emuthreat

@BeefBacon When we are having a discussion about the recent and very prevalent rise in identity politics, specifically the rise of white nationalist ideals and groups in mainstream discussion, dragging black nationalists into the argument is a red herring at best, and thinly veiled racism at worst. I'm talking about a growing movement of people with dangerous ideas, emboldened by irresponsible leadership, and you give me a throwback to a fringe group who hasn't made any headlines for decades. White people are not being systematically abused. They are the system. I've been well-aware of dog whistle politics for years as a means of subtle identification of fellow racists. Such as when discussing the minimum wage and how it has stagnated with respect to both productivity and cost of living, someone starts complaining about the few people abusing welfare. Reagan's campaign against welfare queens, and George H.W. Bush benefiting from the Willie Horton fear tactics are good examples. These were both subversive tactics to use subtle racial stereotyping to instill fear into white voters and coerce them into avoiding more liberal candidates. Trump himself made his political debut back in the 1980's by paying for full page advertisements asking for the death penalty for the Central Park Five, a group of boys who were railroaded for a sexual assault on a jogger, and later exonerated after a confession was confirmed by DNA evidence. Trump maintained his belief in their guilt even through his presidential campaign, persisting in his belief that their convictions should never have been vacated. Trump has been through federal court for discriminating against black tenants in his New York residential properties. Donald Trump was one of the most prominent and staunch supporters of the Obama birther movement, which argued that his place of birth would exclude him from the presidency; ignorant to the fact that having been born to one US citizen makes anyone a natural born citizen regardless of the location one is born. In fact, you can see the moment when Donald Trump decided he was going to be president as he was being roasted by Obama at the White House Correspondents' Dinner in 2011. The election of Trump and his repeated failings to condemn or even acknowledge racial discrimination and prejudices, has emboldened a group of people who have silently simmered in hate for decades; previously only displaying Confederate flags within the privacy of their own homes, they now have the courage to fly them proudly from the backs of their pickup trucks. The problem at hand is the rise of white nationalism in the open. If you have been reading the news lately, the problem is not groups of black nationalists trying to advance their ideals at the expense of others. In fact, the black nationalist movement as I had known it to exist in the past was a call to voluntarily segregate themselves from European culture and regain a mode of self-sufficiency and self-determination. Regarding the BLM movement, most white people should actually support their cause, because their issue is with the consequences of having poorly trained, militarized police force that uses absolute authoritarian tactics to abuse the public for largely victimless crimes. This is not a black problem, or a white, or a hispanic problem, it is a human problem. Kelly Thomas and James Boyd are particularly stark examples of how little regard police can have for human life when their absolute authority is not met with immediate and unconditional submission. I talk about this at times with white conservatives who are not overt racists, and many of them feel that it is worth spending 5 times as much money and energy punishing people for doing even the tiniest thing wrong, than it would be to spend a fraction of the resources helping them along to doing something better with themselves. There is a latent desire within the human psyche to find people to label as 'others' and determine that they are wrong, so they can righteously do harm to those people. This is the danger of the rise of white nationalism. That a group may come to power and use legally sanctioned tactics to marginalize and abuse their political adversaries. Just look at the war on drugs. I have read the transcripts of Nixon's recorded conversations that strongly suggest that his decision to ignore the Shafer Commission Report on Marihuana was so he could exploit the existing habits of his political enemies to imprison, disrupt, and politically marginalize them; specifically the blacks, hippies, and those intellectual Jews (whom he claimed to all be psychologists in one particularly bizzarre rant). The rise of white nationalism will not serve to remove these artificial barriers to success for portions of the population, but rather burden us all with more law enforcement and prison infrastructure expenses, in addition to collateral damage from overzealous enforcement. You might want to refer to OP, and the original source material for context. Trump was being lampooned for blaming many sides, many, many sides; when it was obviously a group of Nazis and WN who flocked to a town to cause trouble. Germany doesn't seem to have any problem determining that there is an appropriate place to decide free speech has its limits. But then again, those who avoided violence during the 1930s were overpowered and pushed out of the discussion. To say that nothing was ever solved through violence ignores volumes of human history. You cannot fight systematic abuse by cooperating with the system. You cannot change a corrupt and hostile system from the outside, nor will you be allowed inside to make changes if you are identified as an enemy of the system. As ugly as it can be, the pacifists will all to often be the ones overrun and marginalized. I am not advocating for violence, but I do understand that if those afflicted are too far separated from the institutions of change, the only practical solution is to tear down some walls. Maybe I just have too much old rascal blood in me, but some things belong at the bottom of the harbor. I would include Nazi ideals and White Nationalist movements among the top of that list. By condemning Antifa and avoiding addressing the "white problem," you are making the same mistake as Trump did to inspire the satirical video. Sorry for the wall of text. I feel that this is a very real and pressing issue that absolutely needs to be understood and dealt with before history repeats itself.

