc, I never saw an instance on DDO of two siblings, close relatives or anything being on the website. Never, not once even.
I believe it is in fact an unventured-into aspect of sibling development as well as even further out into a family that results in only one of a particular group generally being genuinely argumentative and passionately into debating.
You'll easily counter me here with 'toxic families' or instances where many butt heads but what you'll tend to find is that those less adept at the use of words, develop habits as they grow in adolescence through to adulthood that result in them less needing to argue directly and they defeat superior debaters by these social or physical means (you can't 'beat people up' when you're a grown adult but you sure can out-work them and point it out to shut up whatever possibly smart idea they had for the workplace etc).
I think that there is almost a rule, not a trend but an actual somehow rule, that as siblings or whoever (could be cousins or friends if they interacted a lot) develop, the ones who discover they're not as initially gifted at arguing with the other/s learn to avoid argumentation and seek reconciliation or other ways around debating, as a habit (not even innately gifted, just initially, meaning younger siblings in general have lower probability to wind up being into debating).
This 'habit training' also works in reverse. The more one realised they had an edge at argumentation, the more genuinely they worked on their craft and became superior expressors of opinions and persuasion (or at least argumentation). This side of things is probably truer for males than females though because the females gifted at arguing tended to need to be skilled socially regardless (just how things are) whereas the males skilled at it, especially in the modern age of the Internet, could find outlets where they were not really held back by their social awkwardness or physical weakness (I am no exception to this rule and not ashamed in admitting it).
Eventually, either the person becomes a healthier and more disciplined debater and human being or they alternatively get more toxic and argumentative as they grow (the hostile hermit elder stereotype).
Created:
Updated:
Category:
DebateArt.com
hit me up.
if you're curious about RoK, this is a great video to check out:
^ this was made before Vikings civ existed but trust me, don't start Viking transfer into it later instead.
Created:
Updated:
Category:
Gaming
How can myself and drlebronski make a thread about the irrefutable parallels between two user accounts without it being taken down?You can't. This should not be a public matter. All of it would constitute a call-out thread.
MisterChris
There's a reason he's afraid, PM me for the reality check.
Created:
Updated:
Category:
DebateArt.com
Tell me please, fans of Apple, what makes it the privacy phone provider and I will decimate you with the fineprint of the terms and conditions as well as exposing just how much it can spy on you more than the rest due to owning your hardware.
Created:
Updated:
Category:
Technology
Incompetent mods, doomed site.
Created:
Updated:
Category:
DebateArt.com
This is 100% important, PM me if you feel like it, come with an open mind.
Created:
Updated:
Category:
DebateArt.com
I am aware I voted no to the Presidency thing. I understand how this looks but ultimately if it exists I am all for trying. I never once made a secret of my ambitions to be a moderator here, yet I accept that both due to aggression I had to a couple of users here early on and due to me being a social outcast amongst the 'clique' who are moderators, I'll never be one for the foreseeable future.
So, I want you to know what I can and will do for you if you put me in the president position and explain why I am better than almost anyone else who will run for it.
Defense Attorney Guarantee
I absolutely promise you that no matter what Chris, Supa, Ragnar, David or whoever does to gaslight or silence you if/when a ban heads your way and you speak harshly against it, I will both personally represent your case to them even if I disagree with you and think you earned your ban as well as to create a thread myself that they won't dare to close, about your ban for the community to discuss in.
To prove to you that I represented you, I will post captions from our conversations regarding your moderation to a thread I create after the verdict is finally given or they ignore me completely.
Politics/Religion and Bias worries
I identify as left-wing and religiously you could call me agnostic but really I have my own theory that is close to Taoist philosophy in its conclusions and the way I go about life.
I can't promise you that I am going to be completely immune of bias in terms of caring as much if someone who agrees with me is censored vs someone espousing views I disagree with and I think any other candidate who promises you that is not self-aware.
What I can promise you is unless you have been particularly nasty to me personally, I'll unblock you and hear out why your particular censored content is wrongly treated that way.
In cases of harassment and two-way bullying, I have never and will never just instantly say the left-wing person or less religious person is in the right. To me, BrotherDThomas is a much bigger issue to the website community than Ethang5 despite the former blatantly being an atheist troll guised as a Christian and the latter being an unabashed Conservative Christian.
