• Hi all. We have had reports of member's signatures being edited to include malicious content. You can rest assured this wasn't done by staff and we can find no indication that the forums themselves have been compromised.

    However, remember to keep your passwords secure. If you use similar logins on multiple sites, people and even bots may be able to access your account.

    We always recommend using unique passwords and enable two-factor authentication if possible. Make sure you are secure.
  • Be sure to join the discussion on our discord at: Discord.gg/serebii
  • If you're still waiting for the e-mail, be sure to check your junk/spam e-mail folders

U.S. Politics: The Biggest Trade in WNBA History

WishIhadaManafi5

To Boldly Go Where No One Has Gone Before.
Staff member
Moderator

Gamzee Makara

Flirtin' With Disaster
This doesn't sound good...


In regards to Twitter's new terms of service.

This could affect artists, etc.. It deals with copyright. But that aside... there's a bit that is far more concerning in my opinion.

Twitter is for the rich, and Facebook for the poor, based on these rules.

Because people can just OBTAIN licenses, permissions and **** like that without cash upfront. It's TOTALLY that easy. Ughhh

This WILL backfire.

Companies need to stop having lawyers write policies that will only benefit lawyers.
 

WishIhadaManafi5

To Boldly Go Where No One Has Gone Before.
Staff member
Moderator
Twitter is for the rich, and Facebook for the poor, based on these rules.

Because people can just OBTAIN licenses, permissions and **** like that without cash upfront. It's TOTALLY that easy. Ughhh

This WILL backfire.

Companies need to stop having lawyers write policies that will only benefit lawyers.

Nah. Facebook is just as bad imo. That being said, I agree with you on it backfiring.

Yep only the rich can do that for the most part. The average person can't and will have to do without.

Can think of two things... going from an article I read quite awhile back.

A small movie director was working on a movie and tried to get permission for a song. The artist offered him a 'deal' of $15,000 for it since it was the director's birthday. The director turned him down as he couldn't spend that much money for a song.

The other example is about the song Don't Stop Believing by Journey. The cost to use that song (and no I am not kidding) is $1 million dollars.

Thing is, they don't give a damn and don't care. It's all about the money.
 

Gamzee Makara

Flirtin' With Disaster
Nah. Facebook is just as bad imo. That being said, I agree with you on it backfiring.

Yep only the rich can do that for the most part. The average person can't and will have to do without.

Can think of two things... going from an article I read quite awhile back.

A small movie director was working on a movie and tried to get permission for a song. The artist offered him a 'deal' of $15,000 for it since it was the director's birthday. The director turned him down as he couldn't spend that much money for a song.

The other example is about the song Don't Stop Believing by Journey. The cost to use that song (and no I am not kidding) is $1 million dollars.

Thing is, they don't give a damn and don't care. It's all about the money.
I was referring to the stereotype, being magnified here, of rich liberals using Twitter, and poor Republicans using Facebook.

Furthermore, the cliches are that rich Republicans use Gab, Telegram and even shadier services, and Poor Leftists WERE using Twitter after Tumblr shot themselves in the foot, but, again and again, poor Leftists have nowhere that welcomes them because they're seen as nothing more than a risk not worth keeping around.

It's almost like that idea for decentralized social media someone pitched at a conference was what poor leftists need(No, Email isn't de-centralized) to express themselves nowadays...

Heaven forbid anyone say capitalism problematic, and host service no deal with assholes, huh?

This is why a majority of purported Democrats are just Dixie-Corporatecrats in disguise. If they were a modern version of left, they'd have regulated this to hell and back.
 

KillerDraco

Well-Known Member
Worst case scenario being SWAT teams raiding houses while pinning down people who aren't vaccinated by forcing the jab on their arms with helicopters and police sirens outside the neighborhood as If an actual homicide took place. Imagine being dragged into a FEMA camp by force for still resisting to take the shot. Not only is that unethical but a human rights violation as well. The 1st Amendment isn't about white privilege, conservatism, or Republicans when it affects EVERY American regardless of political affiliation.

Reductio ad absurdum isn't the compelling argument that you think it is.
 

WishIhadaManafi5

To Boldly Go Where No One Has Gone Before.
Staff member
Moderator
I was referring to the stereotype, being magnified here, of rich liberals using Twitter, and poor Republicans using Facebook.

Furthermore, the cliches are that rich Republicans use Gab, Telegram and even shadier services, and Poor Leftists WERE using Twitter after Tumblr shot themselves in the foot, but, again and again, poor Leftists have nowhere that welcomes them because they're seen as nothing more than a risk not worth keeping around.

It's almost like that idea for decentralized social media someone pitched at a conference was what poor leftists need(No, Email isn't de-centralized) to express themselves nowadays...

Heaven forbid anyone say capitalism problematic, and host service no deal with assholes, huh?

This is why a majority of purported Democrats are just Dixie-Corporatecrats in disguise. If they were a modern version of left, they'd have regulated this to hell and back.

Ah I see. Thanks for making that clearer.

No doubt on the regulation. Some is fine in terms of stopping monopolies, but what companies are going for isn't even true regulation. It's just controlling the media any way they can.