Dude, you just played yourself. There is no such group of black nationalists. There are black people tired of being beaten and killed for no reason with no recourse. If you are unwilling to focus on the problem at hand, is it possible that you are the problem? If you don't understand the prison industrial complex and its role in the systematic discrimination and persecution of black Americans, perhaps it is time to recuse yourself. For many, it is a daily struggle for their lives and bodily integrity against state sanctioned police abuses. For decades people with racist attitudes have taken roles in police and government, and established policies of de facto systematic discrimination. Never before in my lifetime were these attitudes expressed so openly in the streets. I feel we are at the precipice of an unfortunate turn. Sometimes the bad people don't need to be smacked and made to see the error of their ways, they just have enough of a deterrent to feel the need to shut up and get out of the way.

I've been known to shake trees when desperate or in a hurry.

@BeefBacon In the modern age of globalism and regulatory capture, I think communism being a four letter trigger word is terribly myopic. But that's well beside the point. The reason that Antifa serves a necessary purpose in MY HOME COUNTRY, is that they serve to dilute the White Nationalists from standing unopposed in large numbers. There are so many people I see and speak with who are so politically ambivalent, that they will just take the path of least resistance and join whichever side appears to be winning. The legal aspects of this are important, because hate speech and incitement to violence are not protected speech, and the government should be intervening in the case that someone is caught on camera or in public saying things like down with jews. The idea here being that if the secret service would arrest someone for making the same statement with Trump's name substituted, then by the 14th Amendment, that same legal deterrent should be applied to white nationalists advocating against other races. In the case of Charlottesville, it was a group of organized white supremacists who descended on a town with torches to attack them for their decision by local government to remove a shrine to confederate ideals. At the same time that the alt-right is campaigning for states rights and local determination so they can marginalize "the others" in their own communities, they defy their own ideals by traveling to other people's homes to impose their way of thinking--which I hope most reasonable people could quickly identify as morally repugnant. Many of these confederate shrines where erected in the 1920's and '30's, during the days of Jim Crow laws and local governments infiltrated by the KKK, as a means to bolster and display their resistance to the idea that all humans are equal in the eyes of the law. The idea that people wish to improve the social climate in their towns by removing displays in commemoration of a movement which tried to rend this country in two over their refusal to stop enslaving other human beings is a perfectly reasonable decision on their part. How many IRA monuments do you have standing in Dublin? My guess would be zero... Again, getting back to the legal implications of protesters and conterprotesters showing up with batons and shields, there is a concept in the US of "mutual combat" between two consenting parties. I have tested this personally in my adolescent years when a group of friends would entertain ourselves by drinking and holding impromptu bare fisted boxing matches with each other in the streets. Invariably, the police would show up, and after discovering that we were all friends punching each other for fun, they would have little recourse than to tell us to keep the noise level down. As much as modern sensibilities have conditioned us to detest, abhor, and condemn violence, it is legally permissible in most states between consenting parties, to the extent of nullifying statues against assaults and battery. They do draw the line at what you might know as GBH. In this modern era where freedom of speech is being bastardized into freedom to hate, where federal laws against hatespeech and incitement are going ignored, and where emboldened white supremacists are taking to the streets , it is necessary that they be shown strong resistance. In the case of an impotent, apathetic, or corrupted government, sitting on their hands and refusing to enforce the laws of the land, it is both the duty and the right of good people to stand up and fight for what is right.

I absolutely LOATHE the abuse of fireplace kits for storage. I simply will not do it.