I know what bias is and am aware I have it but I will do everything in my conscious power to correct it. If and when it does happen, I am open to criticism, it will be something I'll need to prove doubters wrong on. I'm not immune to it, I accept it.
My agenda
My primary agenda is to make DART more of a website I'm not ashamed to show off to my family and IRL friends or whatever. As it is now, it's bit of a cringey trollfest in many departments and it's not as much an issue that the trolls are active as it is that I feel not enough special events like debate tournaments and actual worthwhile threads are created and contributed to.
I am going to heavily ensure if someone is baited by trolls to overreact and then gets banned that such user doesn't need to operate here totally afraid and instead ensure that the mods see who the provoking member was and to put into context each post.
I also want to give tips and advise to users in situations that I, as an ordinary user, perhaps never get to hear about or see in a combination of private and public clashes. As you know, I support using the block function much more readily and without the shame that most do. I'd always advise that as a default but I am quite good at seeing situations from both sides and would give tailored advice to any user who is feeling targeted and doesnt know how to handle it without lashing out and who feels the mods don't care.
I want this website to be a pleasure, a website you open every other day excited to see what's being posted rather than worry which nuisance has posted and made you not bother to use the site anymore due to. Those who don't know what I am referring to or how it can be achieved without censorship are welcome to vote against me. Those who want to see if I live by my word, should vote for me and see.
I am not going to cower to Chris, Supa, Ragnar or any of them. I am my own person and my agenda is entirely independent of whatever their clique may approve or or laugh into silence. Whatever you want for the website or to get heard in your defebse, let me know. If you're banned and feel nobody heard your case out, I'm not entirely sure what to do yet as I am not keen to give an email nor would I regularly check one but eventually off-site communication can be arranged. At the moment the presently banned seem to all be severe cases. The only one I think actually could be overturned would be Type1 but that's without knowing when he'd next go wild. When he tries, he's an extremely active and entertaining member. When he doesn't try, he becomes toxic and stupid and I do think personally that he knows that but anyway, the rest I'm not sure about. They all seem legitimate permabans.
Created:
Updated:
Category:
DebateArt.com
All Clan War games run on the fundamentally same game theory, it isn't what you may think (resource gathering is a necessary but overrated aspect of it, as is raw offense, being in a strong clan is worth 100x as much as saving up for a massive boon in power later, always play to overrate yourself early, so as to appeal to the good clans ASAP, this is true whether you're a significantly paying player or not. It would only be slightly unnecessary if you're either the leader of or buddy of a leader of a strong clan.)
quoted from my profile.
I won't say too much here, maybe I'll want to reveal more later on and this guide won't be that unique, if you dig hard enough someone else has said these concepts at some point regarding certain games in the genre but I am going to summarize things that may or may not be obvious and that I have found all clan war games are based on:
- Do not start a clan war game if you can't no-life the game for 3 solid days. You need to be able to dedicate 3 solid real life days where you spend at least half of your waking hours towards this game. I am not kidding, this matters so much more than you think. If you're skilled enough, you'd be able to slack off the middle day of the three due to how bursts of bonuses work in these games but to do that you need to be willing to spend 5-7 dollars to cover it and then it will basically put you exactly where you need to be. If you had worked hard all three days at it, you usually only need to pay 1-2 dollars on a small package boost thing.
- You need to be mentally and financially ready to spend around 15 dollars on the game. This is a minimum, trust me. If you are not willing to spend that money on a game, especially a mobile game, that's fair enough but quit while you're ahead. You won't excel at 90% of the games out there if you're 100% aiming to be free-to-play because the time and energy required to pull of hyper-farming to compensate for the lack of payment still means next to nothing once we analyse significantly premium buys like high-tier vigilantes in Mafia City, high-tier Commanders (or maxing out the good Commanders you already own) in Rise of Kingdoms, so on and so forth. You really will need to spend money on these games as you progress, you will hit 'paywalls' that are not at all things where skill and dedication truly can overcome the complete pay-only stepping block you need to climb over said wall in progress. It's up to you to prove me wrong on this, I am certain this is true, in fact it unfortunately is more like double that amount; 30 dollars, if you really want to be close to genuinely dominant in a server.
