KombatWombat

Chess is an old game, and stalemate wasn't always considered a draw. At other times, creating a stalemate may have been considered a win or loss or partial win, or it may have been illegal altogether. But the modern draw makes sense if you keep in mind a few things. First, the victory condition is putting the opponent's king in checkmate (or accepting their concession). Second, exposing your king to an attack during your move is not just a blunder, it is actually an illegal move, to the point that you can't even do it as a pass through while castling. So stalemate is a unique outcome where neither player achieves their victory condition, yet the game cannot continue, since the player who must move next has no legal moves available.

In a practical sense, stalemate offers a means of giving a player in an inferior position a means of escaping a loss by punishing the dominant player for not being able to capitalize on their lead. It helps prevent someone from being able to brute force a win by making safe moves that do little to actually progress the game, like advancing all their pawns until the game is trivial. It's much less interesting to have the end game strategy be more about not losing one's lead rather than extending it.

So a win requires being more than slightly ahead of an opponent. It's worth pointing out that most high level chess games end in a draw where neither player has a sufficient lead to force a checkmate. There are other rules in modern chess that also force a draw to make sure the game is more about getting a win than just avoiding a loss. Otherwise there would be plenty of ways someone could stall forever to try to get their opponent to concede, and that's not very interesting.

Personally, I would consider making a public post about something on social media as an open invitation to talk about it in comments. It doesn't excuse being rude or anything, but if it was about an issue in my life that I was comfortable sharing, I would expect others to appreciate giving and receiving perspective if they didn't specify otherwise.

Not sure who would be demanding anything in this scenario. People choose to comment or not, including the OP. Everyone is communicating only as much as they feel comfortable doing, unless there's context I'm missing.

I think you give him too much credit. He just says what comes to his mind.

But Ada says they had been talking about it in that comment. They let her know they were thinking about migrating, and Ada supported their decision. Then someone from the 196 mod team let her know when they were working out things with LW. 196 mods did drop the announcement without giving Ada a head's up, which is definitely bad, but by that point she knew the migration was being organized.

This seems like a big overreaction to me, so I see it as a clear PTB. I dislike the idea of banning people based on history in other communities, other than to check if they are a bot or advertiser or something obviously malicious. Trolling could mean something as simple as being sarcastic, and glancing through OP's history they seem to be a real person who believes what they say, even if they can be quite rude about it.

But the upvote/downvote split suggests the community is more divided on this.

Its hardware is yet to be announced, yet is somehow already obsolete.

The Bazaar is a similar game releasing soon. It's still primarily focused on developing synergies between items in your build, but there's more varied events between pvp fights and configuring your pack is simpler because it's on a line rather than a grid, if that makes sense. It will be releasing as free to play probably in February or March.

Thank you for saying this. I'm a vegan and the only comment I've ever had removed on Lemmy is one pointing out that the official definition the vegan community uses is different than the one used by the historic coiners of the word, and by non-vegans, and probably by the majority of people that consider themselves vegan today.

For all the division the mod team creates with others on the platform, they make just as much within their own community. It's hard enough to convince people to give veganism a chance when you don't first have to distance yourself from those unwilling to engage with anyone below their moral high ground.

Harry is someone that already exists and has relationships in the world, usually those sorts or RPGs don't let you customize much. It's like Geralt or Link. But you do get to develop your personality more through dialogue.

As for the tie skill check, the rest of the game is better about saving skill checks for more difficult tasks. It's just there at the start to reinforce how much of a mess your character is. You can come back later when the negative modifiers clear and it's easier.

This is misinformation

Not to defend wanton personal data sharing but a major difference is that giving money away deprives someone of that money while copying data deprives them of nothing, or at least the downstream effects are much less felt. This comes up a lot in the ethics of piracy.