So many people think board games are just not something they like. And if you ask them what they played before, it’s always any combination of Monopoly, Scrabble, Clue, Trivial Pursuit, Risk or the Game of Life.

If you look at the list of the top 20 best selling games of all time (https://moneyinc.com/highest-selling-board-games-of-all-time/), all of them are somewhere between terrible, bad and lower end of mediocre.

It shows that capitalism will market anything, even critique against capitalism.

It’s the board game equivalent of people buying Che Guevara T-shirts at Primark.

Tbh, these artist renditions are almost completely made up. They are made up, because the press won’t print a “We found a piece of bone shrapnel and we guess it might belong to a dinosaur”, but they totally will print a nice image of a dinosaur from Jurassic Park, no matter if it’s truthful or just purely made up.

Science is hard and getting proper science published in regular non-scientific press is even harder, unless you make crap up.

That’s why the fake “chocolate helps you loose weight” study made it into every newspaper front page in existence, while the reveal by the author that the study was faked was completely not covered at all. (He did that to expose how easy it is to get fake science published. He just didn’t expect how little anyone in media cared whether the science published is actually science.)

Real science is hard. Fake science is easy. Debunks and negative peer reviews are just not published. Hence, there’s a huge amount of garbage science floating around and hardly anyone disputes it. Because of blind, unquestioning, religious faith in science.

It’s still a winner-takes-it-all system, just on a lower scale. The UK has a similar system, but it still means that if you are living in a district/county/… with e.g. 70% of the people voting for party A, then your vote doesn’t count.

Ranked choice at least favours compromise candidates over extreme candidates, but it still discounts most of the votes. Same as with FPTP, a ranked choice system with districts mean that most votes won’t count and gerrymandering or accidental grouping of voters means that even a party with low popular votes can score much higher than they should.

Ranked choice is only good if the outcome of the vote can only be a single choice. E.g. “which of these 5 mutually exclusive proposals should be implemented” or “who should be the one singular person occupying office X”. And for these choices, having districts can actually cause even more harm than good, as seen e.g. in the USA.

If you can have a system where a plurality can be in government and where every seat in parliament actually matters, than ranked choice is just as bad as FPTP.

For example, have a look at the 2025 elections in Australia:

(Source: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/2025_Australian_House_of_Representatives_election)

In the primary vote, Labour and Coalition were almost head-to-head (<3% difference). In two-party preferred vote, the difference was bigger, but still not a lot (55% vs 45%). But Labour got more than twice as many seats as Coalition.

That’s massively skewed. Even though the difference is tiny, Labour got almost a 2/3 supermajority.

In a more proportional system, Labour would have had to form a coalition, potentially even with two other parties if they wanted to avoid a coalition with the Liberal National Coalition. But here they are really close to being able to push through constitutional changes without help from another party.

I get what you are saying, but also it’s much more difficult to park a Cunt or Taint van in front of the white house than a Taco one.

Oh, totally, no dispute there.

As Legaleagle put it in their most recent video: At that point it becomes logical to resist arrest, to run or to fight.

There’s a website (can’t be bothered to google it right now), where they reconstruct modern-day animals from their bones as if they were dinosaurs. It’s ridiculous.

That’s why I think that most of paleontology is just speculative nonsense. You get these nice pictures of dinosaurs in their natural habitat, then you read the paper and it turns out, all they have of that dinosaur is an imprint of half a knuckle bone.

Astronomy is similar. You get pretty images of exoplanets with clouds, continents and oceans, and then you read the paper and all they had was periodic flickering of a star when the planet orbits in between the star and us.

At that rate, they could just also invent a space faring dinosaur civilization from the same fragments of information and it would be just as grounded in reality.

“Trump always chickens out”.

Loss is the lamest, most boring joke around. Anyone still posting loss memes deserves an “ok boomer” by now.

Loss must be the lamest meme around. It wasn’t great in the beginning and it only went downhill from there.

Anyone still posting loss jokes deserves an “OK boomer” by now.

Statistically, there are more than enough people who voted for Biden and then for Trump 2.

Yes, that was what I was going for. The really big issue with FPTP systems, especially hard ones like the US is that they create two-party systems which are incredibly undemocratic.

Third parties just can’t exist, because they split the vote for your side, so the only choice you have if you are unhappy with your party is to not vote or vote for the other party, and all that does is benefit that other party you’d be even more unhappy with.

You know, kinda like one might think Harris isn’t left enough, so they end up helping Trump to power.

But what’s even worse is that the elected president only ever represents close to 50% of the population, and he’s close to all-mighty and can do whatever he wants without anyone really checking him.

In better systems coalitions between major parties form, and they represent a much bigger slice of the population, and they keep each other in check, having to compromise to not risk blowing up the coalition. And better systems also have a stronger and more living constitution. One that gets updated more frequently, and that has to be updated more frequently because it includes more details. Since constitutional changes then require a larger supermajority (e.g. 2/3 or 3/4), the governing coalition needs to take the needs of the opposition into account as well, because they need their votes when a constitutional change is required.

For example, the US has had 27 constitutional amendments (10 of which happened within a year of the constitution being created, they were basically 0-day-patches) over the last 236 years.

Austria has had about twice as many within the last 70 years.

I got way too many versions of Monopoly gifted over the years and all of them ended up on our local second hand app.

I don’t know why you’d gift anyone Monopoly. I mean, everyone who wanted to have a copy already has one, but apparently people with no creativity still gift them.

Well, it’s marketed to the same people who think that a Cybertruck is an offroad vehicle.

You seem to have a very narrow and incorrect definition of the word faith, that you place so much faith in, that you don’t even seem to want to look it up in a dictionary.

Your faith in your definition of the word faith goes so far, that you just repeat your incorrect definition and completely shut out any reasoning or any sources that might say otherwise.

The evidence says something else, but your faith in your definition of that word makes it impossible for you to consider any other option.

I think your perception might be 10 years off.

Assassins Creed 1 came out in 2007, less than 20 years ago. It was mindbogglingly fresh and innovative back then. An open world where you can’t just run anywhere you want, but also climb anywhere? And your character dynamically climbed up walls, finding places to hold onto everywhere? That was amazing back then. It was the first game that even attempted anything like that, and it was really, really good. AC only became lame when they started doing the same over and over again with little change.

Similar story with Far Cry. FC1 came out in 2004, only FC2 was also released in that decade (2008). Both FC1 and FC2 were doing something new, fresh and genre-defining. Looking back from now, yes, these games look like everything else that followed it, but because these games defined it.

But in this decade we saw a lot of other genre-defining games, like Warcraft 3 (2002/2003), WoW (2004), KOTOR (2003), Bioshock (2007), Crysis (2007), Fable (2004), Batman: Arkham Asylum (2009), Portal (2007) and also a lot of AAA flops that happened due to too much experimentation and shooting for the stars, like Spore (2008).

And most of the games I listed above don’t have a piss filter.

You will find that everyone who has faith claims to have a good reason to believe in it.

Faith is trust is believing in something without definitive proof. If you have proof, you don’t trust, you know.

That’s just nuts.

Ranked choice is nice, but why not just have an actually democratic system with coalitions? No need for a single winner.

That guy is saying it: https://lemmy.world/post/31562244/17770374

(Or actually, they are saying Harris is worse.)

I have heard the same stance often enough to definitely be able to say, “no one ever says that” is not correct. There are more than enough idiots who do say that.