joats posted:

This video seems like the reviewers are on a pay roll from the developers.

Szcwczuk posted:

It's also sweeter then an entire bowl of sugar, It's fun when you're a kid but after a point you drink it after seeing it and instantly regret the whole idea.

Nation posted:

this is a doxx:

Meta-Mollusk posted:

Ugh... reminds me of the time as a kid when I bought a bottle of chocolate flavored soda. It was the grossest thing I've ever tasted and I don't think they sold those for very long. The label had a picture of a clown in it, which was fitting as I certainly felt like one for buying it.

Szcwczuk posted:

Please tell me there's somewhere I can read more poo poo like this.

Nation posted:

this is a doxx:

The Mantis posted:

i saw someone in these and i think they got doxxed
................


please advise

Szcwczuk posted:

Why would he post that on a loving comedy forum, god this place is hosed up.

Ayn Randi posted:

star citizen: the doxtor is in

Wulfling posted:

I'm out! Finally!

Szcwczuk posted:

I'm not trying to be lovely but why would you drop nearly a thousand bux on a video game? I mean I get it's a hobby and we all spend a poo poo load on it but that's a lot for one game.

What was the thought process?

was it all at once or over time?

What did you think the game would be all said and done?

What specifically drove you to a refund?

SneakyFrog posted:

never noticed it being pink but i totally agree with the rest.

Szcwczuk posted:

I'm not trying to be lovely but why would you drop nearly a thousand bux on a video game? I mean I get it's a hobby and we all spend a poo poo load on it but that's a lot for one game.
What was the thought process?

Szcwczuk posted:

was it all at once or over time?

Szcwczuk posted:

What did you think the game would be all said and done?

Szcwczuk posted:

What specifically drove you to a refund?

Wulfling posted:

I'm out! Finally!

Szcwczuk posted:

This thing was released recently for a limited time around here. It was supposed to be in celebration of a cookie, what it did for me was make me regret food for a while.

Omi-Polari posted:

Kinda. I doubt it's direct like that. Here's how it works:

Tech/gaming reporting and really trade reporting in general is all access-based. But more importantly Polygon is (I'm guessing) mostly VC funded. The VC types want to maximize views, which means the reporters are under a lot of stress to produce a lot of content quickly. This shouldn't be surprising to anyone.

Where it gets far more shady is when the VCs want to drive funding into *the industry,* which then produces content that brings ad revenue into the publications. It's a glorious self-licking lollipop and is not even about Star Citizen per se. It's just how trade rags and VC-funded blogs cover games, tech, model trains ... whatever. CIG doesn't have to pay any publications to give them good coverage, there's just lots of heavy disincentives to do otherwise.

Edit: Basically this is a recipe for a giant blob of hype for every conceivable thing spreading across the media industry.

What I don't understand is why Star Citizen fans feel aggrieved and oppressed by Derek Smart and The Escapist. For crying out loud, 99 percent of the coverage has been nothing but breathless hype. The company has scored $93+ million. They have media organizations with tens of millions of dollars in combined VC funding promoting the game. In terms of crowdfunding games, Star Citizen is commercially dominant over all of their competitors. It's not even close.

Keith Elwood posted:

gently caress you for doxxing me Derek. You're not a good person and deep down you know it. Bring the pain rear end in a top hat, if you come after me with lawyers I'll blow my brains out live on the internet. Then what?

Wulfling posted:

Wulfling posted:

I'm out! Finally!

joats posted:

Oh I understand the need to have good standings with developers, publishers, and other media sources. I am a fan of Giant Bomb's (a professional review site about video games) honest video coverage of gameplay in quick 30 minute segments. And I have read a bit about the repercussions and strange dealings with publishers and media outlets. However, what is being said in the video I have linked has no weight in sanity given towards what is coming out of their mouths. It might as well be as transparent as a GIF image of Chris Roberts throwing money around and yelling "talk about my game and we will give you more stuff". Especially since Giant Bomb has shown that speaking the truth, while upsetting to the developer, can be entertaining to the viewer. Honest opinions and media can still be successful but rare.

TheRoadbeer posted:

I just said I can't imagine any other reason. And based my assumption on that. It's how theories are formed, until presented with supporting or conflicting evidence, I just have that theory to go on.

But this has all been an interesting deflection from the fact that Derek doxed someone, SA provided the platform, and for some reason you want to dispute that.

non-cultist posted:

quote:

I just have that theory to go on.

