Ouch. I had a very similar experience, but all I said was that sexual liberation doesn't mean that sexism is over. It all went downhill from there very fast, ending a week later with me being called a multitude of ableist and racial slurs by people who consider changing box art a threat to free speech.

I find this version preferable.

They DID do a somewhat upgraded version on the 3DS that looks good and plays quite well. If you've got access to a 3DS, I highly recommend it!

Trump is also currently being sued for raping a minor that's tied to the Epstein case.

"I've known Jeff for fifteen years. Terrific guy,'' Trump booms from a speakerphone. "He's a lot of fun to be with. It is even said that he likes beautiful women as much as I do, and many of them are on the younger side. No doubt about it -- Jeffrey enjoys his social life."

The Canadians, their servers just went up this weekend.

[Citation needed].

Stormfront doesn't count.

I'm not sure you understand what an ad-hominem is, since this doesn't qualify. You could potentially argue false equivalency, but I actually happen to agree with them, so eh.

Indeed, and that's been their strategy for a while now (selling consoles at a loss to start), but given that many computers still have difficulty doing 4K at a stable rate this would be one HELL of a cost to eat. I'm very curious as to what the technical load out ends up being when all is said and done.

Sure as hell not going to be for 4K gaming at any price point the average console player is going to spend. I'll be shocked if they can get decent 4K running for less than $800.

Lets not forget their removal of backwards compatibility for all the later models. If they wanted to pull out the hardware for it, that's fine, but even dropping the software support for it? Weak.

I'm a victim of this shitty comment.

Unless AmiMoJo is working this case, they're hardly trying to ensure that anyone is not given due process.

That applies nicely to the court system and the state. It's less applicable in tech forums home to a wide variety of people from varying nations and jurisdictions.

We're allowed to have an opinion on the matter. Based on available information, I think these accusations have merit.

I'd really like to see some numbers on how his (Bezos) wealth breaks down, so I'd prefer more than your word on the matter. Beyond that, much of what he owns isn't just land, but is also real estate (homes, apartments, offices, the like) as is shown in the first posted article.

While we're at it, it's interesting to note that much of what has Trump's name on it isn't actually something he owns. He's a big fan of licensing his name and having no other involvement beyond that, which gives the illusion that he owns more than he actually does. This article in particular has some interesting things to note- particularly the latest assessment by Forbes of Trump's net worth. Trump himself states his net worth (depending on the day and his mood) between 8.6 and 10 billion dollars when you include his "brand". The Forbes assessment actually says it should be 3.2 billion, which puts the "brand" component at up to 5.4 or even 6.8 billion dollars- a much larger portion of his wealth than his real estate holdings. Doubly so when in the same article, Trump says his brand is worth 4 billion. So, no, according to Trump himself and the other sources available, most of his wealth does not come from real estate, local businesses or casinos. It comes from his brand and licensing.

I also find the idea of only land and real estate holders having the ability to vote quite disturbing. I'm at a point in my life where I'm able to put time and effort into researching candidates and politics, but I don't have the money necessary to own real estate. I should not be prevented from having a say/having my voice heard just because I lack the funds to own something almost entirely irrelevant to most of the issues I care about. Since people who rent also don't own real estate, we'd lose many votes from the cities which would disenfranchise a great deal of minorities. Such a plan says that anyone poor, young, or not white, doesn't deserve a say in who represents them, even if they vastly outnumber the people who would be left with the vote.

Jeff Bezos is also a landowner. He's actually number 26 in the country, which seems to suggest he owns more than Trump.

The funny thing is that your point is essentially irrelevant. This isn't even about Reddit as an entity blocking anyone/anything, it's about users choosing to block people for whatever the reason might be.

Can this be used for people to ignore opposition and differing opinions? Yes- but by that token, so can "just not reading the post." Don't need a block feature built in for that. However, "not reading the post" isn't so useful when someone starts following and harassing you online. That's where the block feature starts to really shine.

In the hands of the users, the way the block tool will be used will be a reflection of Reddit's community, rather than the company of Reddit itself. A prime example of this is the upvote/downvote system. It can indeed be used as a method of saying what posts contribute to discussion and what do not- but many times it ends up being used as a "agree/disagree" button that ends up silencing anyone sufficiently with an opinion that is sufficiently unpopular. Sometimes this happens to trolls and bigots... other times to people who call out that same bigotry.

People love to complain about how Reddit is no longer an open platform for free speech... but with systems like that? It never was, despite what Reddit itself claimed.