SquirtleHermit

This sort of comes down to the classic debate of "Depth vs Quality of Life". To quote Steak Bently in his excellent video essay on Metal Gear Solid 4:

Depth of game play, to boil it down, is usually defined by the number of ways a player can approach any given scenario. More tools with more unique properties. More hardcore players tend to value depth more and consider additional depth to be generally how you measure improvement in game play.

But more casual players value ease of play and think additional depth and challenge at the cost of accessibility is more of a downgrade. Hence why the general public considers Bayonetta 2 a straight upgrade from Bayonetta 1, but the crazy combo junkies don't like it as much.

Morrowind's mechanics have a level of depth that vastly exceeds Skyrim's in almost every conceivable way, but is often referred to as "janky" and "clunky". Skyrim's mechanics are far more intuitive accessible, but is often referred to as "shallow as a puddle". Which of these you prefer will largely dictate which game you think has the "better" mechanics.

I've watched multi hour video essays that have failed to make this point so well. Morrowind truly was where the series peaked.

And now we find ourselves at the beginning of the meme.

Also, I find "people are greedy" to be an uncompelling reason to support a system that incentivizes greed and exploitation. If people bending a system to benefit themselves is a problem, then the system should be designed to be resistant to this, in a way that incentivizes promoting the common good. Or at the very least shouldn't encourage these problems.

Capitalism encourages these problems.

But it's also not like the person who runs the whatevers has to be beholden to shareholders and profits. They could instead be incentivized to prioritize the collective well being of the workers.

And for that matter, politicians and the bureaucracy also live in a system that incentivizes (to the tune of millions in bribes) them to prioritize the interests of businesses owners, and thusly shareholders and profits, at the cost of the common good. Which is a major reason they can't be trusted.

How much of a problem it is will vary by how much it impacts and upsets a customer. For you, sounds like it's not that big of an issue.

But the fact that they pulled out the "review bombing" exscuse means that it qualifies as a problem to a significant percentage of customers.

Neat! That certainly does explain a lot!

You're not wrong (cherry picking a little though), and I get that there is more nuance and some exceptions to the generalization. But there certainly is a lot of overlap between Slave Owning and Republican States. Enough that one would be justified in at least wondering if there was a correlation.

I dunno, I think it's a bit more clever and less desperate than that. The teacher knows the kids are saying it a lot. Getting them to even lightly associate it with their learning objectives will help at least some kids academically. Mnemonics are stronger when they are memorable and repeatable after all.

There is no way the teacher thinks this will make learning "cool". And the fact that co-opting it speeds up the process that skibidi will become "uncool" is probably just a fringe benefit to the teacher. Really, it's a masterclass in psychology, a win-win.

Somehow I think everyone missed your joke...

I did just that.... and now I spend the same amount of time browsing Lemmy on Firefox...

Though there was like 4 days where I cut down...

Hey, give me a little credit...

I've managed to misrepresent two sides of an argument in this one.