Whistlin' Crustacean
kiwifarms.net
- Joined
- Jan 10, 2023
I see Locals continues to implode.
Meanwhile, yesterday's trial stream was very ok. Had it going in the background. Nick had some of the best guests on (Branca, Gosney) for much of it, zero degeneracy was present, whatever alcohol was consumed had no negative effect on the show, and despite the trial itself being mind-numbingly boring, the legal commentary and criticism kept it going nicely. Sex jokes were present, but somehow the sleazy undertone that made watching most of Nick's recent streams decidedly unpleasant vanished entirely. It was basically some normal dudes doing "that's what she said" zingers.
An interesting conversation occurs at lunch break.
Steven Gosney talks about how great the chat is. But he's not talking about Locals. He's talking about YouTube and Rumble. When Nick says that Locals "is the creeeeam" of that, Gosney disagrees and says that he doesn't do Locals. Watch Nick's whole posture shift at that. Nick then attempts to minimize and asserts that Locals got wild for a while, but "it's calmed down a lot now." Gosney: "I gotta say, I've peeked in there occasionally. I'm just not paying money to be there, you know. It's like, too wild and woolly(?) for me, I'd get kicked out on my ear. But there is an entertainment value."
You're goddamn right, Steve. There certainly is.
@Himedall All-seeing Waifu:
cheat chat software is detrimental to an online game community"?
You created a useful archival tool. Good. That is a genuine achievement. What it isn't is an entitlement to crown yourself the arbiter of what gets archived with said useful tool and what doesn't. That would remove the entire purpose of an archival tool.
By the way, the fact that your writing got more purple by the paragraph only reinforces the idea that this is basically hubris at this point.
I understand that having some sort of power over a huge community of people is a very intoxicating thing. I also trust you to recognize the fact that you've fallen into the same sort of power complex as many moderators do and to pull yourself out of it.
Meanwhile, yesterday's trial stream was very ok. Had it going in the background. Nick had some of the best guests on (Branca, Gosney) for much of it, zero degeneracy was present, whatever alcohol was consumed had no negative effect on the show, and despite the trial itself being mind-numbingly boring, the legal commentary and criticism kept it going nicely. Sex jokes were present, but somehow the sleazy undertone that made watching most of Nick's recent streams decidedly unpleasant vanished entirely. It was basically some normal dudes doing "that's what she said" zingers.
An interesting conversation occurs at lunch break.
You're goddamn right, Steve. There certainly is.
@Himedall All-seeing Waifu:
That's very much not okay. You don't directly interact with the lolcow. You most certainly do not post these teenage ransom demands like "huehuehue, if you say 'help me, Himedall Kenobi' (WHAT THE FUCK), I will deign to redact your embarrassing shit from my archive." Would you, by any chance, be also willing to accept an essay on "Why the use of third-party
You created a useful archival tool. Good. That is a genuine achievement. What it isn't is an entitlement to crown yourself the arbiter of what gets archived with said useful tool and what doesn't. That would remove the entire purpose of an archival tool.
By the way, the fact that your writing got more purple by the paragraph only reinforces the idea that this is basically hubris at this point.
I understand that having some sort of power over a huge community of people is a very intoxicating thing. I also trust you to recognize the fact that you've fallen into the same sort of power complex as many moderators do and to pull yourself out of it.
From a practical perspective: is that what you want to be doing with your day, every day? By inserting yourself as the arbiter of what gets redacted and what doesn't, you open yourself up to all sorts of retardation. "Well, this guy had his stuff redacted, why didn't you redact my stuff?" "The first guy didn't have to post some stupid classified, why do I have to do that?" etc. Words such as "fairness," "standards," "policy" start to crop up real soon after that, and fuck that shit.
From an ethical perspective: Every single one of these people knows it's a public chat. Whoever says they thought it was private or behind a paywall or whatever else is lying. Why can I say that? Because every single one of them saw the chat before they paid to participate in it. Since the chat is public, and its participants know it's public, there are zero ethical problems in archiving it. Therefore, there is zero ethical reason to police or redact any of it.
From an ethical perspective: Every single one of these people knows it's a public chat. Whoever says they thought it was private or behind a paywall or whatever else is lying. Why can I say that? Because every single one of them saw the chat before they paid to participate in it. Since the chat is public, and its participants know it's public, there are zero ethical problems in archiving it. Therefore, there is zero ethical reason to police or redact any of it.
Last edited:
etc. The smarter Locals subs (not very many - lol) like Art may have already deleted their violent comments bc they know you/Kiwi is on it. They're being fairly careful now. Consider going back for those chats, particularly when Nick started the 24-hour chats. Thanks! C
someone has to save them from their own fucking stupidity, I don't know what the fuck would possess someone to even discuss personal details about their kids on the fucking Internet, but then these are the backbirths who think saying nigger will horrify people on fucking Kiwi Farms