- If points 1 and 2 are fully embraced by you and you're ready to proceed, spend day 1 doing everything the game tells you to do. Do not think you are smarter than the game is, it is built to guide you to do basic things very well, so do them all as it tells you to do. However, the one exception to this rule is if you have the opportunity to upgrade a resource tile/production-zone in your city/turf/town whatever it's called (your place/base where you produce things in) then do this regardless of the game telling you it's wise or not. Just do it, it's always worth it in all of these game formats before they make it obvious that it's worth it.
- On day 2, you need to start using your brain, at the end of day 1 when you had to work or sleep or whatever, you should have left 1-2 troops gathering resources depending what the game let you do. Day 2 should begin with you ignoring the missions/quests the game assigns you and putting on whatever kind of gathering boost the game gives you, even a production boost if you find yourself short of something. Use it all, ramp up the buildings do everything you can do as fast as possible and gather, gather, gather. Dedicate entirely to your main account, you shouldn't have a farm account yet. Just go ham and be a resource-hungry blind player. Even if your 'team' clan/alliance/whatever-name-team tells you to help them, ignore them, you shouldn't be in an amazing team, you should be in a bad team for beginners. Once you're done and all your buildings and training are decent, you ditch that team for a recruiting team that isn't pro and very high-tier but is decent. It is important even if you havethe power to hit a better team's minimum, you stick to a medium team where you are above the minimum. I will explain why in the next step.
- You are now in your 'floating team', this team will become your brethren and friends for the next 2 weeks of your clan war game life. Do not piss them off but don't be entirely quiet so they would sooner kick you than another. Be friendly, keen and active. They build an alliance building and need help? Help out if you can. They are under attack because they stupidly annoyed another clan? Consider joining the other clan or help them out but if you join the other be sure you'll want to and be able to last there. You are a floating boat in an ocean, let the mediocre team carry you. For all you know you hit the jackpot and this is that one mediocre team that actually becomes one of the big players later on, if not it doesn't matter. It's better to aim for a team that's your language and able to interact socially well with you. You'll learn ins and outs of the game by the tryhards within the mediocre team (there's always 2-3) and you'll be able to have a good reputation as a loyal member. Ignore the invites you may get from the 'big boy' teams, that's not your job yet. Stick with this team, help, do everything that is required to be seen as a good team member and don't worry about power-increase, let it naturally come, perhaps pay a small package to help you on your way if you get busy IRL. Keep your ear close to 'da street' and get a sense of which clan is a big power player. This is 100% essential to your success in the city/kingdom/empire (server's) long-run. DURING THIS STEP YOU SHOULD BUILD YOUR FARM ACCOUNTS.
- The moment you're comfortable on your farm account(s), start to look for the big-player clan that's looking for you (some games only require 1, others 2-3, don't worry about being a hyperfarmer, keep your farms decent, that's all that matters). You should be at least 2 full weeks into the game past the time you joined the previous clan. Trust me on this 2-week rule, it's not just about power gain pace, it's about streetsmart pace, you need to see who rises and falls and has a bad vs good reputation. Aim to join the clan who has the best reputation and has done the least sins to other clans, value that over power if the two aren't clear. Within the top four clans of a typical clan war game server, the one who is consistently obeying the 'street code' and has very consistent etiquette is most likely run by players who have deep knowledge and respect for the game, regardless of how particularly powerful they are at that moment. If worse comes to worst and you find they were more toxic than you thought, you will at least have not gotten peer-pressured to break rules and be too much of a troublemaker when you beg another big clan to let you in. This is about risk aversion and being in the clan that will last in the long-run. Nobody likes the clan that abuses its power too soon into a server, they never ever last and if they 'last' the server becomes dead as the weaker just leave meaning they are kings of an empty wasteland in the long run with a terrible reputation if the once who ditched it spread the word about them. This is why it's paramount to be a keen, active player of a rule-obeying clan. Your reputation can get wrecked with one dirty move you get pressured into. You need to be part of the 'hero clan' not the 'villain' clan, servers always ultimately form this dynamic. It is very important to understand how and why the villain clan always loses int he long run but sometimes there's a three or four-way dynamic with 2-and-2 type alliances. Be part of the kindest clan even if they are allied to the dirtiest-playing clan, only value the reputation of your own clan, ignore the other chaos that shifts and changes but the core leadership of the big clans rarely ever truly changes.