After two hours, you should be full kitted if you know what you are doing. Finding interactions is a matter of ingenuity on the part of the individual. Doing the same things over and over, expecting different results, is just spinning your wheels and repeating learned behaviors that are no longer viable. Lately, I have made friends with an English speaking member from a clan of Brazilian PvPers, and have negotiated with him to cook our steaks in exchange for easy re-gearing at our main base. NWAF is always poppin' on those BR servers...

Do we need to make a corollary to Godwin's law about broadly labeling people as communists? Nazism is easily condemned on the grounds that they seek to marginalize, subjugate, or exterminate entire classes of people based on race, religion or nationality. I find it unfair and morally questionable to label those who oppose them as communists. While communism has been an abject failure, the reasons for this are complex but nearly equally due to both the internal corruption by state officials, and economic pressures from capitalist interests that did not wish to compete against a means of production that would disrupt their ability to profit greatly from globalist trade practices; which often sought to establish monopolies or otherwise dominate markets to generate massive profits for the few in the ownership class, at the expense of the many who needed access to those resources to survive. Calling someone a communist because they violently oppose Nazism and white supremacy is not a constructive addition to any discussion on this topic. On the subject of physically opposing white nationalist and neo-Nazi supporters, there is a legal principle in the US known as "fighting words" which was established by the 1942 Supreme Court decision in the case of Chaplinski V. New Hampshire. It basically states that a person who is in public espousing ideas that a reasonable person would consider to be offensive may not find that their speech is legally protected; specifically, words that "inflict injury or tend to incite an immediate breach of the peace." In the case cited, it was a man speaking out against organized religion (or preaching about the JW refusal to salute the flag, depending on which account you read) who was removed to police headquarters for his own protection from the angry mob that he incited; after calling the city marshal a "God-damned racketeer" and "a damned fascist" en route, he was arrested for the use of offensive language in public. His claim was that the arrest was unlawful in that it violated his First Amendment right to free speech, as well as the Fourteenth Amendment's guarantee of equal protection under the law. It established the idea that protected speech only goes so far, before reasonable people would seek to physically disrupt your ability to continue speaking such things. One condition of this determination is whether the person's speech is necessary in the conveyance of ideas or functional in adding to the truth of the matter. To quote Justice Frank Murphy: "It has been well observed that such utterances are no essential part of any exposition of ideas, and are of such slight social value as a step to truth that any benefit that may be derived from them is clearly outweighed by the social interest in order and morality." I must also note that this incident was an apparent social defense of the institutions of Christian American Nationalism, so the foundation is built on the values of the Republican identity as expressed in modern times.. In other words, if one is literally asking to get punched in the mouth, the public may be reasonably permitted oblige them. Admittedly, this concept has not been very well tested, and people still get assault charges for responding violently to utterances that have no other purpose than to deeply offend the listener. But as for the ideas of Nazism and white supremacy, it seems well established which side of these issues that reasonable and just people would stand. We have fought wars over these ideas, both in the American Civil War, and the Second World War. The idea that one would use force to stop the furtherance of these movements is well supported by historical precedent. And after having seen the detriment to human life and society at large, I find myself hard-pressed to not advocate for shutting this shit down by the most direct possible means.

I would like to see double cargo pants, the ones convertable to shorts with extra cargo pockets below the knees and zippers midway around the legs. If it's anything like real life, most players would want to shoot you just for owning a pair. Also fanny packs, or bum bags, as the Brits call them to avoid sounding vulgar. This would go great as the civilian addition to a belt class of clothing/storage. One more thing I've always wanted to see was a burlap sack being usable as a sack. Simple enough; when held in hands, it could give 10 slots of storage in a 2x10 vertical block. Combine with a long stick to make a hobo bindle for 12 slots, storable in melee weapon slot. There are plenty of intuitive ways to add to civilian clothing options to negate the hotkey disadvantage. I guess it all depends on the new player. Now if only I could find that footage....

Somehow, I think the zombies were able to secretly suck out many peoples' brains before we ever knew they were a problem...

Deerstands around Nagornoe is always a good place to check.

So, I went for a swim out to prison island with my peeps recently. Somewhere along the way, I got the idea that digging for clams would be a bitchin'-ass dealie to add to the game. We already have shovels and hoes that would do pretty ok for this. I guess it would be cool if they could add a bucket, or just make burlap sacks capable of holding like 8 items or something. Now I wanna make some clam chowder in DayZ. farm some carrots, celery and potatoes; maybe chase around a cow with a bucket. LOL But seriously, add clams. I wanna come back and bitch about getting KOSed while digging for clams.

