LootHunter: 1. Yes, I remember that.
2. Well, you did say "maybe some of those games should be banned".
3. No, I don't remember that. And it seems, I can't find such a comment. Are you sure that it's not you, who "puts words in someone's mouth" this time around?
1. OK.
2. There's a diffeence between demanding games are removed and saying they "probably should be". It has been assumed that I was demanding.
3. No. He originally said this to Orkhepaj in post 262:
"And what is "boring and lame" for you is quite interesting for another. How many times do I need to repeat the same thing so that people like you finally realize that all people are different and their tastes are also different?"
He then quoted the same thing to me in post 287. Perhaps he got confused about who said what but he obviously has some clearly defined ideas about what I think since he's refered to me as "people like you" (or variations thereof) on other occasions.
Let's also add:
4. Thinking my oppinion is more important than other people's.
"why do you think that your opinion is more valuable than the opinions of other people?"
5. My logic says people have to be offended.
"Hollywood has made thousands of films about good Americans and evil "Russians". So, now I have to be offended and demand that these films not be shown? By your logic, yes."
LootHunter: And after you said, that you didn't, you made a vegan analogy, so it looked like you did. It's not unusual for "ban crowd" to change their opinion on the fly, sometimes in a span of one sentence. So, I'm not really surprised that you failed to convince your opponent.
No. We've already discussed how you were both wrong here. He made the vegan analogy. I should perhaps have been more clear and said "Your analogy doesn't work because the vegan would actually have said...". The fact is, I told him point blank that I didn't think that and he continued to explain that games aren't real to me.
HappyPunkPotato: Do people really believe that or is it just trolls trying to make anti-porn people look silly by pretending to be them and claiming they think that, or even people like JuWalk saying it so many times that people start to bleieve it's a thing?
LootHunter: I don't know. I'm no psychic, so I just assume people mean what they say until it's proven otherwise.
I tend to do that too but I do sometimes I wonder. It would be interesting if there really were a large group of people who actually thought that.
HappyPunkPotato: And yes, I consider negative impact on mental health to be a valid reason
LootHunter: I agree with that. The question is - do porn games impact on people's mental health negatively?
I really don't know and it's difficult to get to the bottom of when passions are running high.
JuWalk: But how to prove this negative influence? Just believing if a person says "this game causes me mental suffering"?
Well, yes?
JuWalk: Let's say we somehow found a way to prove a negative impact. How do you decide what to delete and what not? Whose suffering is important and whose is not? With this approach, we will put some people above others. And this is bad and unacceptable. Deleting everything so as not to offend anyone is also not an option, because this way we will be left without lots of games, and no one will be happy. So how can you be fair if you still start deleting something? I think it's just not possible. Therefore, I advocate the introduction of the possibility of adding a game to a personal blacklist and oppose anyone who proposes removal or supports those who propose it.
I don't know the best way, it would take someone smarter than me to figure it out. Alternatively we could make it fair by banning all games that affect people's mental health, then we're treating everyone equally. A lot of people won't like it but a lot of people don't like it your way either. And as I can feel those assumptions just bursting to get out of you again, I'd better add, I'm just playing Devil's advocate, I don't think we should do that.
HappyPunkPotato: If you're so keen on facts and objectivity why did you keep making stupid assumptions about me and not correcting them when told otherwise?
JuWalk: Because words are at odds with deeds. Here is an excerpt from your first post in this thread:
HappyPunkPotato: Not directed at the people I quoted: The complete lack of empathy and desire to understand from some of the posters here is frankly quite scary. "I want sex games so how dare you be against them even if you find them genuinely troubling, you're so selfish!"
JuWalk: Not a word about the representatives of the opposite camp, who also did not show the slightest respect for other people's opinions, and even insulted those who opposed the removal of these games, and even those who silently play them. Such a one-sided approach quite clearly demonstrated that there is no question of any neutral point of view.
Well if they have genuinely insulted you or anyone else then I am sorry for not commenting on it. I did consider mentioning some of the "silly little boy" type comments (which I find unnecessary and unfair) but figured they came from a place of hurt instead of a place of "I want" so I left it. I'm "in the middle" of the ban porn argument but I saw more mocking language coming from some people on "your side". That quote of mine ended with "Try looking in the mirror Agent-94", they were calling people narcissists. You described yourself as a bastard. I just called it as I saw it.
JuWalk: 1) Some kind of curation is still necessary so that the store is not flooded with hundreds and even thousands of objectively garbage games.
Totally subjective.