- As things progress, you will find that almost all clan war games unfairly benefit from the short-range units being invested into. There's always two types of short-range units; the type that tank the damage and defend and the type that attack hard and fast and aim for the backline. It is possible I am wrong, there may be one of these games where it's optimal to focus on your long-range damagers, heck one may even favour the 'tanky damagers' (the vehicular fourth type that mainly is useful for gathering resources and destroying structures) but if you ask me, based on what I've seen in these games, it's objectively best to either be a tanky focuser or the speedy-short-range focuser. In some games the tanky type are called bulkers, in others infantry etc, in some games the speedy are called bikers, in others cavalry etc. It doesn't matter, all of these games run on the same four fundamental types of crew, you should always dedicate to either the tanky or the speedy, do not be mistaken to think there's long-term benefit in focusing on the long-range because you see, the long-range damagers are great if you pay a ton of money and have such high tier stuff to pull it off but the tanky types are insanely OP as they're both defensive and offensive at once when invested fully into while the short-range speedy are so OP because they're just so utterly versatile (they hit the entire backline meaning both the damagers and the vehicle types) and they help your operation-speed be slightly reduced usually as they're faster units in the first place, helping you ambush opponents and even retreat faster than the other specialists can. Once you decide which of the two you're investing in, stick at it, don't change your mind later or overly try to 'even things out' there is a tiny bit of value in that, yes, but fundamentally know your specialty and in all other ways you can assist a type, stick to a singular specialty of the tanky or speedy type.
- Even if you are an introvert IRL, friendships and loyalties matter. Don't be the quiet guy in the corner, get to know your clanmates, chat now and again, help and ask for help. It's both fun for you and them to feel this interaction. If it ends up going toxic and bad, it's likely you chose the wrong clan or even game. Bear it in mind, consider changing.
- These rules will all help you but never underestimate the importance of being a nerdy type in these games. Ultimately, those rules are what they all have in common. Now, get to know the games specifics. Don't be the sucker who didn't know enough when it really counts.
Created:
Updated:
Category:
Gaming
In my opinion these 2 games are phenomenal in their own ways and in fact have many similarities to one another.
It is also interesting because the 'ability to thrive with not spending hundreds and instead spending time' applies to both.
I have been spending a huge chunk of all spare time in my life the past few weeks on these types of mobile games, in fact one of the motives to do so as that I found an app that pays you to play games it recommends and it happened to recommend clan war games to me, getting me into RoK, to raise funds for my Mafia City gaming and that made me appreciate RoK.
In case you think I'd love all games of this type and this is just a cringey post, let me elaborate on two fundamental reasons why these two thwart other games:
1) The proportionality of 'have to pay' in both is significantly minimised by different variations of safety net for players. Mafia City is objectively the best game of all clan war games I have ever come across in terms of the raw actual safety that it gives a player. It doesn't matter what the hell the powerful players do to you, you can cope because of safe and protected resources as well as a wounded capacity that increases almost exponentially (and when it its maximum is lower than what you have and need, you should be powerful and aware of enough to last/thrive, if not that's your own fault to be frank). With RoK the safety net isn't as much a net as a bouncy castle. Everything about the game is much more about bursts of doing things, you gather in bursts, fight in bursts, rebuild troops after losing them in bursts, etc. If you master the ways to balance out each and properly stratify your time and effort, as well as choosing a city that suits a more survivalist type of statistics build, you will go very far in the game no matter how hard you get hit. It comes down to intelligence, awareness and ability. You can't properly survive big and bad hits in RoK if you're an unaware and low-ability player, unless you want to spend alot. This is why I actually like Mafia City even though RoK would be the easier one for me to stay loyal to for a variety of reasons (since I didn't have it already installed, the other app that pays you to play it gets credit for making me install the game and I get a very fast rate of rewards for playing it).
