|
Fingers of Fury posted:ah right ad hominems and memes (critical thinking) truly the most refined art critics who don't deserve to be made fun of here on something awful where the internet is never mocked So let me get this straight you think the concept of critical thought is a meme?
|
#
?
Apr 3, 2014 20:51
|
|
|
|
| # ? Apr 18, 2024 03:01 |
|
|
MrMortisland posted:See also: Chris himself makes the problematic mistake of using "problematic" later in the episode. No one seems to be pissed at him. I guess Danielle used her Feminist Mind Control to insert Tumblr memes into his brain. Yeah, not a single mention of one of the guys using the word "problematic" later on in the episode. BUT NO IT'S SERIOUSLY NOT ABOUT DANIELLE.
|
|
#
?
Apr 3, 2014 21:00
|
|
|
There's a certain je ne sais quoi about Danielle...
|
|
#
?
Apr 3, 2014 21:01
|
|
|
Fingers of Fury posted:I believe that's what they call an ad hominem. I know you think you are funny and smart but you aren't, cheers bitch
|
|
#
?
Apr 3, 2014 21:07
|
|
|
Did the GAME_JAM thing go down after recording? Surprised that didn't get a mention on Idle Thumbs.
Lone Goat fucked around with this message at 21:15 on Apr 3, 2014 |
|
#
?
Apr 3, 2014 21:12
|
|
|
"Doug Tabacco @tabacco 5h Hey, if you register for the @idlethumbs forums just to complain about @Danielleri being a feminist, I’m going to ban you. FYI." Awesome tweet. Thumbs episodes contain loads of excellent and (for a video game podcast) thoughtful social commentary, but there's outrage when it's a woman, or *shock* a feminist. Danielle was awesome again , hope she becomes a regular. I particularly liked her sharing her approach to game reviewing a few weeks ago.
|
|
#
?
Apr 3, 2014 21:15
|
|
|
Zombies' Downfall posted:I know you think you are funny and smart but you aren't, cheers bitch wow, using gendered insults, that's pretty problematic imo
|
|
#
?
Apr 3, 2014 21:26
|
|
|
forbidden lesbian posted:wow, using gendered insults, that's pretty problematic imo dance for me puppets
|
|
#
?
Apr 3, 2014 21:29
|
|
|
Video game news and thoughtful social commentary. Now that is my jam.
|
|
#
?
Apr 3, 2014 21:31
|
|
|
No but seriously I'm gonna lock the thread for the weekend if all that's gonna come of this is "parade of trolling". \/\/\/ I kinda figured you were good, I meant dudes coming in here to be inflammatory and flee. claw game handjob fucked around with this message at 21:53 on Apr 3, 2014 |
|
#
?
Apr 3, 2014 21:34
|
|
|
I apologize for repeating what the other guy up there said about thoughtful social commentary in video game podcats, please do not close this thread.
|
|
#
?
Apr 3, 2014 21:49
|
|
|
Oh people were bitching in this thread about Danielle? What? She owns man and is one of the better parts of polygon.
|
|
#
?
Apr 3, 2014 21:53
|
|
|
Syrg Sapphire posted:No but seriously I'm gonna lock the thread for the weekend if all that's gonna come of this is "parade of trolling". this is a good idea and maybe just don't unlock it come Monday
|
|
#
?
Apr 3, 2014 21:53
|
|
|
*AHEM*  If anyone has thoughts about The Forrest of Fallen Giants that they want to share with Bonfireside Chat, please send them to us by Saturday at 11AM PST. We'll be joined by CJ from the excellent and fun Twin Humanities Podcast. https://www.duckfeed.tv/contact
|
|
#
?
Apr 3, 2014 22:24
|
|
|
Woffle posted:*AHEM* Stop shoving your stupid agenda down our throats by mostly talking about things that you're interested in, Gary.
|
|
#
?
Apr 3, 2014 23:02
|
|
|
Just trying to get it in before the thread gets locked because of video game men.
|
|
#
?
Apr 3, 2014 23:02
|
|
|
Maybe it was because I was working while listening but I lost the track of where the South Park conversation was going and after that it seemed to go on forever. Didn't really feel this week's episode and I've enjoyed Danielle's past appearances.
|
|
#
?
Apr 3, 2014 23:17
|
|
|
Syrg Sapphire posted:No but seriously I'm gonna lock the thread for the weekend if all that's gonna come of this is "parade of trolling". Please put a trigger warning in the thread title, thank you. Can't have anyone's feelings hurt about off handed tumblr jokes.
|
|
#
?
Apr 4, 2014 00:02
|
|
|
My car was problematic today, does that mean it hates men or whatever?
|
|
#
?
Apr 4, 2014 00:11
|
|
|
Woffle posted:Just trying to get it in before the thread gets locked because of video game men. Misandry!  Well I guess you lost one valuable customer Mr. Butterfield!  
|
|
#
?
