Please create an account to participate in the Slashdot moderation system


Forgot your password?

Comment Re:A more important question is... (Score 1) 193

Since my statement was not adults should stop playing games where the hero is prepubescent, but rather it was the question why are adults still playing with Pokemon?, what you could have done is try and convince me.

I'm almost certain you're trolling now. No one owes you an explanation of why they enjoy the hobbies they do, so why should they have to convince you of anything?

Comment Re:A more important question is... (Score 1) 193

You said that I set myself up as the arbiter of what's appropriate. (Which I didn't.)

I wrote that you have the right to ignore my opinion, since... I am not the arbiter of what's appropriate.

Congratulations, you can reguritate past events. Now, for your next challenge, can you form a coherent counterargument?

We can. Or you can ignore me, since... I am not the arbiter of what's appropriate. It's all the same to me, since my self-image is not wrapped up in ensuring that adults don't play Pokemon.

Yes, I certainly could ignore you, but I'm not going to do that. Instead I'm going to continue to press the issue since you suddenly very defensive and incapable of backing up your opinion with anything more substantial than more opinions and flimsy rhetoric. Or you could keep your opinions on Pokemon to yourself since no one asked for them and they're completely tangential to the original article.

Comment Re:A more important question is... (Score 1) 193

When I was young, I hated broccoli and squash. As I matured, I started liking them. Why? My tastes literally changed.

Since we're throwing around anecdotes, I liked lasagna when I was 6. I still like lasagna as an adult. No one's calling into question changing tastes. We're calling you out for declaring someone else's taste is wrong. You didn't say it outright, but your original post pretty heavily implied it.

Adults playing a game with a 10 year old protagonist is a creepy as old men staring at little girls.

I can't tell if you're deeply insecure or just an exquisite troll. Are you seriously going to equate adults playing video games with child protagonists to paedophilia? If you'd said "adults playing games with a 10 year old protagonist is as creepy as adults who watch My Little Pony", I might have been willing to let it slide as rhetoric. Instead you went and implied that anyone over the age of 18 (or whatever age you consider an adult) who plays a video game with a child protagonist is harbouring paedophilia tendencies.

Just to be clear, are you saying everyone who played and enjoyed Child of Light (with a female child protagonist), The Last of Us (that features a barely-pubescent Elle as a co-protagonist), or the The Legend of Zelda (Link is described as "a young lad") is a paedophile? If you want to make that argument, by all means, go for it. I'll hear you out and we can debate it like adults. But at least have the courage of your convictions and say it as a declarative.

Or, you know, you could not shit on someone else's hobbies in order to give yourself a sense of superiority.

Comment Re:A more important question is... (Score 1) 193

My opinion is my own, and I have the right to write it. Your opinion is your own, and you have the right to ignore it.

You seem to be implying that if I disagree with you, then I should just ignore you and move on. You're leaving out the part where we have the right to call each other's opinions into question. You posted something I found stupid. I responded. Now we have a short (and probably pointless) debate on the subject. That's what adults do.

Comment Re:A more important question is... (Score 1) 193

And what "other, more mature, interests" do you suggest Pokemon players pursue?
For the record, I don't play Pokemon and was never really that into it. I get irritated at folks who look down their noses at other folks' hobbies because it's "not something adults do". Who made you arbiter of what's appropriate?

Comment Re:If that's how Pokemon Int'l treats its fans... (Score 4, Informative) 193

The fan launched the GoFundMe page because the litigants are insisting on a lump-sum payment. From ArsTechnica "Jones even offered to pay the full $4,000 over the course of a year, but Pokémon's lawyers from the firm of Davis Wright Tremaine wouldn't budge on the deadline."

Comment Re:How long will the company stay up? (Score 1) 494

I looked up your claim, since you couldn't be bothered to cite a source for your quotation. Sure enough, the EPA has stated "the cars remain legal to drive and resell. Owners of cars of these models and years do not need to take any action at this time."

However, according to this letter from the EPA, emissios-control defeat devices are in violation of EPA regulations and VW further violated regulations by selling these vehicles. So yes, VW knowingly sold their customers defective vehicles that are illegal by EPA regulations. It's absolutely reasonable for consumers to get their full purchase price back, as making the VW emissions "switch" an always-on option significantly reduces the performance and fuel mileage of the vehicles, which was part of their selling point.

Comment Re:How long will the company stay up? (Score 1) 494

Um, yes, yes it is true, if the owner of the vehicle happens to live in a jurisdiction where emissions testing is a requirement for passing the state inspection. Either the owner has to move to somewhere that doesn't require an emissions test or sell the car at its depreciated value.

Comment Re:How long will the company stay up? (Score 1) 494

Of course it is. It's nothing more than a special case of the so-called lemon laws. If I buy a car off the lot, it loses half its value. However, if that car is later found to be defective, I'm entitled to full reimbursement of the original purchase price or a trade-in of equivalent value to the original purchase price from either the dealer or the manufacturer*. VW knowingly sold defective vehicles to their customers. There are consequences for one's actions.

*Lemon laws vary from state-to-state in the US, but this seems to be fairly standard for what I've read.

Comment Re:Segregation not the answer (Score 1) 449

The person I replied to (AmiMoJo) argued that women are disadvantaged by the presence of men but men aren't disadvantaged by the presence of women.Her argument implies that women are somehow inferior to men and thus need to be protected from them. It seems to fly smack in the face of the claim that the genders are equal in every way.

Luck, that's when preparation and opportunity meet. -- P.E. Trudeau