damnedfurry

joined 1 year ago
[–] damnedfurry@lemmy.world 8 points 9 hours ago (4 children)

Now that I think of it, in the DKC games, I don't recall anyone or anything being 'killed', enemies would just get knocked off the 2D plane you're on. They don't explode or vanish etc. like in SMB3 or ALttP.

[–] damnedfurry@lemmy.world 3 points 9 hours ago

Yeah, LAMF is the phenomenon of 'I voted for X to be done, but because I assumed it'd be done to others, not me'.

As in 'I voted for the Leopards Eating Faces party, but I didn't expect them to eat MY face!'

A politician not doing what they promised to do is not LAMF.

But, for example, voting for someone because they said they'll cut funding from wasteful government programs, and then complaining when funding is cut from a wasteful program that you were utilizing, is textbook LAMF.

[–] damnedfurry@lemmy.world 9 points 12 hours ago* (last edited 10 hours ago) (2 children)

This is literally the opposite of LAMF.

LAMF means supporting someone saying they'll do a thing, incorrectly assuming they'll do the thing only to others and not you(r [collective]), without the someone having explicitly stated such.

Then when the thing IS done to you (r collective]) as well, the LAMF is confirmed by them complaining that it was, or acting surprised that it was.

If you support someone when they promise to do something, then they DON'T do it, that's literally as far from LAMF as you can be.

[–] damnedfurry@lemmy.world 23 points 1 day ago* (last edited 1 day ago)

Don't know how accurate it is, but I've heard of even CSAM being inflated this way in police busts, where if there's a video that's X seconds long and has a framerate of Y frames per second, it will be described as X * Y "images" (so a 10-second 60 fps video is treated like it's the same thing as 600 photos) instead of plainly describing a video as being a video.

[–] damnedfurry@lemmy.world 1 points 1 day ago

storytelling

yeah, The Tale of the Terminally Online, lol

[–] damnedfurry@lemmy.world 6 points 2 days ago (2 children)

Anubis is so lightweight you'll forget it's there until you look at your hosting bill.

I don't know if they realize this is implying it's onerously expensive, lol.

[–] damnedfurry@lemmy.world 4 points 2 days ago

Was wondering why this sounded familiar, saw the article was from 7 years ago (2018) and now I understand, lol.

[–] damnedfurry@lemmy.world 1 points 2 days ago* (last edited 2 days ago)

When the fuck did Asmongold become the largest POLITICAL streamer?

He didn't, not even close—the OP just made that up to augment the ragebait level of their post, lol.

[–] damnedfurry@lemmy.world 1 points 2 days ago

and then goes on to say “why would you add people to your country that don’t speak the language” in English and not the native tongue of the tribe that the land was stolen from

The irony of this is that people who are hardline isolationist/against immigration use that having happened as fuel for their argument, because 'look what happened to the Native Americans when Europeans were able to immigrate en masse', and they argue that that's what'll happen to them if they allow immigration now.

[–] damnedfurry@lemmy.world 1 points 2 days ago

Yeah, the voice someone's born with is definitely what should be focused on, when it comes to criticism.

[–] damnedfurry@lemmy.world 2 points 2 days ago

I have watch history turned off anyway so I wonder how it’s deciding that I should watch these clips.

This is why, lol. Since his videos are generally popular on YouTube, if you have no watch history for your recommendations to be based on, it's just always going to feed you whatever's popular, which will include his stuff.

You're doing it to yourself, in other words. I actually have watched a couple videos of his in the past, and yet, because it's rare, I never see his videos being recommended to me. Hell, in my experience, stuff recommended to me is rarely similar to things I've seen more than a month or so ago.

[–] damnedfurry@lemmy.world 1 points 2 days ago (2 children)

No, anyone whose brain isn't addled by narrative-over-facts finds making up fake conversations to support a narrative extremely pathetic and cringeworthy. It stands to reason that if someone merits being criticized for acting a certain way, then you're able to use actual examples of them acting that way to make your point.

You likely only say what you did because you and the majority of your social circle are part of the above-described addled category.

view more: next ›