+1 for cranking up the settings first, and then turning down the usual suspects.

You've been around here a long time. I figured it was reasonable to assume that you understood how development of DayZ works by now. Really, that's it. You know about the new engine and scripting language, because I've seen you discussing it. We've known it was going to be a long process with unforseen delays ever since they scrapped the 2015 roadmap. So what's up with the whining about it taking too long? Did you forget pieces information that you already knew? Did something else change that I'm not aware of yet?

Given the case you have, I would say that a Corsair H75 would fit nicely on the rear fan opening in a pull-push intake configuration. You will need longer screws than stock to mount one fan outside the case, though. The rest of it seems like a no-brainer. Intel does better for performance on DayZ, but I'm not sure how much better Ryzen is than older AMD stuff. I have an FX 8370, and am only marginally happy with it. Really, I was just trying to squeeze more life out of my AM3+ motherboard. There are plenty of competitive options in about the same price range for what you are looking for. At this point, I'd recommend nothing less than a 1070, but the bitcoin bubble has driven up prices and put many good GPUs on backorder. Pick your card, and an acceptable price, and shop daily for deals until you get a hit on your desired card at an acceptable price.

The negativity is because of the dependably ignorant and vitriolic nature of the public in general. People want exactly what they think things should be, at the instant they decide to want it, and anyone who isn't helping them get it is the enemy. You could give away free hot dogs on the street, and people would undoubtedly complain that there is no mustard. People will buy into a timeshare, and show up unannounced, furious that someone is in THEIR condo when they decided they want to use it. A taxpaying voter will go to a City Council meeting and talk out of turn, yelling obscenities and calling the mayor a thief, and cry tyranny for being removed; after being told the issue was only caused by his own misunderstanding of a County Zoning Ordinance. Players will buy an Early Access game, and click the "I understand" button a hundred times before finding something they really dislike; then go on the internet and shit all over every website with DayZ in the results of their google search. People are stupid, people are impatient, people are needy, people are cruel, and people are emboldened by the anonymity and impersonal nature of communication on the internet. People, especially Americans, are quick to issue their judgments of every perceived slight of others' doing. Don't believe me? Just go read the comments on any news story about a tragedy involving a child. People from all over the world will flock to tell us all just how terrible those parents were, what exactly they should have done differently, and what terrible things should now be done to them in repayment for their recent tragic loss. It makes people feel good to "righteously" attack those who have done wrong, especially in the form of a good ol' bandwagon angry mob. The internet hate train is our fastest growing national pastime. Review-bombing a video game with a protracted development schedule is low on the list of shitty things people do over the internet; both in terms of importance, and impact. Maybe after things are more finished, many of them will have the courage to come back and say "I was wrong."

@blackberrygoo I've got two words for you: Technology Debt. Learn these words, understand what they mean. Stop shitposting about things that you should damn-well know by now. It's embarassing. We've known since 2016 that it was going to take a while to build a new engine. You're like that one guy who goes to a barbecue, and complains that the smoked briskit is taking too long. Oh shit, too many people showed up to the barbecue, instead being lame of giving them all hamburgers and hot dogs, they decide to roast a whole pig in a hole in the ground. It is going to take some time, and no amount of bitching will speed up what is already buried and cooking.

Forgot about a couple tents I placed for over three weeks. Just cam back to them a few days ago and they were still there.

I'm just gonna say that I hope you can pull this out of the fire; even after our last interaction. Take care Weyland.

