CarnivorousCouch

I loved this one, too. Super weird story, but I was hooked. I didn't even object to what I sort of remember as a deus ex machina kind of ending. Seemed fittingly weird for the vibe.

I really wish this had been one for me, but I've never been able to make it more than halfway through despite a few good faith attempts. I am really glad you had a great time with it, though!

Agreed. I thought it was a competently made game, even if not groundbreaking or best in class for shooting. I think people's expectations are often their biggest obstacle to enjoyment.

Golly, it's just so hard to understand why, when actually faced with the prospect, people are so reluctant to start killing their neighbors and relatives!

Forgive my terrible phone doodle, but I think this is what's being suggested. Basically, you're groin-to-ass below, but above your chest is not pressed directly against the front partner's back. Instead, you position the lower arm so your forearm runs across their back, and wrap the upper arm over them in a half embrace.

It's a reaction to a storytelling choice; you'll know when you get there.

Edit: Just saw your other comment in here, and seems you got to the switch already. I share your opinion!

I agree with you. I think 2 is better than 1, and it's not close in my eyes. Audacious storytelling, but (IMO) they pulled it off really well.

You're talking about national elections, and I'm talking about presence in state and local elections. Candidates with a sustainable/viable chance nationally must first have an established local presence. That base builds credibility and sustainability for a movement, as others in the movement can also point towards local or state wins to justify their own candidacies.

I also happen to be familiar with my state Democratic party chairs. The idea that they could be systemically suppressing progressives in state or local elections would require a level of competence and political acumen I've never seen them demonstrate. They barely have control over their party, as is. I'm connected to the political world in my state both personally and professionally, and the concept of Democrats being able to exert this kind of control is actually laughable.

The bottom line is that you're mad that Democrats don't support your candidates, and Democrats are mad you don't support theirs. Both attitudes are unproductive. In the end, if either progressives or Democrats wants to pick up votes, they're going to need to actually persuade voters to show up and vote consistently, and not just in federal elections. This will include voters you don't necessarily like or fully agree with. You know who ran candidates in and voted for every single school board race? The damn Tea Party.

I appreciate the thoughtful response - I haven't noticed that trend specifically with BI, but have seen the general tendency you're describing in media at large. For this specific article, I find the concept of a dumb phone more intriguing than "Lifehack: Eat Gruel!" Type stuff -- see my other comment in this thread if you're curious about why -- but also did roll my eyes at the person who has three such devices for different purposes.

Thanks for elaborating!

People aren't going to like what you're saying, but there's an element of uncomfortable truth. Money and establishment power didn't let the neocons beat back the tea party movement. I desperately want solid progressives, but the ones who appear on my local ballot are either obviously unfit or don't garner enough votes from a "moderate" electorate. And I live in a rabidly "blue" area.

There is a hearts and minds campaign that progressives have continuously failed at, and blaming democratic elites solely for this failure is no more accurate than Democrats blaming progressives for their losses. Politics in a democracy is coalition-building, and we're apparently all failing together.

I agree with you in concept, but I think in practice people struggle with the self discipline, and that's kind of the fundamental problem with apps (and particularly algorithm-based social media). I've set timers to limit my usage of certain apps, including my Lemmy app, to encourage mindful use, but I can understand why someone might want or need more of an enforced limitation.

You might not replace your current phone with a "dumb" device, but when it's time to get a new device eventually, you could ask yourself if less-smart device might meet both your functional and other needs.

Edit: I guess to me this is kind of like: why are people overweight? They can just not eat as much. And while that's technically true - and advice I follow - it's apparently not that easy for everyone. If it was, we wouldn't see problems as pervasively as we do.