• 2 Posts
  • 1.42K Comments
Joined 6 months ago
cake
Cake day: February 22nd, 2026

help-circle
  • It’s because the decision makers are fucking stupid.

    I would be happier at work if we could just solve interesting problems. Instead we have mandates from management to do nonsense, or work in nonsense ways.

    The people at the top are so removed from how work gets done, and how normal people live, they’re useless. Worse than useless.




  • Microsoft and Bethesda are creatively incompetent. They don’t really want to say anything. They just want a funny theme park full of kitschy shit so they can pander to fans.

    They’re fucking soulless morons.

    The first fallout was interesting because it was pretty fresh. The 2nd was a bigger exploration, with some interesting questions about remnants. I don’t really remember 3 but it had some weird narrative problems, I think.

    New Vegas actually asked a new interesting question: who rebuilds after?

    And then 4 just shits the bed because Bethesda has no soul. It’s also mechanically a mess. Power armor in the intro, except it sucks? Fuck everyone who thought that was a good idea.













  • Well, if you don’t ban or otherwise moderate unpleasant people, your community will rot until it’s nothing but unpleasant people and those who can tolerate them. So that’s not a desirable outcome.

    Communities should have rules. People who repeatedly break those rules should be banned. This is true online and offline.

    The more challenging question is “what are the best rules to make?”

    Most places will disallow porn and gore, or require them to be appropriately labeled or quarantined. That makes sense to me.

    Many places will ban anything too violent. Threats against individuals I understand. Saying you can’t even imagine violence against organizations doing violence (eg: ice, the Republican party) is lending support to horrible people, so I’m not keen on that. I can see wanting to keep it from turning into revenge porn, or wanting to avoid drawing the attention of the state.

    “No personal attacks on members” was a rule on a place I used to post. Was pretty nice, usually.


  • You cannot assume that the people making decisions are rational, smart, people. They may believe falsehoods, and act accordingly. They may be chasing a hidden goal (eg: “I get a bonus if I hit X metric, so I’ll kill good parts of the site to do it”)

    I worked at a place where management was like “we want to increase time on site”, and the lead dev was like “I can just add loading spinners everywhere then”. Luckily management was a little smarter and move involved than that, and didn’t approve that strategy.