I was inclined to think you were serious because, believe it or not, it's an argument I've heard before. Apart from random people trying to futz through an argument, Ben Shapiro complained that Democrats, when asked what they'd ban, didn't say "crime."
What is your point, exactly? Because maybe there's a misunderstanding here, because you seemed to make a pro-gun argument by forgetting that murder is, famously, a crime.
If that's the case, it would raise the question: do you think we should regulate gun ownership to lower the rate of gun violence, the same way that the penalties for murder are meant to lower the rate of homicide? Or do you think we shouldn't criminalize homicide, the same way people don't want to regulate gun ownership, because if it isn't 100% effective then it's not worth doing?
Yeah, what were you thinking, OP? Taking one piece of media and altering it to convey a different meaning, providing a humorous juxtaposition. Don't you know how memes work on the internet?! /s
For real, though. I haven't seen these complaints about image macros with the labels changed to make them about RPGs. And if they were... why are they on RPGMemes?
Granted, I'm already burnt out on 5e, but the idea of running it RAW is particularly unappetizing. Aside from shutting down a lot of creativity, a lot of the rules are straight-up busted or missing entirely.
I generally prefer playing with all die rolls out in the open, so this is a really handy way to still freak out the players every so often for no reason. :P
Yeah, that drove me absolutely up the wall. Russia's economy was liberalized after the fall of the Soviet Union, and China even invited Milton Goddamn Friedman to consult on their economic plans.
I got the same feeling a lot with Tucker, where he'd say something so specific and so contrary to reality, that there must have been a point to it. I think a part of it is to inoculate the audience against criticism, doubt, and introspection. You flip around, or simply bring up and immediately dismiss what's actually a strong argument against your position, so that people don't take it seriously when it comes up outside of the echo chamber.
I used to think I was low maintenance with dice, until I needed to buy emergency dice to run a game. The store didn't have the regular Chessex ones, but I'm not a brand loyalist, so I grabbed whatever.
The numbers weren't laid out properly. You know how opposite sides (apart from the d4, obviously) sum up to one more than the die size? I.e., opposite sides on a d6 add up to 7, and opposite sides of a d20 will add up to 21. They didn't do that. Bugged the hell out of me, and I still consider them cursed.
So yeah. Even though I'm not as particular about my dice as most players, but there are some dice I find unsettling and will not play with. :P
The entire impeachment theater is directed at low-information voters. People who will find out about the hearing and not bother to read or watch to find out it's a nothingburger, who won't read the accusations but just take it that there's a scandal, and who will throw their hands up and say "both sides are the same" because they're impeaching one another's presidents.
Sure, but I think this example also commingles labor with ownership (as is often the case).
Like you said, your plan involves building a four-family home. That's labor and worth fair remuneration. It's just that, in order to get that remuneration you'd be taking payment from tenants who build no equity for their money. Yeah, you'll have to renovate in 30 years, but you'd still have property and the money paid in rent while they don't.
A landlord can also simultaneously do valuable work supervising and managing a property. That's not mutually exclusive with profiting from ownership, and we can separate how we evaluate the two. It even comes up with billionaires: Bill Gates obviously did work worth payment as CEO of Microsoft, it's just not where he got most of his fortune. It can simultaneously be true that he's a talented guy who deserved to be paid, but most of his fortune came from exploitative business practices and profiting off of the labor of others.
Also, to be clear, there's a difference between structural and individual criticism. Obviously slumlords are pieces of shit, but there's a difference between that and someone who really does work as a property manager doing right by their tenants, or a family renting out a part of their home to make ends meet. I can think that landlords should be judged on an individual basis, while landlording as a thing shouldn't exist.
The same thing happens with intelligence. D&D characters often have superhuman abilities, so you've got to just do your best with the roleplaying, but let interpretation and die rolls fill in the gaps.
Yeah. I guess it will vary from instance to instance, but from my personal experience, viewing "All" on Lmemy isn't noticeably more political than /r/all. There's maybe less diversity in the stories, and more memes, but still. It's not bad.
Reddit has absolutely been way worse at times, by the way. When T_D was allowed to run roughshod over the front page, and spez bent over backwards to not ban them despite clearly being a nuisance and breaking the rules.
I was playing a monk, and we got engaged from afar by a hostile group, including archers. I got wrecked on the approach, and was downed multiple times.
...then after the fight, I realized I had Deflect Missles. :|
Ah, okay.
I was inclined to think you were serious because, believe it or not, it's an argument I've heard before. Apart from random people trying to futz through an argument, Ben Shapiro complained that Democrats, when asked what they'd ban, didn't say "crime."