More on it. Be warned though, there's some language within:

 
Last edited:

Vernikova

Champion
This doesn't sound good...


In regards to Twitter's new terms of service.

This could affect artists, etc.. It deals with copyright. But that aside... there's a bit that is far more concerning in my opinion.

These are common sense and ordinary terms. What's the issue with these?

1) Almost all companies have this in their terms as a way to protect themselves.
2) Twitter is a free-to-use service. As the now-common saying goes: if it's free, you are the product. Advertising companies will, in general, reserve the right to use content you posted on its platform for advertising. Facebook does the same with its services. The random marketing company doen the street will as well.
3) There are ways around copyright algorithms (if users truly cared). This is an ordinary term to include since they don't want to be held liable for user's expsoing themselves to lawsuits.
4) Yeah, "annoy." The same people that were begging to have the alt-right banned hate a rule that could have the alt-right banned. They don't want it possibly applied to them or their allies though.
5) Once again, another standard term to include along with "as available."

The person complaining isn't even a lawyer nor does it seem like they work in compliance.

These complaints are silly.
 

bobjr

You ask too many questions
Staff member
Moderator
Twitter more than anything else just doesn’t want to have to take any action about anything. It’s why they only give minor bans to literal nazis and take years to do anything to people like Nick Fuentes.
 

Trainer Yusuf

VolcaniNO

AuraChannelerChris

Easygoing Luxray.
Fox News does a sudden 180 regarding how the COVID vaccine is important...


...to recover from this:


Lives are priceless, but they are worthless against the all powerful $1.
Turns out it wasn't because of the stock market, but rather someone sued them for spreading misinformation:

 

AznKei

Dawn & Chloe by ddangbi
Twitter is for the rich, and Facebook for the poor, based on these rules.

Because people can just OBTAIN licenses, permissions and **** like that without cash upfront. It's TOTALLY that easy. Ughhh

This WILL backfire.

Companies need to stop having lawyers write policies that will only benefit lawyers.
I read some stuffs that are linked to Twitter but I didn't actually use it. I have Facebook but I don't post anything because the vibe there is more toxic, especially when it's about politics but I'm still keeping my account because of Messenger so I can keep in touch with the contacts that I know and trust.

I have my own personal problems too but I generally keep them by myself instead of having everyone in the internet to read them, in which I very doubt people experienced the same kind of situation as I do.

I sometimes express my disgust about politics only in this thread as I found the place far less toxic. I'm using YouTube because I'm a content creator focusing on video games and I'm using DeviantArt just to express my thoughts for some arts just like some threads in this website.
 

bobjr

You ask too many questions
Staff member
Moderator

9ShwGol.png


So Activision is really bad
 

Zora

perpetually tired
jfc these activision-blizzard stories are horrifying :(

I hope that since CA government is leading this lawsuit, and did their own investigation, there's actual consequences because **** is not okay.
 

WishIhadaManafi5

To Boldly Go Where No One Has Gone Before.
Staff member
Moderator
jfc these activision-blizzard stories are horrifying :(

I hope that since CA government is leading this lawsuit, and did their own investigation, there's actual consequences because **** is not okay.

Yea they are :(.

I hope so. They need to be held accountable for their behavior.
 

Zora

perpetually tired
Yea they are :(.

I hope so. They need to be held accountable for their behavior.
that said, I feel the realistic trajectory is something to the effect of:
  • A few months from now, games journalism (bleh) will be hyping new products like Overwatch 2 as if nothing ever happened. See also how gaming journalism cared more about a new AssCreed gaming being leaked than the fact the abusers are still making the game.
  • In court, they are found liable for these circumstances with a punishment being a fine (a literal slap on the wrist by AB standards). This will take years.
  • AB pays a fine, promises "to do better," puts on sexual assault workshops with the attitude "if we tell them no, maybe they'll listen" (it doesn't work like that; abusers don't listen until there's consequences).
  • Nothing actually changes.
But, California being behind this at least gives it more of an impact, but sigh, I'm still cynical about how this will turn out.
 
Last edited:

The Admiral

the star of the masquerade
Actually most viruses mutate and because the covid vaccine doesn't actually stop you from getting covid and instead prevents you from possibly dying and being hospitalized this still could of happened. The flu has a bunch of variants.
The flu has a bunch of variants, sure, but according to CDC estimates, only about 52% of the population got a flu shot in 2019-2020 (you might have to scroll down a bit for that number, and this assumes I'm reading the thing right). Not exactly what I'd consider a point that would, like, kill it off. And we aren't even at that number for COVID.
Fox News does a sudden 180 regarding how the COVID vaccine is important...

Not to be That person, but do y'all think Hannity's got the virus and is saying this because he's concerned it'll kill him?

I'm revving up the crab rave anyway.
I figured this to be the case, but it is important to have confirmation.
 

Zora

perpetually tired
Not to be That person, but do y'all think Hannity's got the virus and is saying this because he's concerned it'll kill him?

I'm revving up the crab rave anyway.
GOP is changing tune about vaccine because delta variant is spooking the stock market and, importantly, their donors.

They're going to backpedal but I don't think they can undo the damage they've done.

Edit: also, yeah, FN facing possibly legal issues.
 
Last edited:
Top