Sure, and I said your theory is flawed because you're not supporting your assumption with any supporting evidence or facts. You're supporting your assumption with another assumption.

quote:

Derek doxed someone, SA provided the platform, and for some reason you want to dispute that.

Actually that's not what happened, aside from the fact that SA was the platform for the post (why you think I ever disputed that is confusing). Again, you're attempting to pass off your assumptious theories as fact. I stated that under the available definition of doxing, via Google & the dictionary (https://www.google.com/search?q=doxxing&ie=utf-8&oe=utf-8), what was posted by Derek failed to be as such because no maliciousness can be proven, using facts & evidence, behind his post.

You claimed that it was doxxing because "just because your information is out...Doesn't mean you doxx yourself if someone happens along it and puts the dots together" (https://www.reddit.com/r/DerekSmart/comments/3puh5y/retraction/cw9sp4e).

Using your subjective definition you came up with, you can certainly accuse Derek of doxxing. However what I used originally was a definition using neutral sources.

Anyway, even if we were to use your subjective definition then Derek's post is no more guilty of doxxing than this subreddit, r/shitdereksmartsays, and other similar subreddits you appear to be a regular on. This is, again using your personal definition, his personal information is being shared without his permission, let alone that for his wife & children.

So again, using your own previously stated personal definition of what doxxing is; can you provide proof that Derek Smart gave permission for his personal information to be posted (eg. his real name, employment, etc.) here?

TheRoadbeer posted:

You know, if you cant make your point in a couple short sentences, it's a lie.

That's a whole lot of spleuging you have going on there and I've entertained myself enough watching your mental gymnastics.

Derek doxed, SA provided the platform and you're deflecting to cover the tracks. Lulz, have a great evening.

duckfarts posted:

jfc

congrats on successfully bailing on part of your stupidity

e: i'm liking the number of duck avs on this page

Paladinus posted:

It's a rabbit.

Unfunny Poster posted:

Sure, and I said your theory is flawed because you're not supporting your assumption with any supporting evidence or facts. You're supporting your assumption with another assumption.


Actually that's not what happened, aside from the fact that SA was the platform for the post (why you think I ever disputed that is confusing). Again, you're attempting to pass off your assumptious theories as fact. I stated that under the available definition of doxing, via Google & the dictionary (https://www.google.com/search?q=doxxing&ie=utf-8&oe=utf-8), what was posted by Derek failed to be as such because no maliciousness can be proven, using facts & evidence, behind his post.

You claimed that it was doxxing because "just because your information is out...Doesn't mean you doxx yourself if someone happens along it and puts the dots together" (https://www.reddit.com/r/DerekSmart/comments/3puh5y/retraction/cw9sp4e).

Using your subjective definition you came up with, you can certainly accuse Derek of doxxing. However what I used originally was a definition using neutral sources.

Anyway, even if we were to use your subjective definition then Derek's post is no more guilty of doxxing than this subreddit, r/shitdereksmartsays, and other similar subreddits you appear to be a regular on. This is, again using your personal definition, his personal information is being shared without his permission, let alone that for his wife & children.

So again, using your own previously stated personal definition of what doxxing is; can you provide proof that Derek Smart gave permission for his personal information to be posted (eg. his real name, employment, etc.) here?

duckfarts posted:

it's a DUCK

Wulfling posted:

I'm out! Finally!

B_of_InfoRedux posted:

In other words "LALALALALALA, CAN'T HEAR YOU I AM RIGHT AND YOU'RE WRONG, LALALALALALA"

no_recall posted:

This is the best thread!

B_of_InfoRedux posted:

If mental gymnastics were in the Olympics this would have taken Silver at least.

TheRoadbeer posted:

Still nothing eh puddin? That's ok, I didn't expect much when you started covering your bullshit in multi paragraph spleuging. Come back when you come up with something, I'm sure it'll be adorable.

Nation posted:

a lot of people were young and very naive about the internet back then, poo poo a lot of ppl still had 56k

joats posted:

Congrats on not falling down the hole and wasting more money on promises to come.

Were there any delays, backpedals, better offers if you stick with them or was a painless release?

Wulfling posted:

They straight up tried to ignore me for ~11 days after they asked to confirm the details of the refund. On day 11, I sent them 4 messages, two of which outlined my beginning to go to amazon to charge back every single payment to RSI/CIG, which totaled more than the refund. They Processed it the next day, money went through two days later.

Chargebacks really get them in a panic and will do what ever you ask of them at that point.