Apr 4, 2014 02:10
|
|
|
I appreciate the long Idle Thumbs this week! Always makes the work day go faster. I thought it was funny that Chris described Eddie Murphy's comedy as being "raw" while not remembering that the special he watched was called Raw.
|
|
#
?
Apr 4, 2014 06:13
|
|
|
Are the Idle Thumbs guys going to PAX East? I'm guessing not, but a friend on Steam decided not to go and sold me his pass, and it'd be cool to say hello in person. Maybe pass off a dota donkey courier balloon or 12 to Jake so he can just fill up Sean's office/cubicle/work area when he's not around with giant inflated donkey balloons since nobody is ever going to buy all the stupid things before the heat death of the universe, so might as well do something amusing with them. Also, the episode was really good, and Danielle fit right in yet again. Any Thumbs episode without Jake is lesser for it, but it was still a great one, and the discussion on South Park was interesting. I nearly choked on a pear I was eating when they started talking about terrible and cliche lines and mentioned "how you holding up?"(if target is young, add a "kiddo"). It's so loving true and has been a slight pet peeve of mine, almost every single time someone is sitting down on like, a curb, or sidewalk, or whatever after a terrible event(house fire, witnessed a public murder, it's the post-apocalypse, etc) in any media, someone will walk over(often from behind them) and say that loving line. I really don't think it's a bad thing to go longer, since Idle Thumbs is on par with the Bombcast with the interesting stuff they talk about and level of comedic prowess, though both are better at different aspects. I highly doubt anyone would complain about a two-hour Idle Thumbs, unless you guys are specifically against it for some reason. Sometimes I get this feeling from the way you talk about stuff that one wrong move or one slightly uninteresting topic and THERE GOES THE NEIGHBORHOOD, EVERYONE LEFT or something. I'd love to hear more discussions on stuff, and a lot of topics are talked about in a different light thanks to the viewpoint of being game producers, which very few game podcasts involve. So more Thumbs is always good, I guess I'm saying? 
|
|
#
?
Apr 4, 2014 12:29
|
|
|
The Charlie Brown joke at the end of this week's VGHD made me giggle.
|
|
#
?
Apr 4, 2014 15:28
|
|
|
Woffle posted:*AHEM* Just wrote in, maybe went a bit long, but I really like this area. Looking forward to the cast  Edit: Jeez, sorry, I just realized I might have inadvertently mentioned something later in the game, now that I think about it. Ah well, I didn't go into any detail, but it probably still counts as a spoiler. Bummer! Hakkesshu fucked around with this message at 23:11 on Apr 4, 2014 |
|
#
?
Apr 4, 2014 15:40
|
|
|
Captain Invictus posted:Are the Idle Thumbs guys going to PAX East? I'm guessing not, but a friend on Steam decided not to go and sold me his pass, and it'd be cool to say hello in person. Maybe pass off a dota donkey courier balloon or 12 to Jake so he can just fill up Sean's office/cubicle/work area when he's not around with giant inflated donkey balloons since nobody is ever going to buy all the stupid things before the heat death of the universe, so might as well do something amusing with them. No thumbs at PAX east this year to my knowledge unless Nick's there for Telltale. I would love Dota balloons though, by whatever means.
|
|
#
?
Apr 4, 2014 18:23
|
|
|
weird bleep posted:I thought it was funny that Chris described Eddie Murphy's comedy as being "raw" while not remembering that the special he watched was called Raw. This got a chuckle out of me too. Also when I was trying to remember the other stand up special I made the same Delirious/Notorious mixup.
|
|
#
?
Apr 4, 2014 18:32
|
|
|
That episode should have been titled "Baboo Gazoo".
|
|
#
?
Apr 4, 2014 19:07
|
|
|
fruitpunch posted:I've actually been following you on twitter for a while, didn't know you were a goon though! I really enjoyed the first episode, the conversational tone is really good but doesn't feel unstructured, and you've a much better voice for hosting than 90% of people who host podcasts! Looking forward to seeing how it progresses. You're dead right about monthly releases not quite being enough. It was originally so that me and the guy editing it didn't go stock, staring mad trying to keep up with the recordings and playing the sodding games. Also, you know, doing comedy, work, videogame comedy and all that bollocks. Anyway, because we hate ourselves, we've decided to release fortnightly (every two weeks for you awful colonials). Really glad that people have enjoyed it, though! The next episode is a lot less loose - Steve and I really focus on what we're actually supposed to be doing, and the second guest is Helen Lewis - a very smart lady who edits the New Statesman. We have a lovely chat about things that are PROBLEMATIC, so I'm sure this thread will loving love it. Oh! We're now (finally) on iTunes! Please subscribe! That would be lovely: https://itunes.apple.com/gb/podcast/the-game-that-got-away/id849984650?mt=2 I'd have posted this earlier rather than abandoning the thread, but I sort of fell down a flight of stairs and fractured my skull so I've spent a week in hospital. Good times.
|
|
#
?
