Print

Please login or register.
1 Hour 1 Day 1 Week 1 Month Forever
Login with username, password and session length

[Neonivek]

The ban lists are HIGHLY fueled by two things
1) Selling you new cards
2) Forcing you to use new cards

The Magic: the Gathering banlist seems to operate on an opposite system: it is rare for a card to be banned because it'll tank the price of that individual card. And a lot of money is made selling old, strong cards.

Magic the Gathering also won't reprint popular cards because it will tank prices of that individual card.

[MrRoboto75]

Heroclix only has a rolling ban/retirement on anything 2 or more years old, the ban actually happening in june every year.  Convention stuff as well as the organized play stuff gets banned at 3 years old, but that was because wizkids was lazy once and just sort of rolled with it.  All of the indie comic/ non comic sets outside of marvel, DC, and TNMT (of all things) are not allowed at tournaments, and are basically outside the tournament rotations.

The only model that was retired early was a Felix Faust, which was mostly a small gesture, as he saw play at three international tournaments and was around for three years like any other organized play figure.

Of course in casual play its not unusual to have anything goes games anyway.

[itisnotlogical]

Let's Play scratch-off lottery tickets. Was not expecting that in my subscriptions today

[Neonivek]

Anyone ever get the impression that Privilege means the exact opposite of the way people use it?

Like Privilege actually means you are disadvantaged. "You cannot eat that Donut, you are privileged".

[Egan_BW]

Victimhood privilege.

[Neonivek]

It is more that anytime I hear it brought up it is typically for why someone can't do something.

[Egan_BW]

Exactly. To some people, only Victimhood Privilege is valid. If you lack that, you get nothing.

[Neonivek]

Well you forget the second time Privilege is used (and by you, I mean me)

"No, I am allowed to hit you because your advantaged"

[Egan_BW]

Same principle. "Advantaged" means lacking in victimhood privilege. I have privilege, you don't. Therefore it's okay for me to strike you. Just like feudalism.

[smjjames]

Exactly. To some people, only Victimhood Privilege is valid. If you lack that, you get nothing.

What about the whole 'white priviledge' thing? Which usually translates to male anglo-saxon priviledge.

[wierd]

It is the consequence of allowing the "logic" behind "Some are more equal than others."

It is typically used with race, but also sometimes with gender.  It is usually parlayed in the same vein as physical disability, which is absurd. There is nothing physically debilitating about having skin of a certain color, excepting maybe for being prone to sunburn for white people.

While there may be a culturally derived source of disadvantage concerning skin color (defacto racism), that is something artificial that is fixable by removing the favoritism-- not something that needs continual, eternal, and systemic amendment, like having wheelchair accessibility ramps for the disabled.

The WTF happens when people insist that such permanent amendment is required, and asserting that it really is not is "white privilege."

[Neonivek]

Sorry this WTF just overrides all others I have right now...

So I was watching this video on Free Speech and how people should be censored because freedom of speech isn't Freedom of Consequences and thus you should receive consequences for your speech. That isn't the WTF moment just wait.

They make this VERY off hand remark about a Boss reading a person's twitter account, seeing that they don't like their opinions, and firing them. Which she gleefully states is fully within the spirit of Free Speech.

This festered inside me because it was said quickly and without much thought but...

WOOOOW! That is some big brother type unfortunate implications there!

So what is being proposed here is that Bosses and Businesses should be allowed to police the opinions, affiliations, and beliefs of their employees outside the job... And then decide whether or not to fire them? This is a good thing? This is like a mind virus the more I think about it the more mind blowing it becomes. It was said so innocently like it was nothing.

O_O

[wierd]

Sadly they are correct. It is why I am dead set against employers reading/mining social media, and using what they find (or dont find) in any way in the hiring or retention processes.

Good luck getting snoopy HR drones to not go looking at dirty laundry like that though without major legal beatings behind it.

[Loud Whispers]

"Freedom of Speech means you are free to say whatever you wish to say, free from punishment or retribution for expressing yourself.
Freedom of Speech does not mean you are free to say whatever you wish to say, free from punishment or retribution for expressing yourself."

???

If you have penalties for expressing wrongthink, you clearly do not have freedom of speech lmao

[wierd]

The "accepted" interpretation is that the 1st amendment right to freedom of speech only applies to government agencies giving punitive sentences for speech.  See for instance, China-- where if you you are openly critical of the the party, or of government, you disappear.

That is not permitted in the US. However, there is no compulsion to overlook offensive speech from normal citizens, which HR people happen to be.

EG, if you and I are both citizens, and I call you a "Fucking moron" to your face, you are well within your rights to consider me a bad person, and not want to associate with me, or consider me as a candidate if for whatever reason, I come seeking employment from you, etc.  That is a kind of defacto punishment for speech, that is a natural consequence of said speech.  This is what the video likely is referring to, and is what is alluded to in the instance of the HR drone reading the hot slathering excrement smeared all over your facebook page, and deciding that "you aren't a good fit." For example, finding a whole lot of racially charged epithets/messages, for a candidate applying to work at a highly culturally diverse workplace.

I would personally prefer NOT to allow HR drones to be permitted to read facebook pages as part of their hiring process, (Since people like me are defacto punished FOR NOT HAVING ONE, because of how heavily they have come to rely on the things for making such value judgments, and when they find "OMG! He does not have one!" they go into paranoid mode, and refuse to hire you, even if you are a perfect gentleman.) but that is like pissing into the wind.

The matter of contention is still that the GOVERNMENT cannot punish you, not that you are free from the consequences of the speech-- which is exactly what was being discussed.