|
Now that we have a new thread, in order to ensure that this thread continues to meet TL standards and follows the proper guidelines, we will be enforcing the rules in the OP more strictly. Be sure to give them a complete and thorough read before posting! NOTE: When providing a source, please provide a very brief summary on what it's about and what purpose it adds to the discussion. The supporting statement should clearly explain why the subject is relevant and needs to be discussed. Please follow this rule especially for tweets.
Your supporting statement should always come BEFORE you provide the source.If you have any questions, comments, concern, or feedback regarding the USPMT, then please use this thread: http://www.teamliquid.net/forum/website-feedback/510156-us-politics-thread |
On July 06 2026 10:11 GreenHorizons wrote:Show nested quote +On July 06 2026 09:48 Fleetfeet wrote:
Yup.
Sidebar - GH, you mentioned being genderqueer - what are your preferred pronouns these days?
Also, I have to consult the Trans Council (joking, just some friends who are some combination of either women and/or trans) for a sanity check, and then I'll be good to dive into some liquipedia editing. It really is and the ensuing discussion there wasn't very uplifting. They're just "pronouns" not "preferred pronouns" nowadays (you can't read my tone but it's pleasant, not demeaning). I like people using GreenHorizons/GH. "they" would be a welcome alternative as well. Gotta say I don't feel particularly safe making a point of this but it felt like a bit of an obligation and I really appreciate you doing something to makes me feel at least a little bit safer.
Which point don't you feel safe making, and why?
That you like people using GreenHorizons/GH and that they/them would be a welcome alternative (because you don't think we'll do that, or for some other reason)?
Or that nowadays a person's pronouns are described as "a person's pronouns" and not "a person's preferred pronouns" (because some people were trivializing semantics earlier with the woman vs. female conversation, so they might also be dismissive of whether or not using "preferred" is a big deal, or for some other reason)?
Or a different point?
|
On July 06 2026 10:20 DarkPlasmaBall wrote:Show nested quote +On July 06 2026 10:11 GreenHorizons wrote:On July 06 2026 09:48 Fleetfeet wrote:
Yup.
Sidebar - GH, you mentioned being genderqueer - what are your preferred pronouns these days?
Also, I have to consult the Trans Council (joking, just some friends who are some combination of either women and/or trans) for a sanity check, and then I'll be good to dive into some liquipedia editing. It really is and the ensuing discussion there wasn't very uplifting. They're just "pronouns" not "preferred pronouns" nowadays (you can't read my tone but it's pleasant, not demeaning). I like people using GreenHorizons/GH. "they" would be a welcome alternative as well. Gotta say I don't feel particularly safe making a point of this but it felt like a bit of an obligation and I really appreciate you doing something to makes me feel at least a little bit safer. Which point don't you feel safe making, and why? That you like people using GreenHorizons/GH and that they/them would be a welcome alternative (because you don't think we'll do that, or for some other reason)? Or that nowadays a person's pronouns are described as "a person's pronouns" and not "a person's preferred pronouns" (because some people were trivializing semantics earlier with the woman vs. female conversation, so they might also be dismissive of whether or not using "preferred" is a big deal, or for some other reason)? Or a different point?
Likely making a point of genderqueerness and/or coming out and/or declaring pronouns.
Makes total sense given the last few pages that it wouldn't feel safe. I still half-expect someone to declare that they're lying about being genderqueer for street cred or something.
@GH Thanks for the correction, and sorry for not offering 'if you don't mind answering' or some other out. Thought about DMing tbh but that felt too personal/invasive.
|
On July 06 2026 10:20 DarkPlasmaBall wrote:Show nested quote +On July 06 2026 10:11 GreenHorizons wrote:On July 06 2026 09:48 Fleetfeet wrote:
Yup.
Sidebar - GH, you mentioned being genderqueer - what are your preferred pronouns these days?
Also, I have to consult the Trans Council (joking, just some friends who are some combination of either women and/or trans) for a sanity check, and then I'll be good to dive into some liquipedia editing. It really is and the ensuing discussion there wasn't very uplifting. They're just "pronouns" not "preferred pronouns" nowadays (you can't read my tone but it's pleasant, not demeaning). I like people using GreenHorizons/GH. "they" would be a welcome alternative as well. Gotta say I don't feel particularly safe making a point of this but it felt like a bit of an obligation and I really appreciate you doing something to makes me feel at least a little bit safer. Which point don't you feel safe making, and why? That you like people using GreenHorizons/GH and that they/them would be a welcome alternative (because you don't think we'll do that, or for some other reason)? Or that nowadays a person's pronouns are described as "a person's pronouns" and not "a person's preferred pronouns" (because some people were trivializing semantics earlier with the woman vs. female conversation, so they might also be dismissive of whether or not using "preferred" is a big deal, or for some other reason)? Or a different point?
All of the above+? Several people have already continued using "he/him" after I mentioned being genderqueer and pointed out that them failing to respect that was indicative that they were not actually engaging in good faith. Pretty sure someone tried to gaslight me about it too.
I'm already the defacto "Black council" here. ZerO could be included if/when they participate. It's not exactly helpful that the sort of phenomena I was describing in the beginning pushed ZerO to get banned so they can't right now. I don't want to end up the "chair of the genderqueer council". I don't like that this is opening myself up for endless sealioning, bad faith "oopsies", and too much more to list in this moment burying any sincere attempts at growth.
