Of course it’s senseless. That’s why I’m asking why you think it’s happening here. There’s no reason to accuse people of being unable of separating the art from the artist because they reject any brand marketing otherwise. The implication of identifying that as the driving factor suggests that you believe engaging in buying these doughnuts is a statement that you are separating the art from the artist and it is very unclear how that’s the case.

You’re saying I am personally virtue signaling because you want it to be happening, not because it’s actually happening. You’ll notice I actually haven’t said a word for or against JK Rowling, Harry Potter, or this marketing campaign this whole time. You’ve been arguing with a boogeyman everytime you want to accuse of virtue signalling, not me.

Frankly you just don’t seem to understand any of these terms or concepts your using, including “moving goalposts” now if you think restating the same question over and over is a form of it. This is what it means to use a term “properly”: using the term according to its actual definition and connotation, not according to whatever talking points sounded good to you from a Facebook comment.

Block me all you want, but you’ve already shown everyone how little you understand of what you’re saying that you can’t even defend from from simple followup questions without going apeshit.

No, the question was always if you’re sure you’re applying separating the art from the artist properly. Not anyone else who just go in and eat a doughnut because they like Harry Potter and they like doughnuts so why not. That makes sense, that’s what normal human beings do. What they don’t do is start justigying their description as an ability to separate art from the artist.

I’m wondering why you saw people who oppose this because they hate JK Rowling and any opportunities where she generates revenue and decided this was a case of an inability to separate art from artist, as if Harry Potter was a doughnut flavour and not a book series. This is why I keep asking you to explain how buying these doughnuts is closer to showing appreciation for the art than it is enriching the artist since you are operating on the belief that rejecting this marketing opportunity means rejecting the art.

The more you keep insisting that all hate for JK Rowling is performative virtue signaling, the less I’m convinced you’ve actually thought any of this through. How do you figure nobody could actually hate JK Rowling specifically if they don’t go around finding reasons to hate any and all artists? Do you go around telling people who say they hate broccoli they are performativity virtue signaling because they’ll eat lettuce without considering it shares vitamins and nutrients with broccoli too?

You’re arguing about brand recognition, not separating the art from the artist. This is a consumerism campaign to tie a commercial product to another business brand, not an artistic endeavour to encourage or appreciate the books directly as if it’s a public reading or a themed event. Nobody had an issue with the fan-generated gathering at King’s Crossing Station a few years ago for the anniversary of the books.

So how does buying these doughnuts show an appreciation for the art more than it enriches the artist? This is what needs to be explained since you believe the concept of separating the art from the artist apparently is the concept at play here.

The question was about how you see buying these doughnuts as appreciating the art more than supporting the artist, not how much you care about giving the artist a penny.

Unfortunately your problem is that I understood your words too well. How else would I be able to tell that you didn’t respond to what I said at all? If I had a poor understanding of words, I’d see all your big words and how many of them there were and think “Wow, this guy must be correct”.

So, since you were the one to fail to respond to what was asked in the first place, the question is which words I used were so incomprehensible that you ended up spending 20 minutes typing up something that didn’t apply? Was it “correctly”? Maybe “doughnuts” since it’s spelled in a regional way?

That’s a lot of words to avoid explaining how buying these doughnuts is appreciating the art and not enriching the artist, and how separating the artist from the art applies here.

Are you sure you’re separating the art from the artist correctly if you believe buying these doughnuts is appreciating the art and not enriching the artist?

No, I’m saying that you’re sharing the same flawed tactic: vaguely referencing something that sounds bad but could be easily explicable with the context provided. It’s especially not a great way to go about it right now after Admiral Patrick used it to make accusations that don’t hold up to scrutiny about more than just the dbzero instance, but also blahaj.zone and its admins.

Like what’s the threshold for “calls of violence and death” here? You also reinforced Admiral Patrick’s idea that it was acceptable only towards people the instance’s admin agreed with. So what are the specific details? Who were these calls for violence and death towards? How intense were they? Are we talking about “Punch Nazis” or “Kill all brown people”? Both are calls for violence and death but are still very different.

This entire accusation revolves around an extreme extrapolation from reading the statement “We’re not pacifists” in response to AdmiralPatrick’s insistence that any acceptance of violence is evil, no matter the context. There is no reasonable way to see that statement and jump to “Therefore they glorify and encourage violence” without filling in a lot of blanks with assumptions.

Curiously, you’re doing it with the exact same language that AdmiralPatrick used, where the exact nature of the targets of the “instance’s views” aren’t specified.

He’s been a MAGA chud for years.

I ordered things alphabetically before AI because it made it easier for other people to read the list. It’s a built-in command in a lot of languages too.

It’s spelled “asinine” but I do like “assnine” lol

The quoted criticism sounds reasonable and objective to you?

Tom Scott actually talked about this in his recent Wired video.

YouTube itself auto-generates and suggests these AI thumbnails. That’s why they all look the same. Creators now also have to choose three thumbnails and titles and the system swaps between them. Imagine having to make three distinct thumbnail images and titles for each video. It’s no wonder this samey AI generator images are so prevalent on the platform now, it takes three times the amount of effort to avoid it now.

…You’re the one asking for it. What are you doing?

What next, you’re going to pretend like you frequently find text articles for most YouTube videos you watch so you think it’s a totally reasonable request and can’t understand why anyone would be confused about it?

A “body language expert” opinion? What next, a phrenologist? Someone who can read chakras?

Is this based on anything or is it just wishes and hopes

The only people sending this message are morons who think the NP is a reputable source of news and not conservative agiprop.

All the Zelda games have the same jingle for when you get an item.

They did though by patterning with publishers. Forcing physical releases to go through Steam as DRM. Killing the physical pc gaming market.

Not only does this not describe forced retail exclusivity, it’s three different statements that are all false in their own ways. Distribution agreements aren’t exclusivity agreements, Steam only deals in digital copies not physical copies, DRM implementation is optional, and there are no stipulations barring publishers from making or distributing physical copies.

We’ve gone from one incorrect statement about Steam to five.

They also have their Non-Favoured-Nations clause, meaning a game can’t be sold for cheaper off Steam.

You mean the Most-Favoured Nations clause that five people filed a suit over, based on a a Tim Sweeney tweet from 2019? Not only was that suit silly, it doesn’t even make sense as this sort of clause is extremely common in retail and not at all unique to Steam or Valve compared to other storefronts.

Only as they geared up to sell their own consoles.

You also don’t seem to be fully aware of Valve’s contributions to Linux gaming.