2) The sheer effort into the artwork and events hosted is phenomenal! In games like Clash of Clans, State of Survival (though that's not necessarily clan war it kind of fits the genre due to many resource-management and troop management similarities), King of Avalon and such variations of clan war games, you often find yourself in a very generic type of pattern after a while. I just named three extremely high grossing games, two of which are often ranked above Mafia City but I don't agree with this ranking at all. These games are stale. In fact, King of Avalon practically stole its entire artwork and stuff from GoT, it probably paid them royalty. Mafia City and RoK if anything stole from each other and improved. They host events in servers that massively benefit you as a free or cheap playing player. The artwork put into both games is simply so high effort and amazing, I don't know what else to say. RoK definitely has superior audio though but I think the production team of Mafia City don't know much English and struggle to sufficiently word things grammatically correct in English so even though the vocals are good acting in tone, a lot of what they say in the catch-phrases or plots for the cut scenes don't entirely make sense.
These two factors may seem small but imagine that these games are things where you spend your life playing it passionately. They are practically a fusion of MMORPG and action fused into one game format. It is just so ridiculously fun to play.
I would say that RoK will end up superior to Mafia City in raw grossing, consistently due to the fact that it markets smarter (it literally pays some streamers to dedicate to it, even making YT vids with tips and tricks, whereas Mafia City relies on content creators genuinely liking it, not that the RoK ones don't like RoK) and it's more kid friendly by a mile. I would say Mafia City is a solid 15+ game, it's actually rated 17+. There's genuine violence and raunchy artwork and scenes in it, the only child-friendly aspect of it is just how 'loser-proof' the mechanics of resources and wounded capacity are. RoK is very careful to have its animations and speech of characters be very sterile and friendly, despite 'wars' happening within the game.
Another thing I really appreciate in RoK is that it actually went through the effort of accurately depicting certain warlords of the past including my favorite Sun Tzu. On the other hand, Mafia City very accurately depicts certain aspects of mafia life and its mentality and makes you experience first-hand how psychologically it is to be part of the Mafia, I feel. I also think that the mechanics of migration in Mafia City are much fairer than in RoK. RoK anyone can migrate to a very new server... Imagine the kind of stomping going on for newer players... That said, as a newer player you get an immunity shield for many real life days there, whereas in Mafia City said truce/shield doesn't last as long.
Price-wise, you can't truly thrive in either game if you never want to pay money and that may disgust people who want games where only pure ability determines the winner. I would say that ability turns your five dollars into what a less able and dedicated players turns their $40 into (literally 1:8 ratio I would say is accurate) and that this is fair enough in my eyes.
The only issue with these games is they're so addictive because you can't stop playing them just 'like that', you need to constantly be active or your alliance/clan kicks you out and you wither away real quick and even MC's better safeguards against how much you wither won't matter because you'll be so behind the curve of progress of players within your city ('city' is a very different word in RoK, City in RoK is Turf in MC and City in MC is Kingdom in RoK).
There is one thing that's absolutely fantastic by RoK that MC really should take note of. Everything about the game guides a brand new player a little better on what to do and when. MC tries this and does a decent job of it but starts really suddenly throwing you in the deep end in terms of what to do. In MC you need to create new email addresses to make farm accounts (accounts that are never trying to 'win' they build weaker troops and solely use their levelling etc to gather resources faster, in MC it is common practise for these accounts to be attacked by the main account, willingly let it attack them without troops being on their turf whereas in RoK it's more common to have them join the alliance/clan of the main account and send resources, the cause of this is twofold and is correct for both game formats in terms of being superior to the other as a normal practise in resource-efficiency of transfer.
Created:
Updated:
Category:
Gaming
To those who think BLM haven't changed anything and that 'it hasn't happened since the slavery days'
Tell me right now that the way she was treated in her trial and lack of representation she had would have happened if she were a Caucasian American.
Do not look '.co.uk' and tell me she was British, read the article. It was a British lawyer that saved her. That is irrelevant to the piece, I am just clarifying before people try to correct me on this. The British legal system also has needed a lot of work pushed forward by BLM protests and campaigns in order to improve, it's just further along the way, I believe.
Created:
Updated:
Category:
Politics
I don't have anything more to say, I want people to say what they think.