Apr 5, 2014 13:15
|
|
|
Fantastic idle thumbs episode, I really enjoyed it. I have just been browsing here as well http://www.objectivegamereviews.com/counterstrike-go-review/
|
|
#
?
Apr 5, 2014 14:02
|
|
|
I enjoyed the last Idle Thumbs podcast, but the conversation on media literacy was a little disconcerting. Needing some level of subjective "understanding" to responsibly enjoy media just makes me immediately jump to conclusions of censorship. I understand that the crew weren't advocating that at all, but the conversation did come off a bit elitist to me. The Archie Bunker question is an interesting concept, but I'm of the belief that people who identify with characters or ideals contrary to the intent of the authors would find validation one way or the other. At least the media exists to possibly change the mind of some who haven't put much thought in their belief systems already. The die hards aren't likely to change their opinions due to a tv show or a video game anyway. If the author feels like his work is detrimental to message they are trying to convey, they are free to walk away from it, just as Dave Chappelle did.
|
|
#
?
Apr 6, 2014 00:42
|
|
|
Optimus Subprime posted:I enjoyed the last Idle Thumbs podcast, but the conversation on media literacy was a little disconcerting. Needing some level of subjective "understanding" to responsibly enjoy media just makes me immediately jump to conclusions of censorship. I understand that the crew weren't advocating that at all, but the conversation did come off a bit elitist to me. The Archie Bunker question is an interesting concept, but I'm of the belief that people who identify with characters or ideals contrary to the intent of the authors would find validation one way or the other. At least the media exists to possibly change the mind of some who haven't put much thought in their belief systems already. The die hards aren't likely to change their opinions due to a tv show or a video game anyway. If the author feels like his work is detrimental to message they are trying to convey, they are free to walk away from it, just as Dave Chappelle did. I listened to the latest Thumbs ep the other day, and I'm surprised about the disproportional amount of heat Danielle Riendeau received for not being 100% on-board the "South Park is hilarious" train. I thought that the discussion about media literacy was pretty spot on because a lot of people don't know the sausage-esque making process that content creators go through to make consumable media. These are somewhat extreme examples, but there is a definitely nonzero number of people out there who think that Stephen Colbert is not putting on a schtick and there is a website dedicated solely to people taking Onion stories as being literal.
|
|
#
?
Apr 6, 2014 00:55
|
|
|
Phone posted:I listened to the latest Thumbs ep the other day, and I'm surprised about the disproportional amount of heat Danielle Riendeau received for not being 100% on-board the "South Park is hilarious" train. I thought that the discussion about media literacy was pretty spot on because a lot of people don't know the sausage-esque making process that content creators go through to make consumable media. I have absolutely no problem with a person not finding South Park or any edgy media funny, I haven't even played the game. What I have an issue with is the idea that it requires some level education or perspective to get the meaning of something "correctly". When a artist puts a piece of work out into the public space, it is at the mercy of the audience to how they interpret it. That's a personal thing, and the macro reaction to it is but a reflection of all these personal reactions, some of which the artist may have never expected due to their own personal perspective/biases. I believe that the audiences reaction to art is just as important, if not more important, than the artist's original intent as it reveals societal characteristics and trends of the time. Phone posted:These are somewhat extreme examples, but there is a definitely nonzero number of people out there who think that Stephen Colbert is not putting on a schtick and there is a website dedicated solely to people taking Onion stories as being literal. That's more a symptom of the spectrum of society than a inherent problem of it though. Those people existed prior to the work, and would still exist regardless of its release.
|
|
#
?
Apr 6, 2014 02:05
|
|
|
Optimus Subprime posted:I have absolutely no problem with a person not finding South Park or any edgy media funny, I haven't even played the game. What I have an issue with is the idea that it requires some level education or perspective to get the meaning of something "correctly". When a artist puts a piece of work out into the public space, it is at the mercy of the audience to how they interpret it. That's a personal thing, and the macro reaction to it is but a reflection of all these personal reactions, some of which the artist may have never expected due to their own personal perspective/biases. I believe that the audiences reaction to art is just as important, if not more important, than the artist's original intent as it reveals societal characteristics and trends of the time. I think the concern is more that South Park can, for example, teach schoolkids to use "Jew" as an actual nonironic insult. I don't buy that this doesn't happen, because South Park came out when I was in middle school and kids absolutely absorbed a lot of the surface level parts of that show without thinking critically about it, because the show is entirely watchable as simply a hilarious offensive thing. It's not a matter of people being "correct" or "incorrect"; there's lots of media that can be unpacked at a super deep level, and also can be enjoyed at a surface level, and who cares. But there's also some media that can very easily advance attitudes and speech that, in all likelihood, it does not intend to literally advocate, and I think it's entirely reasonably to bring that up as a matter for discussion and criticism without calling for censorship or elitism. No media is off-limits to criticism, and there are lots of reasons to criticize things.
|
|
#
?