ZerO (and some others) could probably speak well to the danger of just expressing the kind of vulnerability required to convey that there's something wrong. Particularly for Black people AMAB.
@Fleet No worries mate! I appreciate the recognition on the leaving an out thing, and while scary, I'm thankful you asked in thread.
|
On July 06 2026 10:39 GreenHorizons wrote:Show nested quote +On July 06 2026 10:20 DarkPlasmaBall wrote:On July 06 2026 10:11 GreenHorizons wrote:On July 06 2026 09:48 Fleetfeet wrote:
Yup.
Sidebar - GH, you mentioned being genderqueer - what are your preferred pronouns these days?
Also, I have to consult the Trans Council (joking, just some friends who are some combination of either women and/or trans) for a sanity check, and then I'll be good to dive into some liquipedia editing. It really is and the ensuing discussion there wasn't very uplifting. They're just "pronouns" not "preferred pronouns" nowadays (you can't read my tone but it's pleasant, not demeaning). I like people using GreenHorizons/GH. "they" would be a welcome alternative as well. Gotta say I don't feel particularly safe making a point of this but it felt like a bit of an obligation and I really appreciate you doing something to makes me feel at least a little bit safer. Which point don't you feel safe making, and why? That you like people using GreenHorizons/GH and that they/them would be a welcome alternative (because you don't think we'll do that, or for some other reason)? Or that nowadays a person's pronouns are described as "a person's pronouns" and not "a person's preferred pronouns" (because some people were trivializing semantics earlier with the woman vs. female conversation, so they might also be dismissive of whether or not using "preferred" is a big deal, or for some other reason)? Or a different point? All of the above+? Several people have already continued using "he/him" after I mentioned being genderqueer and pointed out that them not respecting that wasn't indicative that they were actually engaging in good faith. Pretty sure someone tried to gaslight me about it too. I'm already the defacto "Black council" here. ZerO could be included if/when they participate. It's not exactly helpful that the sort of phenomena I was describing in the beginning pushed ZerO to get banned so they can't right now. I don't want to end up the "chair of the genderqueer council". I don't like that this is opening myself up for endless sealioning bad faith "oopsies" and too much more to list in this moment burying any sincere attempts at growth. ZerO (and some others) could probably speak well to the danger of just expressing the kind of vulnerability required to convey that there's something wrong. Particularly for Black people AMAB. @Fleet No worries mate! I appreciate the recognition on the leaving an out thing, and while scary, I'm thankful you asked in thread.
I just rechecked my recent posts and noticed that one of them - the long one - had he/his/him at the end instead of they/their/them, when referring to you. That was careless of me, and I'm sorry for that. I've gone back and corrected the pronouns in that post, though the new edits won't fix the quoted portions in other people's responses to the old version. I'll try not to make the same mistake again; I know it's my responsibility to get it right for future use, and not your responsibility to keep correcting me if I repeatedly mess up your pronouns. (That being said, if I do mess up someone's pronouns, I'm hoping that any person would just kindly poke me with a reminder.)
|
On July 06 2026 11:34 DarkPlasmaBall wrote:Show nested quote +On July 06 2026 10:39 GreenHorizons wrote:On July 06 2026 10:20 DarkPlasmaBall wrote:On July 06 2026 10:11 GreenHorizons wrote:On July 06 2026 09:48 Fleetfeet wrote:
Yup.
Sidebar - GH, you mentioned being genderqueer - what are your preferred pronouns these days?
Also, I have to consult the Trans Council (joking, just some friends who are some combination of either women and/or trans) for a sanity check, and then I'll be good to dive into some liquipedia editing. It really is and the ensuing discussion there wasn't very uplifting. They're just "pronouns" not "preferred pronouns" nowadays (you can't read my tone but it's pleasant, not demeaning). I like people using GreenHorizons/GH. "they" would be a welcome alternative as well. Gotta say I don't feel particularly safe making a point of this but it felt like a bit of an obligation and I really appreciate you doing something to makes me feel at least a little bit safer. Which point don't you feel safe making, and why? That you like people using GreenHorizons/GH and that they/them would be a welcome alternative (because you don't think we'll do that, or for some other reason)? Or that nowadays a person's pronouns are described as "a person's pronouns" and not "a person's preferred pronouns" (because some people were trivializing semantics earlier with the woman vs. female conversation, so they might also be dismissive of whether or not using "preferred" is a big deal, or for some other reason)? Or a different point? All of the above+? Several people have already continued using "he/him" after I mentioned being genderqueer and pointed out that them not respecting that wasn't indicative that they were actually engaging in good faith. Pretty sure someone tried to gaslight me about it too. I'm already the defacto "Black council" here. ZerO could be included if/when they participate. It's not exactly helpful that the sort of phenomena I was describing in the beginning pushed ZerO to get banned so they can't right now. I don't want to end up the "chair of the genderqueer council". I don't like that this is opening myself up for endless sealioning bad faith "oopsies" and too much more to list in this moment burying any sincere attempts at growth. ZerO (and some others) could probably speak well to the danger of just expressing the kind of vulnerability required to convey that there's something wrong. Particularly for Black people AMAB. @Fleet No worries mate! I appreciate the recognition on the leaving an out thing, and while scary, I'm thankful you asked in thread. I just rechecked my recent posts and noticed that one of them - the long one - had he/his/him at the end instead of they/their/them, when referring to you. That was careless of me, and I'm sorry for that. I've gone back and corrected the pronouns in that post, though the new edits won't fix the quoted portions in other people's responses to the old version. I'll try not to make the same mistake again; I know it's my responsibility to get it right for future use, and not your responsibility to keep correcting me if I repeatedly mess up your pronouns. (That being said, if I do mess up someone's pronouns, I'm hoping that any person would just kindly poke me with a reminder.)