Created:
Updated:
Category:
Politics
At what point can we ban a user? Literally 1 in 2 (actually that's an understatement) of Wylted's threads are racist and I just saw this in what was meant to be a funny roast thread:
At what stage is it too far?
At what stage can other members get angry and say it is punishable?
Created:
Updated:
Category:
DebateArt.com
Unlike the ads, Mafia City isn't a 3d game where you make tough decisions, it's at first a run of the mill pay-to-win clan war game.
If you ever were too inactive or lazy, just tap 'redo city' because you'll never catch up in that particular server, they almost always start you off fairly though but if you're unlucky enough to start bang in the middle of a period where a server isn't 'overfull' and there aren't enough to justify opening another you'll be a straggler so if you notice you're waaaay waaaay behind anyone, just ride it out and get a feel for the game then start a new server when the option comes (if you just start anew there and then, you're probably ending up in an even worse city where you're even more behind the curve).
The reason I recommend this game is that unlike the other clan war games I've played, this has legitimate, fully viable ways for an 'addicted' free-to-play gamer to catch up with and snowball a freely bought VIP upgrade as well as then using the privileges like a second building queue to their advantage enough to genuinely out-compete or equally compete with the average pay to win player. You will never truly be top of a server if you aren't a pay to win hardcore type but you can genuinely maintain a high rank in a server for a long, long time (servers don't last forever but they last many months making the grind worth it, I think it's like up to 8 idk).
I have played one or two other clan war games and they not only throw you in the deep end but their 'flexibility' is actually very deceptive. Mafia City's simplicity is in fact its strength (there's only one direct means by which to pillage others and you can't hijack the pillaging army during, you can only defensively defend your own clanmember or alternatively sacrifice them and attack the attacker preemptively but that's usually the worse option as you first want to make their attack itself fail and their forces significantly deplete). You have constant daily missions guiding you on what to do and when. You don't need to follow it to play 'correctly' if you're pay to win or hardcore grinding but it helps to abide by the quests that come daily because the rewards are absolutely generous and add up to equal having paid a full 5 dollars for upgrades over just 3 days of properly abiding by it vs that.
I have never ever come across a clan war game where if you are dedicated and observant enough you can genuinely be on equal footing with hardcore pay-to-win scrubs. When I say pay to win, I respect that they fund the game's production, of course, but when someone literally pays 100 US dollars' worth to stampede past 2-2.5 weeks of hard work in-game, in a server that's fresh and where their lead then lets them snowball their clan hard there comes to be a level of 'hmph'.
Interestingly, though, the game's design is very clever, there's become a culture of 'don't unnecessarily pick on the noob clans' among the higher clans and it's enforced within the clans by either kicking the member full out or letting the member be attacked by the other clan first and then warning them (but the latter won't usually work if they messed with a noob clan).
It's a very fair culture in the game, I don't feel the same as in other clan war games at all, the culture seems to be that the big dogs pick on each other and any little league clan is kind of ignored and left to compete on their own level in the outskirts of the map as they please. This is largely due also to the fact that the game doesn't 'kill' newer players' armies as much it just wounds them and also it pays out only 50% what you'd naturally earn from a player if it feels their level is too low compared to yours.
There's many nerfs and structures in the game that make it a very healthy balance between an individual adventure and social gaming.
No, I wasn't paid to write this, I just truly feel this game is on another level in terms of clan war games.
Created:
Updated:
Category:
Gaming
If you really think about it all for a minute, we all can in some way relate to or know someone that can relate to this devil Satan character.
He wants the freedom from a tyrannical piece of shit and yet comes to become the very thing he hated God for being and winds up the ultimate tester and enforcer of sinning spirits.
He struggles in a way that suggests genuine agony and psychological trauma, not just weird hypocrisy.
The character Jesus seems conflicted, the guy in one way is an outgoing alpha male and in others is a very homosexual needy type. In one way, he wants us all to forgive and love each other and yet also we are taught to resent and loathe the devil and all those who dare sympathise with him.
This devil character is not angled as an enemy of Jesus but rather a bully, yet in reality it is Jesus who is potentially the bully to the devil. It comes entirely down to who is lying about who.
Created:
Updated:
Category:
Politics
Created:
Updated:
Category:
DebateArt.com
Sheriff Chris is hereby the officially unofficial street name of MisterChris.
