• Announcements

    • Ludicrously Desist

      Logging in   05/10/2017

      If you had an account and can't log in as of 5/9/17, this may be because of a change in logins with new forum software. You can log in using your publicly displayed name (not your username) or your email address and the password you used before.   If you have problems with this, please ask any of the mods or admins. 

Blink of Terraxia

Global Moderator
  • Content count

    14,038
  • Joined

  • Last visited

About Blink of Terraxia

  • Rank
    The Demon of Good Taste
  • Birthday December 25

Profile Information

  • Gender
    Not Telling
  1. Per Wikipedia, 'Critics have accused the order of being a "Muslim ban" because the order only targeted Muslim-majority countries [2] and because Trump's advisers called it a "Muslim ban" [3]' It is obviously not a ban on all Muslims, but it affects mostly Muslims, and that is the language its progenitors use to describe it, so...
  2. There is not. This is probably for the best, given spambots and email address collectors. I suppose you could just put it into one of the other contact info fields, though -- I don't think most of them check for particular entry formats.
  3. Kel, I can't tell you what the original source for those definitions was -- it was five years ago and I don't remember. My guess is they were paraphrased from Political Compass threads. What I can tell you is that last time around, despite some hearty discussion and criticism of other questions on the survey, over multiple threads, no one gave any suggestions, criticism, or feedback about those questions (with one exception: Dantius suggested adding a fifth "moderate" or "liberal" option to the economic views question). No one had any criticism for the labels used in them at all. So, forgive me for being a little surprised by the complaints this time around.
  4. There is plenty of room between "should uphold" and "trample" (which is not language I used for any of the options).
  5. As I stated earlier, the labels weren't really helpful, but I kept them for the ability to compare with the questions from five years ago. It sounds like if this option didn't have a label, that you don't identify with, you'd have had no problem here. I would suggest, however, that if you look at the breadth of social views in the U.S., there are a lot of people who identify as "conservative," who are described by others as "socially conservative," and who fit perfectly with the social views answer labelled as "conservative." Whatever political self-identification you may have, you are certainly much less socially conservative than a very large chunk of the country, if the best description for you was the one included "uphold minority rights."
  6. Also, alhoon, you keep editing your posts to tone them down after other people have already replied to them. It just happened with your post above and Lilith's response. While I applaud the thought process there and use it myself, it works a lot better if you do it before you post. Once someone else has read your post and replied, it's a little bit like pulling the rug out from under them to go and edit your post substantially.
  7. Again, however, I will point out that the two political questions specified economic views and social views. "Liberal" only showed up in the social views question. All of the things alhoon listed off in parentheses are economic issues (and contrary to what ADoS claims here, "Libertarian" was also only listed under social views, so it did not include those things either). What the poll actually used: "Liberal: the government should avoid interfering with personal liberty, and it should uphold minority rights, but some things are just so immoral or socially destructive we can ban those" I think that is a pretty good summary of the socially liberal position in the U.S. and on the Political Compass and as discussed on the forums. For the first time in a long time, Triumph didn't say it better
  8. The forums are in English. The poll is in English. This is not an "English only" thing, this is a "we communicate almost exclusively through writing on this forum so there has to be one language we all use" thing. Isn't this standard operating procedure for being on the Internet? Especially when you visit a site where most people have a different set of life experiences then you do? I'm having a hard time seeing a problem here. As an aside, this appears to be the same thing that comes up in Geneforge debates: you have missing knowledge (due to not wanting to play G1, and missing parts of other games) but that leads you to complain and to demand that everyone else* tailor their comments to your unique situation. That's just not how communication works. *Including games that came out 14 years ago.
  9. The reality is that, while there are people from all over the world who access these boards (and they are all very welcome)... at the end of the day, the culture here is overwhelmingly anglophone and also predominantly American. I state this as a neutral observation. It's just the way things are. So in some categories, attempts to make things more global would actually make them move further away from the culture of the boards themselves. The political questions are an example of this. When I wrote them five years ago, they were heavily influenced by the recurring Political Compass threads as well as by the many political discussions and debates that have taken place here -- and which most frequently turn on U.S. politics. The gender and sexuality questions, similarly, were rebuilt this year around the ways those things tend to be discussed on the forums and in the community here. (And they have "Other" options precisely to make sure nobody felt excluded.) Honestly, I am a little confused by the expectation that a single survey could somehow be culturally accessible to the entire world. -- Finally, I received a private complaint that the survey was hard to understand for people who have poor English. Really didn't know what to say to that!
  10. Context matters here. The questions were explicitly asking about social views and economic views, not political affiliation. The questions would be better without the initial labels, which weren't really necessary. I considered removing those. However, these were some of the questions that were used five years ago; removing the labels would make it harder to compare the new results with the old results.
  11. New game, easily. Though I would be happy to see a G1 remake, the Spiderweb games that begin new series frequently end up being the most interesting ones of the bunch. I'm willing to bet this answer would correlate strongly with whether you have played all SW games, or only Geneforge games.
  12. After two days we're now at 42 surveys. That is probably the bulk of them, but I'd like to at least give a chance to people who are more likely to check the forums on weekends, so let's say this will stay open till Monday morning. Assuming today's slow trickle of submissions continues, that puts us on track to get fairly close to the 60 surveys we got five years ago.
  13. This isn't the first time we've told you this, but you have really wanted to hope it happens sooner. I don't blame you for being so eager, but this is the reality.
  14. FWIW, once Avernum 3 is out, Geneforge 1 is the most likely target to receive an update. That said, I would not expect it to be the next release after A3 -- that will probably be a new game. (And of course there's no guarantee Jeff will stick to past patterns and do G1 at that point, even if it is our best guess right now.) So I would not expect an updated G1 until 2019, probably late 2019. Also, I would expect significant game mechanics changes when it is updated, so even if it looks more like G5, it might not play like G5. That's been the case with all of Jeff's previous remakes (Exile to Avernum, Nethergate to N:R, and Avernum to Avernum Remake). And remember that G5 is already 9 years old and will be 11 years old, at least, by the time any G1 remake hits. That's over a decade of time for Jeff's design sensibilities to change.
  15. Specifically, that confirms the iPad release is early 2018. In the past desktop releases have come out at least a few months before iPad releases, though it's always possible that can change (especially given that SW's attitude towards iPad development has been fluctuating).