According to the link in the commentary, the namesakes of the three were flipped states. So I don't think it's meant to reflect the artist's views, unless anyone from the Pacific team has anything to say?
According to the link in the commentary, the namesakes of the three were flipped states. So I don't think it's meant to reflect the artist's views, unless anyone from the Pacific team has anything to say?
As far as I know, most of them are actually non-American, and the American member has expressed they will stay neutral on it.
MaxAndEmilytate said: According to the link in the commentary, the namesakes of the three were flipped states. So I don't think it's meant to reflect the artist's views, unless anyone from the Pacific team has anything to say?
Given the “Artist’s Commentary”:
Currently feeling happy~~(>V<)
And the obvious tenor of the link’s commentary is so obviously triumphant for Trump, I’d say it’s rather plain that this is meant to reflect the artist’s views.
You knew that, of course.
Because your point was to try and intimidate the artist by gas-lighting and intimating that you were “offended”.
Grow up.
“Rooting for Trump” in the real world is actually rather uncontroversial, especially in America. The only thing controversial is that many on the Left will typically try to harm people who do so, from public beatings to rioting across the nation. Generally speaking, normal people in every country don't like that you do this.
That considered, it's rather normal to find someone in any walk of life who roots for Trump.
MaxAndEmilytate said: So I don't think it's meant to reflect the artist's views, unless anyone from the Pacific team has anything to say?
Not sure how you'd jump to that conclusion, as any user can add and remove tags on images. The user who added them to the post seems to have a history of bad tagging.
Won't say anything about my leaning on the elections, but since they are over we should give the man a chance to prove or disprove himself to the world. Who knows? He might actually be a cause for good? (please don't argue about it, I am merely saying I hope that will be the case, not that I can see the future)
I agree. This presidential campaign was like straight out of a dystopian novel, there is literally nothing bad about Trump aside from people not liking his looks or personality, but huge problems with Hillary with blatant criminal acts and political corruption. Hillary's support stemmed only from the fact that she had money, control of the media, activists/criminals, and foreign governments on her side... its truly nothing short of a miracle that Trump pulled victory when the strangers in suits on TV were selling blatant lies like he is Hitler, he will start WWIII, he doesn't want to win, he isn't rich, he is racist, he never worked a day of his life, etc. The thing that I think most people don't realize is that America experienced this before with Reagan where the media straight up lied about him in a desperate campaign to make him lose. The pressure back then wasn't anywhere near as aggressive and radical as this year, but I think the greatest blessing was the internet where people could look up the claims themselves and keep track of the contradictions that the establishment's rhetoric tried to hide.
Not sure how you'd jump to that conclusion, as any user can add and remove tags on images. The user who added them to the post seems to have a history of bad tagging.
I see now that you're an admin.
I appreciate that the vandalism is fixed.
However, to your first point, it's not a "jump".
Referring to the "how", ultimately, the answer is: "Experience". It is natural to suspect an admin in this day and age when something like this happens particularly on this subject.
Take a look at some cases of "politically-incorrect" articles and content who's vandals turned out to be official wikipedia guides and editors, people who were erroneously extended trust and "the benefit of the doubt" by users, as if their position put them above reproach and suspicion.
Denials notwithstanding, failure to suspect that there are SJWs working on this site would be the mark of a fool. Besides, people in positions of trust treat suspicion as the practical outgrowth of that position, rather than with indignation. Nobody's suggesting that you should serve as a pinata, but it goes with the territory.
Nobody is entitled to trust.
Certain people behave viciously, especially when things don't go their way; rioting, vandalizing businesses, assault and murder, whether in Milwaukee, New York, Baltimore, Chicago, Portland, etc. Next to that, a little mischief and online vandalism on a website is nothing. Heck, these people take pride in their "social justice", filming themselves and posting their work online at Worldstarhiphop.com as if it's something to be proud of.
I'm sure whoever tried to vandalize this art-work is very proud of himself too.
How the admins handle it is their call, of course it is.
But if it happens too often (with SJW's that's easily forseen, and it sounds like you've let this miscreant off the hook before), users will simply get tired of the idiocy and go elsewhere - and the admins will be held responsible one way or another just as Wiki was.
Personally, I enjoy checking your site for Sima's work; it's well-designed and rather convenient. I hope to continue to patronizing it, just as the Pacific team has in providing their content.
