Commented 5 years ago2018-08-08 08:28:57 UTC
in journal: Mapping while nappingComment #101435
On a somewhat related note, this journal title led to me sitting here by myself saying "mnapping" over and over. It sounds like the human equivalent of any given video of animals making sound while eating.
@NineTnine: Doing plain ol' videos has crossed my mind, but having it live does have some advantages. Namely, it gets other people involved without having them take the time out to be explicit guests, it makes it more interactive, and it makes it more entertaining for me. Changing format into straight video would give more freedom to edit it down into a more palatable form, but... I'm not yet convinced it's worth it.
@JeffMOD: If size is an issue already, then that's a point in favour of cutting the length down a little bit. It would make it a little less of a process to get the recordings up, too.
@Archie + Instant Mix: I suppose I'm not against the idea of letting others take the reigns for a little while, provided someone was willing to put in that time. (If they were to use the same format and livery, that would take a little setting up.)
Honestly, I'm not looking to have this hiatus be a long one. If anything, it's an issue of communication. I do have enough time to do them, but without having set times that I can reliably do them at each week, there's two problems: One, without it being on a schedule, I'm likely to become a bit tardy and put it off (which is more a me-problem than anything else, so not really an actionable issue). Two, it's harder to make it clear that there is a stream before the stream happens.
When it's at the same time each week, people are able to know that and don't necessarily have to depend on, say, my shoutbox message 20-60 minutes before it happens. What I actually need is a more direct way of letting people know that a stream is 'bout to happen. If people can't watch (or don't want to), they can not watch, and that's fine. But if people can and do want to watch, they need a way to know that it's an option! And I'm not sure how I can make that happen.
(Also, as a side effect of all this, I'm not going to be able to do them at my usual relatively-timezone-friendly times of day. Unsure how that will affect things at this point.)
Commented 5 years ago2018-05-25 21:53:45 UTC
in journal: #8937Comment #44172
I guess it depends on what circles you run in, Pebs, because I’ve seen a lot of this garbage. Like, just a stupid amount. It’s amazing the amount of anti-woman sentiment being displayed around this thing.
From what I’ve seen, it can be divided into two camps: firstly, the it’s-not-historically-accurate camp, which... well, 1: From what I understand, it’s not historically inaccurate. Even just going off of the debates I keep seeing, about the only part of the war in which women were absent was the British frontline, which would be quite some minutia to get hung up on, since 2: As Urby grandly pointed out, Battlefield’s realism is skin-deep at best. To call it completely realistic would be to ignore vast amounts of what is going on in those games. 3: Pretending women weren’t a part of the war is some serious erasure of the part they played, and either takes some brazen ignorance or brazen sexism. It’s hard to tell the proportions of both.
The second camp are people who are just straight up angry that there’s women in their video games. Emphasis on their. The kind of folk who believe video games are made for people like them and thus don’t need to cater to any other group, and in turn feel whenever that representation rears its ugly head, the design team must have been forced or coerced by feminists or liberals or whatever. I don’t even know how someone gets into this kind of mindset. The design teams for games like this are huge and there’s no chance there’s no diversity in said teams. You can bet top dollar that a lot of those people fight tooth and nail for any kind of ideal representation in AAA works, since management knows that as soon as you start rocking the boat (which should be an exaggeration) people like this come out of the woodwork.
People who say there’s too many X in any given media - women, queer folk, etc - they don’t want one or two less. They want none.
Commented 6 years ago2018-01-10 11:01:47 UTC
in journal: #8898Comment #53039
Fixed the link. I’n quite sure I set the first one to not expire... You are aware that you wouldn’t need to buy anything for this arrangement? All you’d do is join via a code (which I would give everyone) through jackbox.tv.
Commented 6 years ago2018-01-09 06:22:40 UTC
in vault item: Unfinished Naval BossComment #21269
This is actually really neat. There's some wonderful entity work going on here, making it really feel like that brushwork is a living thing. I hope this got used at some point!
@JeffMOD: If size is an issue already, then that's a point in favour of cutting the length down a little bit. It would make it a little less of a process to get the recordings up, too.
@Archie + Instant Mix: I suppose I'm not against the idea of letting others take the reigns for a little while, provided someone was willing to put in that time. (If they were to use the same format and livery, that would take a little setting up.)
Honestly, I'm not looking to have this hiatus be a long one. If anything, it's an issue of communication. I do have enough time to do them, but without having set times that I can reliably do them at each week, there's two problems: One, without it being on a schedule, I'm likely to become a bit tardy and put it off (which is more a me-problem than anything else, so not really an actionable issue). Two, it's harder to make it clear that there is a stream before the stream happens.
When it's at the same time each week, people are able to know that and don't necessarily have to depend on, say, my shoutbox message 20-60 minutes before it happens. What I actually need is a more direct way of letting people know that a stream is 'bout to happen. If people can't watch (or don't want to), they can not watch, and that's fine. But if people can and do want to watch, they need a way to know that it's an option! And I'm not sure how I can make that happen.
(Also, as a side effect of all this, I'm not going to be able to do them at my usual relatively-timezone-friendly times of day. Unsure how that will affect things at this point.)
From what I’ve seen, it can be divided into two camps: firstly, the it’s-not-historically-accurate camp, which... well, 1: From what I understand, it’s not historically inaccurate. Even just going off of the debates I keep seeing, about the only part of the war in which women were absent was the British frontline, which would be quite some minutia to get hung up on, since 2: As Urby grandly pointed out, Battlefield’s realism is skin-deep at best. To call it completely realistic would be to ignore vast amounts of what is going on in those games. 3: Pretending women weren’t a part of the war is some serious erasure of the part they played, and either takes some brazen ignorance or brazen sexism. It’s hard to tell the proportions of both.
The second camp are people who are just straight up angry that there’s women in their video games. Emphasis on their. The kind of folk who believe video games are made for people like them and thus don’t need to cater to any other group, and in turn feel whenever that representation rears its ugly head, the design team must have been forced or coerced by feminists or liberals or whatever. I don’t even know how someone gets into this kind of mindset. The design teams for games like this are huge and there’s no chance there’s no diversity in said teams. You can bet top dollar that a lot of those people fight tooth and nail for any kind of ideal representation in AAA works, since management knows that as soon as you start rocking the boat (which should be an exaggeration) people like this come out of the woodwork.
People who say there’s too many X in any given media - women, queer folk, etc - they don’t want one or two less. They want none.
You are aware that you wouldn’t need to buy anything for this arrangement? All you’d do is join via a code (which I would give everyone) through jackbox.tv.
... That's not a good thing.