I appreciate that and totally understand. I hope others follow your and Fleetfeet's examples.
Happens to the best of us. That's typically how it gets handled when there aren't extenuating circumstances and what I try to do when applicable.
|
Has Trump attended a single world cup match yet? Or is tonight's going to be the first? Seems the lack of participation by him is a performance of its own with how obnoxiously loud he is about everything else. I guess it doesn't look good to "truth" about immigration when France is showing what a successful melting pot looks like, the USA themselves are an intentionally inclusive team and he already got into a fight with the women's team last term: there probably isn't much political upside for him in football, so unless he likes it personally (which definitely doesn't seem like it), he's making a deliberate point of staying far away from the greatest sports tournament worldwide? At least it spares us the celebrity cam spotting him. Showing Infantino pretty much every match is already one too many punchable faces.
|
On July 06 2026 10:39 GreenHorizons wrote:Show nested quote +On July 06 2026 10:20 DarkPlasmaBall wrote:On July 06 2026 10:11 GreenHorizons wrote:On July 06 2026 09:48 Fleetfeet wrote:
Yup.
Sidebar - GH, you mentioned being genderqueer - what are your preferred pronouns these days?
Also, I have to consult the Trans Council (joking, just some friends who are some combination of either women and/or trans) for a sanity check, and then I'll be good to dive into some liquipedia editing. It really is and the ensuing discussion there wasn't very uplifting. They're just "pronouns" not "preferred pronouns" nowadays (you can't read my tone but it's pleasant, not demeaning). I like people using GreenHorizons/GH. "they" would be a welcome alternative as well. Gotta say I don't feel particularly safe making a point of this but it felt like a bit of an obligation and I really appreciate you doing something to makes me feel at least a little bit safer. Which point don't you feel safe making, and why? That you like people using GreenHorizons/GH and that they/them would be a welcome alternative (because you don't think we'll do that, or for some other reason)? Or that nowadays a person's pronouns are described as "a person's pronouns" and not "a person's preferred pronouns" (because some people were trivializing semantics earlier with the woman vs. female conversation, so they might also be dismissive of whether or not using "preferred" is a big deal, or for some other reason)? Or a different point? All of the above+? Several people have already continued using "he/him" after I mentioned being genderqueer and pointed out that them failing to respect that was indicative that they were not actually engaging in good faith. Pretty sure someone tried to gaslight me about it too.
No, all it is is indicative of your bad faith and unproductive behaviour. Genderqueer people are not a monolith either, some are fine with whatever pronoun, some prefer they/them, some stick to their "old" for one reason or another. It is on you to tell people your preference. Instead you deliberately don't and then weaponise your vagueness.
I am happy to accommodate your wishes once you actually voiced them (it seems like you still left it up to people to figure out if you want he/him/she/her/they/them, much like your behaviour throughout the entire discussion...), but I am also a big fan of energy and effort matching:
You showed no effort throughout the whole discussion, a clear determination to only put in the absolute minimum, and the energy you have given off has been anything but constructive, and I wouldn't be surprised at all if you are all bad faith. And thus that is what you get from me. For someone like Wombat or DarkPlasmaBall who have shown nothing but genuine efforts to understand and be understood I would happily go through my posts and correct it but for you? Nah, you don't get to expect anything from me apart from what you do yourself: the absolute bare minimum.
Everything you received these past few pages, and probably this thread in general. is entirely the result of your behaviour. The only thing you are victim of is your own character. If you don't feel safe declaring your pronouns in here, and thus people don't accommodate them, that is on you.
It is perfectly fine not putting in much effort to accommodate someone's preferences if they act like you do. It would be rude to ignore them, but anything that takes effort is perfectly fine not to do. If that happens to someone from a marginalised group, that sucks, but it isn't a shield to protect you from justified backlash.
Against my better judgement, I did show this to my trans friend, who did say she(her preferred pronoun) would identify as genderqueer herself. And her opinion of this whole thing pretty much mirrors what I threw at you right from the start: That you are the type of person that actively makes her life and struggles worse with your behaviour, that while there were some mistakes, overall everyone besides you seemed to make a genuine effort and that the only person she would not feel comfortable talking to or being around is you. In fact she went so far as to when I jokingly suggested she should hop in and post this herself, her response (after making fun of me for still frequenting forums... ouch) was "No thanks, I have better things to do" and pointing to you specifically why she wouldn't participate even if she did care about this community at all. And, even though a bit more hesitant, she did say that she would have absolutely no worries asking people to use specific pronouns, at least when it comes to the people in the last pages of this thread. She wouldn't go further than that, but that is entirely due to her not being familiar with this community overall, and having a low expectations of gaming communities. Her verdict was that if the last few pages, excluding you, are any indication for this community then "you can't really complain much", which translates to pretty fucking good coming from a german.