And the obvious tenor of the link’s commentary is so obviously triumphant for Trump, I’d say it’s rather plain that this is meant to reflect the artist’s views.
You knew that, of course.
Because your point was to try and intimidate the artist by gas-lighting and intimating that you were “offended”.
Grow up.
“Rooting for Trump” in the real world is actually rather uncontroversial, especially in America. The only thing controversial is that many on the Left will typically try to harm people who do so, from public beatings to rioting across the nation. Generally speaking, normal people in every country don't like that you do this.
That considered, it's rather normal to find someone in any walk of life who roots for Trump.
Grow up.
...
Did you seriously just assume my political views?
No, I did not know. I was merely saying I wasn't sure and was looking for official word from a member of the Pacific team.
In what way was I trying to intimidate the artist? How does my sincere desire to avoid assuming the artist's views lead you to think I was offended? Where and how I was trying to do that? Show me. I never said anything of the sort. How is any of what I'm saying right-bashing? I don't see how what I was saying can be construed as such.
I asked a sincere question. You were the one who jumped in and attacked me out of nowhere.
As long as the users aren't attacking other users or people and keep their opinions to a civil discussion then it is fine to have disagreements and disagree on subjects. If it turns into nothing more than attacks and name calling though, it will eventually lead to bans, as that is not the kind of environment we wish to have on this site. Also spamming memes or pointless comments like "first" will get you in trouble as well.
As for comments, we generally do not delete comments, but users can and will down vote comments. The default threshold is a score below 0 resulting in comments being hidden, but users can change the threshold at which this kicks in. As most users though will not have changed this, receiving a score of -1 or lower will mean for most users your comment will be hidden from view unless a user clicks to have all messages revealed.
[...] and it sounds like you've let this miscreant off the hook before [...]
Comments, post changes, and various other activities are recorded in the user's profile. This is the first time I've come across this user or at least noticed him, but I'm still readily able to look at his profile and see the various tag changes he has made during his time here. Given what I've seen of the tag edits he's made, I've left a comment in his record that he needs to improve his tagging and warned him that tags are meant to cover things seen in the image, not cover their personal feelings of the content in it.
According to the link in the commentary, the namesakes of the three were flipped states. So I don't think it's meant to reflect the artist's views, unless anyone from the Pacific team has anything to say?
When an artist explicitly tells you their views, even goes to the trouble of creating a piece and linking context to it, only SJWs say:
"No, you're not. I think your work and your words don't reflect your views. What does the Pacific team have to say about this?"
Why look for "official word" when the artist states explicitly right in the "Artist Commentary" with "Currently feeling happy~~(>V<)"?
Why go over his/her head or to anyone else for "official word" to "find out", when the artist's link is explicit with "(2016) President Trump!" and "Sima was able to blitz one out immediately for the aftermath."
Unless you are trying to find something (or someone) to deny and suppress Sima's views
You read the Commentary since you referred to it, so clearly you're not blind.
You used the link and read all the way to the bottom where it referred to the three ships, so clearly you read everything in depth and you're not stupid.
You responded to me in perfect grammatical English, English that clearly demonstrates you can even twist subtle precepts and wordplay to your convoluted benefit (although I am equally skilled at un-twisting it).
The celebratory nature of Sima's post is not subtle.
The "Currently feeling happy~~(>V<)" and other emotes are not subtle.
That linked website taht you read about the "three ships" is in no bleeping way subtle about rooting for Trump.
It is the opposite of "subtlety". It is the opposite of "nuance".
It is "in your face".
Sima is happy.
Sima is rooting for Trump.
We all knew it, as did you.
And that bothers you?
Tough; stop using thuggish tactics and "gas-lighting" attempts to try to deny Sima's political views are legitimate - even that they're not his/her own.
And stop trying to pretend now that you didn't use those tactics, after getting called out.
You knew Sima's intent and views.
You are not stupid;
You are malicious.
(and unrealistic stupidity is too often used as an "out" after getting caught).
And the same goes for the rest of those anti-Trump "protestors" who've been burning and rioting our cities for months (or was it years? Actually, a century).
They are not "stupid".
They are not "misguided".
They are not "the responsibility of Trump".
They are responsible for themselves, their actions, even the words they type on this website.
You all need to be called out on it - and more.
MaxAndEmilytate said:
In what way was I trying to intimidate the artist?