King David has stepped down why? Because when you want to rule a kingdom, you have a king and when you want the roughians to truly respect you, you need a good Sheriff and his Deputy.
Yee haww
Created:
Updated:
Category:
DebateArt.com
I think we love debating because we're toxic people through genuinely no fault of our own.
Can you show me somebody in real life who loves debating that isn't a toxic person in a fair few ways?
I was no exception to this rule. I probably still am not, I'm working on it.
I think debating is a natural interest and hobby of someone who is very prone to habitually disagree and nitpick at things. I was that guy for a fair amount of my life. I changed how readily I showed it IRL but never changed the core personality and it was only recently that I appreciated how much effort I put into arguing when otherwise agreeing and even faking a polite white-lie-support of something could just so much easier handle the scenario.
If we go through life nonstop arguing it gets addictive, not just because we are good at it but because we feel 'real' amongst a buch of 'fakes'. The problem is that this makes us enemies, nobody likes a skilled debater in real life. Can you imagine Oromagi, Ragnar and Ramshutu or MisterChris or whoever just arguing the crap out of everyone in their workplace that disagreed with them? Nobody would end up liking them... That's the issue with it.
I have spent so much of my life loving to argue and finally now I realise I basically convinced 0 people of anything... Okay maybe 2 or 3 but come on, that's at the sake of alienating far more.
What good is it to debate? I even do it with etiquette and that just makes more enemies as then I seem fake about it. I've never once seen positive outcome from a real life application of my debating skills, like literally never. It's only helped me when another similar to me tries to take me on in that way and how rare is that? Like... twice a year someone maybe really, really wants a debate on something with me but that's about it. We live in a world that's still ruled by jungle law, we're just primates wearing suits and ties to hide the reality of it. If you piss off the wrong alpha, it doesn't matter how logical you are, you'll get alienated in that place. That's life and it's irrational, unfair and shit but what I have come to realise and truly appreciate is that what's even more shit than that would be a world where we all argued 24/7... nothing would get done.
I'm starting to wonder if I was wrong about everything, like ever taking part in a community like this and ever liking to argue. It's caused me more issues than I'd like to admit, In hindsight I do believe lost a few real long-term friendships predominantly due to this habit and craving of mine to argue and debate.
I've just learned to shut my mouth when I disagree and think hard of the impact of my disagreement before opening it (my mouth) but that doesn't really settle the unrest in me at the stupidity of what's unfurling in the (to me) childlike disagreement between grown adults that should have a higher capacity to reason than what they convey.
Is that what life is like for you other skilled debaters? I really dislike it but I accept it.
Created:
Updated:
Category:
Personal
Unlike lions, wolves, tigers or really any creature similar to them in the food chain other than some very aggressive snakes, leopards are pure psychopaths especially in scenarios of disputed territory.
With almost all other predators after either a stare down (with lions and tigers) or combined stare down with some tactical hits (with wolves) you can fundamentally make the creature respect you and consider you a worthy adversary who isn't erratic such that it will leave you in peace even when your back is turned and you're stroking it etc.
The thing with leopards is there's never an 'okay we're buddies' stage. They will wait for hours playing nice and hunt you the moment you sleep or let your guard down with back turned etc.
It's much worse than lions even in the way they attack, leopards like to keep their prey alive and bleeding out slow so it keeps a good taste throughout the eating session if they happen to get full before they finish it.
Leopards are truly cruel creatures.
Created:
Updated:
Category:
Personal
At present there are 9 threads of deep conspiracy theory and extreme misinformation/disinformation by Wylted with the tag 'RM' attached.
This is solely done to harass me just as this thread is being done to callout and get a consensus from other users on the matter.
Wylted supported freedom of speech so I am pretty sure he will not oppose me calling him out on this. He may well claim to have done it with benign intent, assuming I'd be interested and that I support his conspiracy theories but that assumption is indeed an unreasonable one and I can tell you that I don't support his threads at all, even when I partially discussed skepticism about mRNA vaccines he uses 'does' when he means 'can' in the thread's title, making a direct accusation rather than an abject hypothesis.
Created:
Updated:
Category:
DebateArt.com