Apr 6, 2014 06:25
|
|
|
Chris Remo posted:I think the concern is more that South Park can, for example, teach schoolkids to use "Jew" as an actual nonironic insult. I don't buy that this doesn't happen, because South Park came out when I was in middle school and kids absolutely absorbed a lot of the surface level parts of that show without thinking critically about it, because the show is entirely watchable as simply a hilarious offensive thing. It's not a matter of people being "correct" or "incorrect"; there's lots of media that can be unpacked at a super deep level, and also can be enjoyed at a surface level, and who cares. But there's also some media that can very easily advance attitudes and speech that, in all likelihood, it does not intend to literally advocate, and I think it's entirely reasonably to bring that up as a matter for discussion and criticism without calling for censorship or elitism. No media is off-limits to criticism, and there are lots of reasons to criticize things. Chris, I literally just saw an episode of South Park that suggested that people can and should use the word human being as a general pejorative because it's a totally cool and fun word to say as long as you're not specifically calling gay people faggots (unless they're acting like faggots of course).
|
|
#
?
Apr 6, 2014 06:59
|
|
|
Al! posted:Chris, I literally just saw an episode of South Park that suggested that people can and should use the word human being as a general pejorative because it's a totally cool and fun word to say as long as you're not specifically calling gay people faggots (unless they're acting like faggots of course). I think the message that episode sends is more "society can define and redefine the meaning and connotation words have" moreso than "GO AROUND YELLING 'human being' BECAUSE IT'S OKAY!" It involves the use of that word, but it's not literally about that. (I think that episode is kinda gross and disagree with its takeaway, but. Whatever.) sleepwalkers fucked around with this message at 03:04 on Apr 7, 2014 |
|
#
?
Apr 7, 2014 03:02
|
|
|
sleepwalkers posted:I think the message that episode sends is more "society can define and redefine the meaning and connotation words have" moreso than "GO AROUND YELLING 'human being' BECAUSE IT'S OKAY!" So I haven't seen this episode but I think the point here is that it's SUPER EASY to confuse the intended message in a case like this. Some works can be dense or difficult to understand, or have a deeper meaning that hides behind something purely enjoyable, but that's kind of different to the message of a work being able to be taken in two entirely different ways (possibly even opposing ways) without needing to reach very far.
|
|
#
?
Apr 7, 2014 06:13
|
|
|
I'd just like to bring up the possibility that South Park is actually awful and you're giving it way more credit than it deserves.
|
|
#
?
Apr 7, 2014 06:44
|
|
|
HMS Boromir posted:I'd just like to bring up the possibility that South Park is actually awful and you're giving it way more credit than it deserves. There's a pretty good likelihood of this.
|
|
#
?
Apr 7, 2014 06:55
|
|
|
It sounded like everybody involved hasn't seen a South Park episode from the last decade and failed to consider the possibility that the show got worse with time.
|
|
#
?
Apr 7, 2014 07:00
|
|
|
|
| # ? Apr 18, 2024 03:01 |
|
|
Chris Remo posted:So I haven't seen this episode but I think the point here is that it's SUPER EASY to confuse the intended message in a case like this. Some works can be dense or difficult to understand, or have a deeper meaning that hides behind something purely enjoyable, but that's kind of different to the message of a work being able to be taken in two entirely different ways (possibly even opposing ways) without needing to reach very far. There is no deeper meaning behind that episode(the episode in question being "The F Word"). The entire point of the episode is that "words only have power if you give them power(read: racial/ethic/sexual/gendered slurs)", and they make it blatantly obvious that that's the lesson to be learned, however ridiculous and insulting that lesson may be. As one of those f-words (I refuse to use that word, so I'm sorry if this bothers anyone), the episode has come up a few times in conversation since its airing, usually when a friend or family member says the titular word and I ask them why it's necessary that they use it. If the reason isn't because they're just homophobic, which has been the reason a few times, it's that they saw that episode and they "learned" that slurs don't have any real power. I'm also a bit surprised at the reaction to Riendeau's dislike of the series. She tried to explain why, but she was cut off a few words in, and the only thing I heard from her over the next ten minutes or so during the media literacy discussion was "mhmm" and "yeah". I'm curious how you feel about "Mr. Garrison's Fancy New Vagina". Astro Creep fucked around with this message at 07:10 on Apr 7, 2014 |
|
#
?
Apr 7, 2014 07:06
|
|