So I guess that officially counts at least for half a point for you on the "driven a trans person away from this community" scoreboard for you. How does that make you feel? Any intention of being a better representative of genderqueer people and womens issues/trans issues? We didn't have any prior interactions that I remember, and you managed to make me despise you in record time. A trans person who never met you singled you out throughout this entire exchange as the only person she is sure she wouldn't like/wouldn't feel comfortable discussing these things with. Maybe it really is just you?
Big props to the people who still extend a hand to you and apologise I am not that big of a person.
EDIT: Also no, I did not intend to gaslight you into anything. I just don't think you identifying as genderqueer on its own gives you any authority on anything besides how you personally feel about these things. If I am supposed to take you more serious than that I need more cred - like the reason why I value my friends input on this over yours, apart from the obvious, is that she has walked the walk. She was very active in the LGBTQIA+ community/group at the university we both went to, and now she is doing the same at her work. She got her company to participate in the christopher street day in the city we work in, and organises said participation in large parts. And as part of that, she actively engages with peers to learn about their struggles and woes and doesn't just fight for whatever she feels like, but pays attention to very real struggles of the people around her. When she tells me "this is an issue for trans people" I trust her that this really is an issue and not just for her personally, because I wouldn't doubt for a second that she spoke to those people. Not even for a second would I think that maybe this is just the concerns of some wanabe online activist who doesn't do anything of their own and just theorises on what might be bad so they can pretend they are a good person by pointing it out.
|
Northern Ireland27306 Posts
On July 06 2026 15:14 Acrofales wrote:
Has Trump attended a single world cup match yet? Or is tonight's going to be the first? Seems the lack of participation by him is a performance of its own with how obnoxiously loud he is about everything else. I guess it doesn't look good to "truth" about immigration when France is showing what a successful melting pot looks like, the USA themselves are an intentionally inclusive team and he already got into a fight with the women's team last term: there probably isn't much political upside for him in football, so unless he likes it personally (which definitely doesn't seem like it), he's making a deliberate point of staying far away from the greatest sports tournament worldwide? At least it spares us the celebrity cam spotting him. Showing Infantino pretty much every match is already one too many punchable faces.
That was Infantino? I thought it was a gay migrant worker!
He hasn’t has yet I don’t think has Trump. Surely because he knows he’ll be booed I’d imagine
|
On July 06 2026 17:44 WombaT wrote:Show nested quote +On July 06 2026 15:14 Acrofales wrote:
Has Trump attended a single world cup match yet? Or is tonight's going to be the first? Seems the lack of participation by him is a performance of its own with how obnoxiously loud he is about everything else. I guess it doesn't look good to "truth" about immigration when France is showing what a successful melting pot looks like, the USA themselves are an intentionally inclusive team and he already got into a fight with the women's team last term: there probably isn't much political upside for him in football, so unless he likes it personally (which definitely doesn't seem like it), he's making a deliberate point of staying far away from the greatest sports tournament worldwide? At least it spares us the celebrity cam spotting him. Showing Infantino pretty much every match is already one too many punchable faces. That was Infantino? I thought it was a gay migrant worker! He hasn’t has yet I don’t think has Trump. Surely because he knows he’ll be booed I’d imagine
He went to the Knicks finals game with way more complicated logistics knowing he'll get booed in NYC.
Anyway, in his demented head maybe he thinks that now that he called in a favor with his corrupt buddy Infantino and the unprecedented move of rescinding the red card was done he might get a hero's welcome in Seattle.
From what I know of Seattle, that seems very unlikely but I guess we'll see.
It's a very interesting combo, Trump's corruption and FIFA corruption seem to have mixed quite well, a match made in heaven (or maybe hell).
|
Northern Ireland27306 Posts
On July 06 2026 08:49 Fleetfeet wrote:Show nested quote +On July 06 2026 08:23 WombaT wrote:On July 06 2026 07:05 Fleetfeet wrote:On July 06 2026 05:38 Artesimo wrote:On July 06 2026 05:18 WombaT wrote:On July 06 2026 04:34 Artesimo wrote:On July 06 2026 03:59 Fleetfeet wrote:
I'm not proud of my contribution to this saga or where it ended up. I (as seemingly all of us did) took the original statement (regarding paraphrased"you all don't even realize how toxic you all make these spaces" personally) and responded defensively. I don't know what the correct response is/was, but I don't think it's the level of shitting on GH we've seen.