Damn, dude, I wasn't trying to start anything. You could probably still consider me to be on your side somewhat sympathetic on a human level, even though I am very out of the loop on this issue. I've played your servers, met some of your people and seen the diligence in keeping them clean and running smoothly. Just trying to let you know, that aside from my great personal experiences with you and your servers, I've heard quite a bit otherwise; even to the point of getting cryptic warnings to stay away from that community after suggesting your servers to people who ask for a good place to play. As for the guy I sent your way: of course I only heard one side of the story, and have no way of verifying it either way. But that does nothing to change the perception of the situation, which can be functionally more consequential than the reality of the situation. As for the forums rules, I can tell you that I met Boneboys on not the greatest of terms after mentioning something related to your 10th paragraph. It's not explicitly in the rules, but it got me a two week vacation with not so much as a warning. I can see that you have been struggling to get this sorted out, and I can sympathize with the stress this must be causing you. But it sounds like this is a PR war, and appearances matter. Perception matters. In my opinion, some aspects of airing all this dirty laundry in public might serve contrary to your interests. That is just my perception of the situation from an outside point of view. Take it or leave it. Sorry for adding to your troubles, however incrementally. I'm not trying to dogpile on the side of the haters, just want you to be aware of appearances and how adding more public drama might not necessarily jive with the image you are trying to cultivate.

This sounds like a personal issue, or a political conflict. In either case it might pay to keep things a bit closer to the chest in this case. I've played on your servers, and had good interactions with you personally, especially concerning policing the servers for all manner of in-game fuckery. But there is a reputation that your servers are getting lately, which you might want to take control of; this type of thing doesn't necessarily help. I referred a player to your No. 2 server because he was looking for good RP. Two days later he messages me about how your admin was blasting him on FB using obscenities, because he left the group after deciding the server was not what he was expecting--finding more KOS than he was looking for. Just saying man, there are some things not right in that house. This much drama doesn't happen for no good reason. Getting banned from the official forums is not what I consider to be effective damage control. Best of luck to you.

Hold my beer.

It's mostly just a matter of whether those players create threads asking reasonable questions, or making wild accusations. If someone wants information, there are plenty of folks willing to give them direct answers to good questions. This largely depends on how someone approaches the situation. If you have a question about the quality or function of a product, you will likely get helpful information to resolve the issue. If you have a screaming rant about how the product is shit and the company is robbing you, you might not get very warm response. Refer back to the title of this thread to understand my point.

The false dichotomy was the assertion that there are only two ways to participate: casually interested and hyper-involved to the point of illness. There was a great exaggeration to the level of participation required between playing the game and having informed opinions, to his extreme scenario. It was suggested that the alternative to casual interest is criminal obsession; which is a ridiculous hyperbole. It's as if I were to say not caring to read up on a subject of interest was on the same level as book-burning. They are the most extreme opposites. "check and follow every status updates by devs, every single forum post and so on, and do it for 100 years till the game is developed." It's a bit facetious, I know; but it represents an all-or-nothing approach to informing oneself about development. As for voting and relevance to the weight of one's opinion: It is expected that one should take the first immediate steps to help oneself in a matter before a grievance can carry any meaning. In relation to DayZ, there are a number of people who never submitted a bug report after thousands of hours playing, but have very harsh criticisms of both the state of the game, and the manner in which it has progressed. Refusing to be bothered to give their feedback through the facilitated channels, does erode the credibility of the complaints; if you have the means to gripe, you have the means to help. Much in the same way that not reading the instructions can void a warranty, there is a minimum level of understanding required to make a valid complaint about pretty-much anything. Knowing where you are and what you are doing is a crucial first condition. Walking into a wine cellar and complaining that it is too dark and chilly, is a good example of such. Complaining that they should put in more lights and turn up the heat, is something I could safely call an objectively invalid opinion in that situation.

@Mantasisg Nice job creating a false dichotomy. What you say reminds me of people who complain about taxes, but have never voted. They can't have it both ways. Some folks like to learn all the songs by their favorite artist, others will memorize the statistics of athletes, some people have stamp collections. What all these have in common, is that if someone with limited relveant knowledge and experience shows-up talking trash and making uninformed claims, it is annoying. You may have noticed that the posts titled in the form a a question, with no presumption of laziness or cash grab accusations, usually get many concice and polite responses within a few hours. It's almost as if a person walking up and interjecting themselves into an ongoing conversation get different results based on their level of politeness and knowledge of the subject....weird.

Compassion for people too young to have developed reading comprehension and critical thinking skills seems appropriate. For people who are too lazy, stubborn or ignorant to bother learning what is going on, is a perhaps asking a bit too much; especially when by posting here, they have established that they have internet access, a specific interest in this game, and the skills to read and write. Something about a horse and water, yadda-yadda...