this post was submitted on 24 Sep 2023
733 points (90.4% liked)

Games

15794 readers
2145 users here now

Video game news oriented community. No NanoUFO is not a bot :)

Posts.

  1. News oriented content (general reviews, previews or retrospectives allowed).
  2. Broad discussion posts (preferably not only about a specific game).
  3. No humor/memes etc..
  4. No affiliate links
  5. No advertising.
  6. No clickbait, editorialized, sensational titles. State the game in question in the title. No all caps.
  7. No self promotion.
  8. No duplicate posts, newer post will be deleted unless there is more discussion in one of the posts.
  9. No politics.

Comments.

  1. No personal attacks.
  2. Obey instance rules.
  3. No low effort comments(one or two words, emoji etc..)
  4. Please use spoiler tags for spoilers.

My goal is just to have a community where people can go and see what new game news is out for the day and comment on it.

Other communities:

Beehaw.org gaming

Lemmy.ml gaming

lemmy.ca pcgaming

founded 1 year ago
MODERATORS
you are viewing a single comment's thread
view the rest of the comments
[–] Seasm0ke 6 points 9 months ago (8 children)

Its funny how you credit the invisible hand of free market forces to keep things fair but acknowledge everywhere else that the only thing that actually intervenes to promote fairness is the FTC as government regulatory body.

If we could drop the obvious bullshit romanticism of capitalism this would be a mostly accurate post.

[–] [email protected] -2 points 9 months ago (7 children)

Found the tankie lol

Unregulated capitalism doesn't work. I don't think anyone has ever seriously claimed that it does. The FTC isn't the only thing keeping the market fair, the free market does that on its own. When a company does a shitty thing, they lose customers and die. That's true in pretty much every market in the real world, except for a few problematic ones where there are bad actors trying to cheat the system.

[–] Imotali 4 points 9 months ago (5 children)

Anti-capitalist ≠ tankie

In fact Communist ≠ tankie

Tankies are specifically defenders of Marxist-Leninist communism and their one party state rule (which is ironically not communism, it's Stalinism which is a form of autocratic socialism)

[–] [email protected] -2 points 9 months ago (3 children)

Sure, but

  • Lemmy == Lots of tankies
  • Tankies == Anticapitalist

So I operate on the assumption that anticapitalist people on Lemmy are tankies. It's not true in all cases ofc, but without more info, I think that's a safe default.

That dude calling my post "bullshit romanticism of capitalism" gives a bit more confidence that they're a tankie with a strong case of grassphobia.

[–] Seasm0ke 1 points 9 months ago

Great example of oversimplification and reaching for conclusions that reinforce your bias. An effective way to shield yourself from valid criticism or any self reflection is to automatically discredit the person who brings it to your attention, whether its true or not is of little importance right?

[–] Imotali 1 points 9 months ago

Lemmy is not full of tankies, yours truly a communist.

And your post was free market romanticism.

[–] weeahnn 1 points 9 months ago (1 children)

Sure, but

  • Beer == Germans
  • Germans == Fascists

So I operate on the assumption that German people on Lemmy are Fascists. It’s not true in all cases ofc, but without more info, I think that’s a safe default.

And before you call my flawless reasoning stupid... I don't really have anything to say.

[–] [email protected] 0 points 9 months ago

logic error on line 2: Beer == Germans

Beer does not equate to Germans, rather Germans equate to Beer. If we fix that error, then it doesn't fit the original pattern:

  • Germans == Beer
  • Germans == Fascists

That would only work if Beer == Fascists, which of course is not true.

Also, wrong does not equal stupid, rather stupid equals wrong. Which is to say, you comment is wrong, but not necessarily stupid.

load more comments (1 replies)
load more comments (2 replies)
load more comments (2 replies)