The same way most SJWs do it; by trying to get their political enemies "in trouble" and censored (or get them to self-censor) using surly tactics, over what is actually normal (and arguably moral) behavior...in this case, "rooting for Trump".
Sima's done nothing wrong (for that matter, neither have I), regardless of whether you get the other Pacific Team members and the admins on this website to side with you.
MaxAndEmilytate said:
How does my sincere desire to avoid assuming the artist's views lead you to think I was offended?
You pretended that this artist's work, linked referrals, and explicit words were not his/her own... and now you claim to be "sincere"?
If you're not an SJW, then I'm an ELF.
MaxAndEmilytate said:
Where and how I was trying to do that? Show me.
I've already done this multiple times in different ways, but in one respect I shouldn't have bothered. Anybody with English as his first language would know the condescending - even threatening - nature of what you wrote at first blush.
But in another respect, letting people like you go unchallenged would have been the greater sin. That's why the country has so many problems. Maybe Trump will inspire some resistance. Hopefully more than that.
It's like an SJW getting up into your face, or using their fore-finger to push your head backwards, only for her to ask later "How did I hurt you? Show me."
You'll probably still claim I didn't dissect this play-by-play, along with your fellow-travelers who will support you, knowing they're lying.
Every time, people like us don't "know" how to respond to that kind of mendacity, when in fact we actually do - deep down - and with more than just words.
More than anything I think, that's the point - the inspiration - of Trump.
MaxAndEmilytate said:
I never said anything of the sort.
Screen capture is my friend.
MaxAndEmilytate said:
How is any of what I'm saying right-bashing? I don't see how what I was saying can be construed as such.
Pretending ignorance won't save you. Again, "unrealistic stupidity" doesn't fool anyone who doesn't want to be fooled.
MaxAndEmilytate said:
I asked a sincere question. You were the one who jumped in and attacked me out of nowhere.
And this is the last of MaxAndemilytate's SJW two-step that everyone is familiar with:
Step one: Attack someone.
Step two: Play the victim.
Actually, there's often a Step Three: the "offensive, racist, fascist, bigoted troll" (no, they're not referring to the SJW) has his comments deleted, and his account banned by the admins.
In that event, please note: the admins on this site didn't ban the person who's been a repeat-offender at vandalizing posts, including Sima's work, as one admin has revealed:
NWF_Renim said:
Not sure how you'd jump to that conclusion, as any user can add and remove tags on images. The user who added them to the post seems to have a history of bad tagging.
You're working far, far too hard to troll people over assumptions of alignment you dug up about a couple non-aligned questions and your own misunderstanding of the site's mechanics.
Sakuri_Kunikai said: I'm pretty sure Trump's wearing a Gilgamesh cosplay, not the God Emperor of Mankind.
Nah, while it lacks a lot of the ornateness (and EAGLES) of Empty's armor, it does have the right pauldron being ornate and the emblem on the chest-plate.
Won't say anything about my leaning on the elections, but since they are over we should give the man a chance to prove or disprove himself to the world. Who knows? He might actually be a cause for good? (please don't argue about it, I am merely saying I hope that will be the case, not that I can see the future)
Unfortunately, all we have to really go on is his words, since he has no political record on which to base opinions, and his words during the campaign promised to do hundreds of actions from the inhumane and counterproductive (leveling ISIS occupied cities, killing family members of terrorists) to the ignorant and diminishing of the very international power he claims he'll rebuild (pulling out of treaties and obligations, throwing entire regions to the wolves).
Extrapolating from his business and personal practices isn't any more encouraging, from his refusal to provide any proof of his claimed wealth besides flash and bling to stiffing charities, using his meager foundation for personal use, and hogging charity events to which he did not donate a dime, to stiffing hundreds of contracted companies and their thousands of working class employees (even in the best case for him, that they really all did subpar work, it still means he's terrible at hiring for a guy who has to directly appoint well over 1000 people to essential posts).
What he has said since being elected is more encouraging (including repeatedly plagiarizing Obama policies without attribution, such as focusing deportations on those who committed crimes other than crossing a border or overstaying a visa), but I'm not holding my breath.
Won't say anything about my leaning on the elections, but since they are over we should give the man a chance to prove or disprove himself to the world. Who knows? He might actually be a cause for good?
Haha, nope. Unless you count him being a cautionary tale for other countries (GJ netherlands).
Anticipating this going into the harsher in hindsight pool any month now.
