139
you are viewing a single comment's thread
view the rest of the comments
view the rest of the comments
this post was submitted on 20 Feb 2024
139 points (94.3% liked)
Games
16365 readers
1002 users here now
Video game news oriented community. No NanoUFO is not a bot :)
Posts.
- News oriented content (general reviews, previews or retrospectives allowed).
- Broad discussion posts (preferably not only about a specific game).
- No humor/memes etc..
- No affiliate links
- No advertising.
- No clickbait, editorialized, sensational titles. State the game in question in the title. No all caps.
- No self promotion.
- No duplicate posts, newer post will be deleted unless there is more discussion in one of the posts.
- No politics.
Comments.
- No personal attacks.
- Obey instance rules.
- No low effort comments(one or two words, emoji etc..)
- Please use spoiler tags for spoilers.
My goal is just to have a community where people can go and see what new game news is out for the day and comment on it.
Other communities:
founded 1 year ago
MODERATORS
I’m not certain how what you said debates the other comment at all. Like I get that Chester will get more advanced or whatever, but allowing kernel level garbage is not ok to me. No matter the circumstances.
I mean there's no point in debating in the first place if you've just drawn your line in the sand and don't give a fuck about anything else
"I don't want to hand over compete kernel and administrative control of my PC just to play a game" seems like a pretty reasonable line to draw.
If you like it, feel free. But it still isn't particularly conducive to debate if it's just your own line in the sand and you don't particularly care what anyone else thinks.
The purpose of debate isn't necessarily to convince the person your debating against. It also helps sway others who might be party to the discussion. Just because I have a line in the sand re: turning over control of my computer doesn't mean I can't debate that point and offer my own reasons for taking that position, while someone contrary to that can explain theirs. Neither participant in the debate needs to budge in their position, but by both offering their reasoning it may be useful in persuading others to one of their sides.