- Mar 17, 2019
- 522
- 641
This directly answered the question I wanted to ask.
So the guy is just dead until he randomly releases an update at some point.
This gives me unpleasant True Facials developer vibes
- Thread starter UncleVT
- Start date
So the guy is just dead until he randomly releases an update at some point.
This gives me unpleasant True Facials developer vibes
- Mar 17, 2019
- 522
- 641
Is the “better experience” mod also broken for you guys?
The only thing that works is the automatic dialog skip
The only thing that works is the automatic dialog skip
guys i can not download monkey from here , where can i get it ? or how ishould download from here ?
If you stretch the definition enough, a big maybe. Also depends on the situation. I cannot think of a good use of pleasure as a form of wealth, like "wealth of pleasure". It does not ring. It's also hard to count or measure
Or exchange (the pleasure itself, when you get it it remains with you.)Edit: Edited couple of times.
Last edited:
You must be registered to see the links
no wealth does not mean pleasure it can mean abundance of (large amount of) something (good). so it can mean abundance of pleasure but no one referenced wealth of pleasure, i said generates wealth which refers to material possessions or resources
it's pretty unambiguous, no need for bad faith lexical semantics
btw google as a dictionary? really?
- May 28, 2022
- 43
- 103
Yeah, it was not a criticism of your point, that I found fair.
But, I was surprised by the ambiguity of the Google definition.
Meaning that you can be poor and wealthy at the same time.
As it is not only connected to material goods, even in the Google example.
So, it is more than a dictionary. I'm not claiming this is good either.
But, I was surprised by the ambiguity of the Google definition.
Meaning that you can be poor and wealthy at the same time.
As it is not only connected to material goods, even in the Google example.
Yeah realy, Google has a sort of monopolistic grab on cultures.
So, it is more than a dictionary. I'm not claiming this is good either.
I don't think the dictionary article meant that, it just used poor wording which is open to interpratation. But even with that pleasure as a wealth was a big strech.
Only in a future (which i rather be dead in), we maybe extract our brain activity that store our response to pleasure and sell them in market. Then pleasure will be a form of wealth.
Last edited:
this game is so dead dudes are having semantic arguments about the word wealth in the comments
what the fuck are you talking about? you're investing in the product so the developer will continue to work on the product and make it better for you. If the guy you are paying money to for the development of a project takes your money and does not offer any form of communication that our money is going anywhere, you're going to get nervous aren't you? Just take half a second to think about it before you jump down someones throat. It was a pretty simple analogy.
it's not an investment, it's more akin to a sponsorship maybe but in the end it's exactly what i wrote you buy access via subscription service. it's in the patreon tos.
any money spent is gone when you buy that access and the access is gone when you stop paying an investment grows what you invest it's the exact opposite. when you give money to someone on patreon you are financing their ability to work on art in the widest sense and their only obligation is to give you access (which is done by patreon) nothing more.
if you give money and they don't meet your expectations that sucks but it's a you problem. my advice would be the same i would give to a gambler, consider what the activity is worth it to you, spend that money and consider it lost+ from the start. it will cause you a lot less frustration and you get exactly what you paid for. if you find it's more worth you can consider paying more.
- Oct 15, 2021
- 2,437
- 4,010
If I were to ever scam people on patreon this would be my exact reply to my angry supporters.
no you wouldn't, you would lie and sell dreams betting on self-delusion unless you plan on failing with the scam
- Oct 15, 2021
- 2,437
- 4,010
No, I wouldn't lie. Why would I need to lie? Majority of patreon supporters do not care as long as I give them tiny bits of content every few months. I've learned this from watching a few big patreon backed game threads on this forum. Why would I bother telling lies when I can tell truth? It won't change a thing anyway.
"an act of
You must be registered to see the links
time, effort, or energy to a particular
You must be registered to see the links
with the expectation of a
You must be registered to see the links
result."spend less time jerking off, more time reading things.
ok then, let's look at the full entry (that you omitted) so everyone has a source and look at (i mean you didn't just use google as a dictionary for all definitions right?) (it's collins in case anyone has trouble reading the weak grey font in the top)
now back to your choice of definition and let's deconstruct it with the context of the comment i responded to in mind
does patreon accept time? no
does patreon accept effort? no
does patreon accept energy? no
what do they accept? money
wait a minute...that's not part of your cherry picked definition! why? bc it's a definition for immaterial forms of investment! did you use a bad faith argument to counter me, along with a personal attack, bc you didn't like what i said? bc using a cherry picked definition knowing you're misrepresenting the context is exactly that. well that or you just didn't understand the definition. but since you're such an avid reader, your reading comprehension should be above question here, right? so intellectual dishonesty it is
using the 2nd definition would make a lot more sense btw, it's beyond me why you wouldn't use that one, as it's far more reasonable to argue and i even described it in the comment you responded to. it's still wrong in the context of op's original post, however(reasoning below).
op regarded it as a financial investment, in a business sense, their use of language shows it: " Can't expect investment when you make your investors nervous by not communicating. "
what happens when you make investors nervous? they pull out their investment. that phrasing indicates a financial investment like a shareholder which would be covered by definition nr. 1, even though it's ridiculus, which is why i pointed that out.
op in response doubled down
" Just take half a second to think about it before you jump down someones throat. It was a pretty simple analogy."
the analogy was still flawed and i responded to that even offering definition 2 through different wording bc op has a clear association of what an investment is, you missed that too (hint the term sponsorship as in buying a service that can be of use for you in the future and i even described it " when you give money to someone on patreon you are financing their ability to work on art in the widest sense and their only obligation is to give you access ")
it does, however, not fit in your choice of definition whatsoever
i hope that was clear enough now and ffs can we let it rest now
This thread became absolutely incredible.
Bored with the models, they started molesting a dictionary.