I think it's trivial for us to collectively agree that the (women's league) should be named in accordance to the people who would be included in it. I think it stands as reasonable criticism for our part of gamer spaces and inclusivity, and while I might disagree with GH on its severity or value as evidence that we're all unaware of how toxic we make an environment, I don't think where this has ended up looks good for any of us. I'd rather we have fewer shitty and mean voices, and as much as we all enjoy a good Kwark snipe now and then I don't wish for that as the general tenor of any conversation. Nah, it absolutely is. When you see someone making a genuine effort, and you have a problem with what they are doing, you don't attack them. You go like "hey nice job, but you could improve here...". You definitely don't cherry pick some minute detail and attack them over it as if what they did was irrelevant or even counterproductive. Because again, I have encountered this type of person while trying to make things actively better for my players. They NEVER made anything better, they only ever made my job harder, and rarely have they ever contributed anything themselves apart from their constant nitpicking. At least for me that was and still is where all my outrage towards him comes from. I don't expect a "well done" or pat on the back, but I expect useless little shits like him to either zip it or contribute in a way that doesn't actively hurt what they pretend their cause is. Instead the clown walks around and acts all high and mighty while still having shown 0 contribution to the issue himself, made no case for his own criticism (he basically just piggy backed on the sensible ideas that others have suggested as his intentions)... shall I continue? He doesn't contribute to the issue he claims to be of importance, he doesn't contribute to the discussion in any meaningful way, all he does is at best provide nothing, and at worst hurt things even more. Did my behaviour reflect badly on myself here? Probably yeah, when it comes to showing self control. I shouldn't have engaged with him in the first place. But I'll just point towards the fact that all my anger comes from the fact that I have made an effort, however flawed it may have been, but the intention was definitely there and call it overall balanced out at that point. I take the hit on self control in exchange for "fought the enemy of the cause". Not to mention that I did not find the reactions much defensive at all. It was less "how dare you attack my honour" and more just utter confusion at what the hell he is even on about. I gave a rough idea of how a defensive action from me would have looked like. If all your criticism boils down to "overall good, but not perfect" you deserve to be driven out of town with thorny sticks. Especially when presenting it in the way he did, which again, at best does nothing and at worst drives people away from the cause. At best he is an incompetent enemy, at worst just an enemy. Have you tried not being a cis dude and a piece of shit sexist? Well in all fairness, being a women has never been more accessible in my lifetime, so maybe this really is on me. I could just become one, join the tl female/womens team, and sort this all out by just demanding whatever I feel like is the best solution. Unfortunately I am too washed for competition these days... man it really does always come down to "not good enough"...  I absolutely get this and am similarly uncomfortable answering the question "what should we do for/about womens' spaces" when most of us here aren't women. I'm glad we had a number of people responding with "I don't know, so I asked -woman- and here's what they said.". It isn't a problem we should solve, it's a problem we should help the impacted solve.
The cause of the personal offense (on my part and others) wasn't about 'female leagues', though, it was the blanket statement before that indicating we all had no idea what a toxic environment we create for everyone non-white-male. Obviously I think that statement itself was problematic for the strength and absoluteness of the wording, but it's impossible for me to say it was wrong to say unless I know what GH's goals were in saying it. It could have been a chess move prompting an action and revealing 'our mistake' after our reaction (I don't think this happened and isn't true in hindsight?) It could have been GH just frustrated as fuck and communicating poorly It could have been GH just being a troll and communicating with malice It could have been some reason I can't imagine. I can't speak to GH's goals or motivations, all I can offer is that it was nearly impossible for me to not react defensively and take it personally. The 'female league' stuff is fair enough criticism, but I think the core of the issue is what GH is saying now, that we've passively chased multiple trans people off of this site, and maybe that's a bad thing we could look at. Even if I think GH didn't and doesn't have a right to imply I'm not an ally and have only ever been an ally to white power, I still don't have to think his criticism comes from nowhere and is just vindictive. (This whole post is preachier than I'd like. You're obviously on top of your life and a better ally than I've been to marginalised groups. Not trying to tell you how to live, you already know that. Just offering my perspective and why I'm trying to shift it.) I think that’s rather an important discussion to be had, both in this specific instance, but also more generally. But have a discussion, not whatever this became. I’m pretty acutely aware that I’m a cis white dude in a scene pretty dominated by dudes, which I’m working on, and have worked out. Equally I’ve got to kind of intuit what barriers I may inadvertently be putting up, because I simply don’t get feedback from various other groups, be it positive or negative. Feedback I’d absolutely welcome GH decided to just shit on everyone’s efforts and provide nothing useful in terms of actionable feedback or suggestions. It’s his incompetence in communication that’s pissed people off, well, I can only speak for me. I think folks would actually be open to critique or better ways of doing things if like, it was actually a sensible discussion instead of this nonsense. Not your post here, which I think is great, just the general direction I said I’d nope out of this thread tangent and got drawn back in, but I’ll try to stick with it this time. Yeah it seemed like an absurd angle of attack to me, but I don't have all the info so that's hard to say as a truth rather than an opinion. At the end of it all I'll take the nugget reminder of us all having participated in Plasmid's departure, and us allegedly having pushed at least one other trans person away, as a wakeup call that we're not doing 'enough'. I don't know what 'enough' is but I can accept that we're not getting there, and if we're not getting there maybe more inclusive language on what seems trivial to me is a good place to start pushing for 'enough'
From what I recall Plasmid’s departure was rather influenced by fear and frustration of actual US politics being rather bleak for people like her rather than the thread at large being especially non-inclusive, but point taken.
Agreed, we can and should do better. Equally it’s difficult to be more inclusive unless issues and preferences are clearly articulated.
