You’re going to wonder why it’s so quiet when everyone’s blocked you, and you’re never going to figure out it’s you.

Even as you admit - you’re not giving anyone what they’re giving you, you’re making it ten times worse.

If this sub has mods this will be the last help you ever receive here. We will never speak again.

I’m not surprised. You did your worst immediately and learned approximately nothing. You escalated to a tantrum over getting what you asked for, alongside - again - gentle offhand criticism.

And you’re still doing edgelord bullshit like you really flexed on someone by calling them the n-word.

Nevermind the irony of your complete inability to wonder - were you called “prickly” on account of your own actions? Does your back-of-a-Big-Dogs-t-shirt philosophy apply to you?

… do you maybe think “prickly” means someone called you a prick?

Yes. You immature font of toxicity. I linked to a page specifically about how a short script, from scratch, can convince Linux you have a joystick attached. Is it a trivial turn-key solution? No. Does that justify the screeching slurs you’ve spat? Not at all, you fucking gremlin.

edit: Saw your contrary follow-up, doesn’t change anything. Be better in the first place. And I don’t mean your grammar.

deleted by creator

deleted by creator

You meet polite suggestions with the worst insults you know, after the bare minimum of searching about a niche issue.

You will not be missed here.

Child.

Fantastic. Gluing together Unicorn Engine and Wine has been on my to-do list for longer than I’d care to admit, so I’m thrilled someone else is tilting at this windmill.

Probably write your own driver, if you’re this prickly after a whole half-hour of searching.

“How to” is an explanation. “How do I” is a question.

30-year copyright, no exception.

Dead people don’t need incentives.

Blackwater, Facebook, Twitter.

They had.

Dull.

You forgot to say anything.

There are plainly websites where Simpsons porn is openly available. If it was as illegal as actual images of child abuse, I cannot imagine where you think they’re hosted. Secret wizards on the backside of the moon would still get raided by the FBI. In practice, that law’s inclusion of drawings is unenforceable nonsense, because - as I keep telling the idiot who I assure you I am still bickering with - drawings are not children.

Child rape is different from drawings.

Child rape is worse than drawings.

Any argument to the contrary, on any basis, no matter how dry, is kinda fucked up. Saying so, to him or to you, doesn’t mean I’ve engaged in some campaign to silence him, or prevent others from considering his position. It means I’ve judged his words on their merit and I expect he’s just an idiot.

I am not joking when I say this person has contradicted their own hair-splitting within one sentence. They will outright sneer as if I have imagined all claims of equivalence… in the same comment as insisting two wildly different problems are by-definition the same thing. Dude legitimately failed at argumentum ad nuh-uh. And I spotted this trajectory from the outset. Unless you feel I’ve tricked him into adopting this position, it was always right there in his mind, and that was in evidence.

At this point I’m legitimately worried about that guy failing Piaget metrics. Whatever diplomacy you want me to extend to people by default, it has been spent.

I don’t believe you’re physically capable of self-consistently stating what you think your point is. You’re somehow not equating these things you just said are defined as the same thing. You’re sneering as if noticing that definition - which you block-quoted - is some kind of delusion.

All while projecting emotion in a way that’s almost as ironic as your constant parroting of the phrase “reading comprehension.”

Is it difficult to use the internet without object permanence?

No possible definition of child sexual abuse can include drawings, no matter who writes it. That’s not what those words mean.

Drawings… aren’t children. It is literally that simple.

And if you think any of this is identically illegal to actual photos of child abuse - one, there’s a whole network of shamelessly public US-hosted sites for you to turn in and be a national hero, and two, you might be wholly incapable of remembering what you’re arguing. Whether you think these things are equivalent oscillates between letters.

What you’re asking for is what I’m very obviously doing, here. Again: “shutting someone out” does not mean the talking stops. I am almost pathologically inclined to continue bickering with someone, for the sake of a potential audience.

This ding-dong’s false equivalence is equally obvious. They’ve contradicted their contrary insistence within the same sentence as some of those insistences. Most recently they’ve blamed it on the laws where this study took place. Last I checked… Stanford is in California. American laws do not say diddly fuck about drawings of Bart Simpson’s dick. There’s public-facing sites where you could find one in a heartbeat. The FBI is not out a-hunting them. Their legal troubles will mostly come from the Walt Disney Corporation.

Not that any country’s laws could possibly make child… sexual abuse… materials… somehow include computer renderings of fictional characters.

If we want a polite and civil discourse, everyone needs to make an effort.

Why is that the highest goal?

The creeping demand for “civility” above all else is a detriment to conversational honesty. That doesn’t mean anything-goes. Screaming escalations and blatant trolling are not the same thing as identifying bullshit and saying ‘that’s bullshit.’ Saying so is not polite or civil, but surely it’s important. Rules saying otherwise have been a gift to bullshitters. Moderation never comes down hard and fast enough on their fallacies, abuse, and manipulation, compared to how mods pounce on direct call-outs. Even in language and tone that would scarcely raise eyebrows face-to-face. As if ‘do you still beat your wife’ is ambiguous, but ‘hey, get bent’ is inexcusable.

Long ago and far away, the point of reference was a cocktail party.

Most forums are not debate clubs, or kindergartens, or any other equivalent scenario where a quiet ‘what are you fucking talking about’ would get someone ejected. They’re indoor-voice banter. Constructive, ideally, and sober enough to side with well-spoken rationale over ingroup posturing… but somewhere that ‘here’s why you’re wrong, jackass’ will be judged on ‘why’ more than on ‘jackass.’

And sometimes the person you’re talking to is obviously drunk or stupid or both, but you can keep calmly telling them how they’re wrong about everything that comes out of their mouth. Debate is not what’s happening. Civility won’t help. But you can keep it reasonable, and frankly, that’s better.

“They’re up-front about the false equivalence,” says chronic clue-dodger.