Other Random question of the day

No answers to yesterday's question. What a shame.

Random question of the day:

What's the dumbest thing you've done when you were a kid?
I got excited about going to my friend's house so out of impatience and excitement I put my giant unicorn stuffed animal at the end of my bed and jumped over it only to end up spraining my ankle like an idiot.
 
Both my faith and my own reason give me a rather negative view of superstitions as a whole. However, if people do believe in them, then who am I to stop them? It's their life... as long as it isn't hurting anybody else or even themselves significantly, I'm not getting involved.
I don't want to be judged on something as silly as a zodiac.
 
Funnily enough, when reading up on my Zodiac sign out of curiosity, and it just so happens to line up with pretty much every major characteristic of mine. Minus the crippling depression, but still, not far off.

I think there's always a grain of truth in superstition, even if that truth isnt relevant anymore - maybe some poor sap broke a mirror 500 years ago and suffered for seven years straight, or walked under a ladder and instantly died. I mean, they had to have come from somewhere. Even so, and I've said this about religion too, being of such and such superstition gives you no - and I mean Z e r o - justification to be a dick. I balance my beliefs in superstitions with being a decent human being, you can too.
 
I think it's dumb when it comes to modern people believing in them, but really interesting in historical/cultural contexts.

One thing that is pretty hilarious in Mount & Blade (medieval game) is this interaction with Artimmener (engineer guy) when you send out Katrin (peasant woman) to gather "right to rule" points, based on her identifying the "mark of kings" on your hand.

He objects and says:

"I understand that you've given leave to Katrin to spread some nonsense about marks on your hands. I just want to say that, as an educated man, I find it disturbing that you would resort to old women's superstitions to back your claim. Village women will believe one thing one day, another thing the next. Now a horoscope, properly cast by an astrologer at a royal university with a reputation to uphold, might tell you something worth knowing..."
 
Last edited:
Honestly, Elite: Dangerous is fairly chill if you know how to approach people. There's so few people who play Elite: Dangerous I feel like it's mutually understood that shooing people away with toxicity is the exact opposite of what the playerbase needs right now.

There's still meta snobs, but that's mostly for PVP and those guys are typically dicks regardless.
 
I honestly believe the hollow knight fandom isn't toxic... some people disagree simply because others will disprove their lore theories, but other than that, the fanbase is quite tame... then again, its not necessarily the most popular game either
 
I honestly believe the hollow knight fandom isn't toxic... some people disagree simply because others will disprove their lore theories, but other than that, the fanbase is quite tame... then again, its not necessarily the most popular game either
Hollow Knight has hit just shy of 3 million purchases.

I'd hardly call that not popular!

Still though, fantastic game. I'm starting a Steel Soul run after getting my ass whooped last time I tried.
 
Hollow Knight has hit just shy of 3 million purchases.

I'd hardly call that not popular!

Still though, fantastic game. I'm starting a Steel Soul run after getting my ass whooped last time I tried.
well you just don't hear much about it in comparison to these other super popular games

I've done one steel soul run, and failed pretty early on lol... i haven't done it since, rn im attempting the pantheons
 
Random question of the day:

What's the worst case of toxic gatekeeping you've ever witnessed in a fandom?
For the most part it's in a lot of niche fandoms, where the OG material is hard to get into. A lot of older fans will gatekeep people who got onto it because of the most popular thing in the fandom. It's stopped me from getting into several fandoms before
 
Only marginally more than when they are alive, in the sense that the whole point of accusing someone of something should be to help the victims, and it is scummy to accuse people for the mere purpose of dragging them through the mud, or profiting from the drama, in my opinion. So if someone is dead, it’s plain and simple less likely that anyone will be helped by such an accusation.

Other than that of course, it’s important regardless of the celebrity being dead or alive, that the evidence exists, and the person is being truthful in the accusation.
 
Could you clarify what you mean by “Mixed Opinion Media”? Do you mean mixed opinions about media or media where the media itself contains mixed opinions? Or something else entirely?
 
Could you clarify what you mean by “Mixed Opinion Media”? Do you mean mixed opinions about media or media where the media itself contains mixed opinions? Or something else entirely?
Well, by "Mixed opinion media" I mean a game like Zelda II: The Adventure of Link on NES. Some people love it, some people hate it. The same would probably go for games such as Sonic Unleashed or Sonic and the Black Knight, for example.
 
Well, by "Mixed opinion media" I mean a game like Zelda II: The Adventure of Link on NES. Some people love it, some people hate it. The same would probably go for games such as Sonic Unleashed or Sonic and the Black Knight, for example.

I see. Well, then I suppose the boring answer is “It depends”. There is no one singular reason that makes some media divisive among fanbases, it’s a very case by case kind of thing. Three of the major causes (which aggregate a lot inside them) would be

A) Making a large or otherwise significant (for the audience) change. People who are opposed to the specific change and people who dislike change in general will always be against it, while those who like the change are likely to defend it.
B) Touching on or incorporating divisive issues. Politics in general falls in this category, in taking a political stance a piece of media will generally earn the ire of and/or alienate the other side of the isle, as well as those who simply wanted it to remain apolitical.
C) Audience content vs Critic content, or Simple Fun vs Artistic Composition. For many it doesn’t really matter if something is formulaic so long as the formula still gets the adrenaline going, or still makes them fill sad, etc… While others may care more about the way things are made and look (perhaps can’t even help looking) at things more in depth. Just enjoying something doesn’t mean it’s good, nor does a dislike make it bad, but a confusion of the two can divide these two “camps”.
 
I would make an informed and thought-provoking comment here, however, it would appear that I am far too much of a cultural illiterate to comprehend what question is even asked.
 

Users who are viewing this thread

Back
Top