I’ll also add the caveat that sometimes there is no catch-all inclusive language, so in the absence of malice I tend to assume best intentions
I have bipolar disorder, some people prefer to say they are bipolar. Probably a more prevalent ‘divide’ with autism discourse as it were. Some consider a condition a facet of one’s person, others an inextricably integral element. Some don’t consider either condition to be a disorder, some do.
While it’s easy to respect a preference in direct conversation, when speaking more generically it can prove impossible as some conflict directly.
Of course, better to try one’s best regardless of some of that complexity
|
On July 06 2026 15:14 Acrofales wrote:
Has Trump attended a single world cup match yet? Or is tonight's going to be the first? Seems the lack of participation by him is a performance of its own with how obnoxiously loud he is about everything else. I guess it doesn't look good to "truth" about immigration when France is showing what a successful melting pot looks like, the USA themselves are an intentionally inclusive team and he already got into a fight with the women's team last term: there probably isn't much political upside for him in football, so unless he likes it personally (which definitely doesn't seem like it), he's making a deliberate point of staying far away from the greatest sports tournament worldwide? At least it spares us the celebrity cam spotting him. Showing Infantino pretty much every match is already one too many punchable faces.
You feel snubbed as someone whose continental sport is soccer because the leader of the free world hasn't gone to enough World Cup Games hosted in his country compared to your expectations (whatever they may be based on). This is reading too much into it.
I would bet money that had POTUS gone to more World Cup Games you would be going "Look at the security nightmare and waiting lines Trump forced upon innocent viewers to satisfy his vanity," blaming him for the bad experience citizens and tourists got as a result, and chastising him for watching sportsball instead of presidenting. Then ironically saying oh it's better that he's watching sportsball instead of presidenting since he messes everything up anyway. Would I win money?
|
Northern Ireland27306 Posts
I mean Infantino invented a Peace Prize for him to win, least he could do is show up at a game or two eh?
|
On July 06 2026 21:04 oBlade wrote:Show nested quote +On July 06 2026 15:14 Acrofales wrote:
Has Trump attended a single world cup match yet? Or is tonight's going to be the first? Seems the lack of participation by him is a performance of its own with how obnoxiously loud he is about everything else. I guess it doesn't look good to "truth" about immigration when France is showing what a successful melting pot looks like, the USA themselves are an intentionally inclusive team and he already got into a fight with the women's team last term: there probably isn't much political upside for him in football, so unless he likes it personally (which definitely doesn't seem like it), he's making a deliberate point of staying far away from the greatest sports tournament worldwide? At least it spares us the celebrity cam spotting him. Showing Infantino pretty much every match is already one too many punchable faces. You feel snubbed as someone whose continental sport is soccer because the leader of the free world hasn't gone to enough World Cup Games hosted in his country compared to your expectations (whatever they may be based on). This is reading too much into it. I would bet money that had POTUS gone to more World Cup Games you would be going "Look at the security nightmare and waiting lines Trump forced upon innocent viewers to satisfy his vanity," blaming him for the bad experience citizens and tourists got as a result, and chastising him for watching sportsball instead of presidenting. Then ironically saying oh it's better that he's watching sportsball instead of presidenting since he messes everything up anyway. Would I win money?
Rare time I agree with oblade. People will be complaining either way.
|
Northern Ireland27306 Posts
On July 06 2026 21:47 Geiko wrote:Show nested quote +On July 06 2026 21:04 oBlade wrote:On July 06 2026 15:14 Acrofales wrote:
Has Trump attended a single world cup match yet? Or is tonight's going to be the first? Seems the lack of participation by him is a performance of its own with how obnoxiously loud he is about everything else. I guess it doesn't look good to "truth" about immigration when France is showing what a successful melting pot looks like, the USA themselves are an intentionally inclusive team and he already got into a fight with the women's team last term: there probably isn't much political upside for him in football, so unless he likes it personally (which definitely doesn't seem like it), he's making a deliberate point of staying far away from the greatest sports tournament worldwide? At least it spares us the celebrity cam spotting him. Showing Infantino pretty much every match is already one too many punchable faces. You feel snubbed as someone whose continental sport is soccer because the leader of the free world hasn't gone to enough World Cup Games hosted in his country compared to your expectations (whatever they may be based on). This is reading too much into it. I would bet money that had POTUS gone to more World Cup Games you would be going "Look at the security nightmare and waiting lines Trump forced upon innocent viewers to satisfy his vanity," blaming him for the bad experience citizens and tourists got as a result, and chastising him for watching sportsball instead of presidenting. Then ironically saying oh it's better that he's watching sportsball instead of presidenting since he messes everything up anyway. Would I win money? Rare time I agree with oblade. People will be complaining either way.
Some people will always complain, can’t really be helped. Can’t say I care especially either way, it is pretty standard to have the head of state or head of government of a host nation show up for a few games. Some attend more than others, but it’s pretty standard shrug one’s shoulders stuff
Less standard is such a figure ringing the head of FIFA to sidestep their own disciplinary procedures, but not exactly surprising behaviour from either Trump or Infantino
|
The issue is if you openly foment a reputation for being a corrupt piece of shit by bragging on live TV about how rich you've gotten from the bribes you're taking, people are going to complain when you do anything, or even when you don't do anything. That's not a "woe is me, I have no good options" scenario -- you've created that by your own volition the moment you decided to be a piece of shit.
|
On July 06 2026 21:58 WombaT wrote:Show nested quote +On July 06 2026 21:47 Geiko wrote:On July 06 2026 21:04 oBlade wrote:On July 06 2026 15:14 Acrofales wrote:
Has Trump attended a single world cup match yet? Or is tonight's going to be the first? Seems the lack of participation by him is a performance of its own with how obnoxiously loud he is about everything else. I guess it doesn't look good to "truth" about immigration when France is showing what a successful melting pot looks like, the USA themselves are an intentionally inclusive team and he already got into a fight with the women's team last term: there probably isn't much political upside for him in football, so unless he likes it personally (which definitely doesn't seem like it), he's making a deliberate point of staying far away from the greatest sports tournament worldwide? At least it spares us the celebrity cam spotting him. Showing Infantino pretty much every match is already one too many punchable faces. You feel snubbed as someone whose continental sport is soccer because the leader of the free world hasn't gone to enough World Cup Games hosted in his country compared to your expectations (whatever they may be based on). This is reading too much into it. I would bet money that had POTUS gone to more World Cup Games you would be going "Look at the security nightmare and waiting lines Trump forced upon innocent viewers to satisfy his vanity," blaming him for the bad experience citizens and tourists got as a result, and chastising him for watching sportsball instead of presidenting. Then ironically saying oh it's better that he's watching sportsball instead of presidenting since he messes everything up anyway. Would I win money? Rare time I agree with oblade. People will be complaining either way. Some people will always complain, can’t really be helped. Can’t say I care especially either way, it is pretty standard to have the head of state or head of government of a host nation show up for a few games. Some attend more than others, but it’s pretty standard shrug one’s shoulders stuff Less standard is such a figure ringing the head of FIFA to sidestep their own disciplinary procedures, but not exactly surprising behaviour from either Trump or Infantino
You got to give it to Trump, the guy knows how to control headlines. Last week it was revealed that he stole a couple billions in crypto and insider trading. Today nobody cares anymore and we're talking about a phone call he made to help his football team.
|
Northern Ireland27306 Posts
On July 06 2026 22:09 Geiko wrote:Show nested quote +On July 06 2026 21:58 WombaT wrote:On July 06 2026 21:47 Geiko wrote:On July 06 2026 21:04 oBlade wrote:On July 06 2026 15:14 Acrofales wrote:
Has Trump attended a single world cup match yet? Or is tonight's going to be the first? Seems the lack of participation by him is a performance of its own with how obnoxiously loud he is about everything else. I guess it doesn't look good to "truth" about immigration when France is showing what a successful melting pot looks like, the USA themselves are an intentionally inclusive team and he already got into a fight with the women's team last term: there probably isn't much political upside for him in football, so unless he likes it personally (which definitely doesn't seem like it), he's making a deliberate point of staying far away from the greatest sports tournament worldwide? At least it spares us the celebrity cam spotting him. Showing Infantino pretty much every match is already one too many punchable faces. You feel snubbed as someone whose continental sport is soccer because the leader of the free world hasn't gone to enough World Cup Games hosted in his country compared to your expectations (whatever they may be based on). This is reading too much into it. I would bet money that had POTUS gone to more World Cup Games you would be going "Look at the security nightmare and waiting lines Trump forced upon innocent viewers to satisfy his vanity," blaming him for the bad experience citizens and tourists got as a result, and chastising him for watching sportsball instead of presidenting. Then ironically saying oh it's better that he's watching sportsball instead of presidenting since he messes everything up anyway. Would I win money? Rare time I agree with oblade. People will be complaining either way. Some people will always complain, can’t really be helped. Can’t say I care especially either way, it is pretty standard to have the head of state or head of government of a host nation show up for a few games. Some attend more than others, but it’s pretty standard shrug one’s shoulders stuff Less standard is such a figure ringing the head of FIFA to sidestep their own disciplinary procedures, but not exactly surprising behaviour from either Trump or Infantino You got to give it to Trump, the guy knows how to control headlines. Last week it was revealed that he stole a couple billions in crypto and insider trading. Today nobody cares anymore and we're talking about a phone call he made to help his football team.
I wouldn’t conflate a resigned lack of surprise for folks not caring.
Trump doing something blatantly corrupt with no consequence is about equivalent to me posting a daily update that yes, today is a day of the week that ends in a ‘y’.
|
On July 06 2026 22:09 Geiko wrote:Show nested quote +On July 06 2026 21:58 WombaT wrote:On July 06 2026 21:47 Geiko wrote:On July 06 2026 21:04 oBlade wrote:On July 06 2026 15:14 Acrofales wrote:
Has Trump attended a single world cup match yet? Or is tonight's going to be the first? Seems the lack of participation by him is a performance of its own with how obnoxiously loud he is about everything else. I guess it doesn't look good to "truth" about immigration when France is showing what a successful melting pot looks like, the USA themselves are an intentionally inclusive team and he already got into a fight with the women's team last term: there probably isn't much political upside for him in football, so unless he likes it personally (which definitely doesn't seem like it), he's making a deliberate point of staying far away from the greatest sports tournament worldwide? At least it spares us the celebrity cam spotting him. Showing Infantino pretty much every match is already one too many punchable faces. You feel snubbed as someone whose continental sport is soccer because the leader of the free world hasn't gone to enough World Cup Games hosted in his country compared to your expectations (whatever they may be based on). This is reading too much into it. I would bet money that had POTUS gone to more World Cup Games you would be going "Look at the security nightmare and waiting lines Trump forced upon innocent viewers to satisfy his vanity," blaming him for the bad experience citizens and tourists got as a result, and chastising him for watching sportsball instead of presidenting. Then ironically saying oh it's better that he's watching sportsball instead of presidenting since he messes everything up anyway. Would I win money? Rare time I agree with oblade. People will be complaining either way. Some people will always complain, can’t really be helped. Can’t say I care especially either way, it is pretty standard to have the head of state or head of government of a host nation show up for a few games. Some attend more than others, but it’s pretty standard shrug one’s shoulders stuff Less standard is such a figure ringing the head of FIFA to sidestep their own disciplinary procedures, but not exactly surprising behaviour from either Trump or Infantino You got to give it to Trump, the guy knows how to control headlines. Last week it was revealed that he stole a couple billions in crypto and insider trading. Today nobody cares anymore and we're talking about a phone call he made to help his football team.
I totally missed that. Would you mind posting a source/article?
|
On July 06 2026 21:04 oBlade wrote:Show nested quote +On July 06 2026 15:14 Acrofales wrote:
Has Trump attended a single world cup match yet? Or is tonight's going to be the first? Seems the lack of participation by him is a performance of its own with how obnoxiously loud he is about everything else. I guess it doesn't look good to "truth" about immigration when France is showing what a successful melting pot looks like, the USA themselves are an intentionally inclusive team and he already got into a fight with the women's team last term: there probably isn't much political upside for him in football, so unless he likes it personally (which definitely doesn't seem like it), he's making a deliberate point of staying far away from the greatest sports tournament worldwide? At least it spares us the celebrity cam spotting him. Showing Infantino pretty much every match is already one too many punchable faces. You feel snubbed as someone whose continental sport is soccer because the leader of the free world hasn't gone to enough World Cup Games hosted in his country compared to your expectations (whatever they may be based on). This is reading too much into it. I would bet money that had POTUS gone to more World Cup Games you would be going "Look at the security nightmare and waiting lines Trump forced upon innocent viewers to satisfy his vanity," blaming him for the bad experience citizens and tourists got as a result, and chastising him for watching sportsball instead of presidenting. Then ironically saying oh it's better that he's watching sportsball instead of presidenting since he messes everything up anyway. Would I win money?
It’s time to catch up, US under Trump has willingly given up their leader of the free world status. They are openly protectionist and hostile to their allies.
Be interesting to see who steps in to fill the void or if it is more by committee.
|
On July 06 2026 22:17 DarkPlasmaBall wrote:Show nested quote +On July 06 2026 22:09 Geiko wrote:On July 06 2026 21:58 WombaT wrote:On July 06 2026 21:47 Geiko wrote:On July 06 2026 21:04 oBlade wrote:On July 06 2026 15:14 Acrofales wrote:
Has Trump attended a single world cup match yet? Or is tonight's going to be the first? Seems the lack of participation by him is a performance of its own with how obnoxiously loud he is about everything else. I guess it doesn't look good to "truth" about immigration when France is showing what a successful melting pot looks like, the USA themselves are an intentionally inclusive team and he already got into a fight with the women's team last term: there probably isn't much political upside for him in football, so unless he likes it personally (which definitely doesn't seem like it), he's making a deliberate point of staying far away from the greatest sports tournament worldwide? At least it spares us the celebrity cam spotting him. Showing Infantino pretty much every match is already one too many punchable faces. You feel snubbed as someone whose continental sport is soccer because the leader of the free world hasn't gone to enough World Cup Games hosted in his country compared to your expectations (whatever they may be based on). This is reading too much into it. I would bet money that had POTUS gone to more World Cup Games you would be going "Look at the security nightmare and waiting lines Trump forced upon innocent viewers to satisfy his vanity," blaming him for the bad experience citizens and tourists got as a result, and chastising him for watching sportsball instead of presidenting. Then ironically saying oh it's better that he's watching sportsball instead of presidenting since he messes everything up anyway. Would I win money? Rare time I agree with oblade. People will be complaining either way. Some people will always complain, can’t really be helped. Can’t say I care especially either way, it is pretty standard to have the head of state or head of government of a host nation show up for a few games. Some attend more than others, but it’s pretty standard shrug one’s shoulders stuff Less standard is such a figure ringing the head of FIFA to sidestep their own disciplinary procedures, but not exactly surprising behaviour from either Trump or Infantino You got to give it to Trump, the guy knows how to control headlines. Last week it was revealed that he stole a couple billions in crypto and insider trading. Today nobody cares anymore and we're talking about a phone call he made to help his football team. I totally missed that. Would you mind posting a source/article?
Hundreds of millions of trades made right before big announcements regarding "liberation day"
https://www.wsj.com/finance/stocks/trumps-brokerage-accounts-made-big-trades-around-liberation-day-tariffs-06e92290
1.4B profit from crypto meme coin and "liberty financial"
https://www.reuters.com/world/us/trump-reports-more-than-14-billion-income-crypto-ventures-2026-06-30/
|
|
|
|
|
|
EPT
