Absolutely would buy that brand just because of the mascot.

That feels like a weak argument, revenge porn is a crime, so is illustrated csam.

Not everywhere. If it’s legal where the admin lives and legal where the server is hosted, you can’t really make this argument. You could make the argument that it’s morally wrong, but like… the point is that it’s a possible point of contention, and not as cut-and-dried as you suggest.

Also the ideology of a nsfw community is a straight-forward issue.

You’d think so, but like… What about disagreements over what type of content should be allowed? Should they allow AI generated stuff? Revenge porn? Illustrated art depicting minors? Specific extreme fetishes?

…but not if it requires real-ID internet laws for the rest of us.

Possessing that would have immediately declared you the King or Queen of the Playground when I was a kid. Nobody would have even thought to contest your rule.

Q4 Revenue grew 70% year-over-year to $726 million. 2025 Revenue grew 69% to $2.2 billion. Q4 Net Income $252 million, 35% of revenue. Source

But that’s cool, I’m sure 19 million will teach 'em. I wonder how much they sold that data for.

Of course not, just like rich non-citizens will have exceptions made for them. The rules only apply to the poors.

I lowkey wish ‘disappear into the woods for 30 years’ was even a viable option. There’s something deeply appealing about just living off the grid and away from society with a small group of close friends, living simply and self-sufficiently and just leaving the modern world behind.

Why not? (Alternately you can use the sub-term ‘Scaly’.)

Sale History:

2023: £385,000

1997: £185,000

Good luck with the new price, I guess? Perfect for someone who’s always dreamed of living in a parking lot.

She wasn’t “my” candidate, any more than Donald Trump was “your” candidate. I voted against Donald Trump. Folks who voted third party didn’t do that. They may not have voted for him, but they didn’t vote against him.

This, really, is what gets me about billionaires. Literally any of them could have just faded into obscurity years ago, lived a life of abject luxury and never had a single worry. Or, they could have spent like 10% of their wealth on improving things for society as a whole, and everyone would have loved them for it. But no - they all had to just focus on hoarding more and more and making things worse and worse for everyone else. It’s fucking baffling to me.

Ah, yes. Because that’s the most objectionable part of that opinion, not ‘We should jail people for their voting behavior’. Can you get any more authoritarian?

Edit: But sure, if that’s where we’re going, I’ll bite:

It was a two party race. There were no other viable candidates. You didn’t vote against Trump in any meaningful way; you did nothing to prevent our current situation, and that’s a pretty wild stance to be defending.

I spent a lot of years playing EQ1, and I don’t think any game will ever really capture that magic again, but this sure looks like it’s a great attempt at doing so.

What! I love this conceptually.

Well, I suppose you’re welcome to your opinion, even if it’s an absolutely horrid one.

Send them back to NK. Send them the first leg of the trip on a bus driven by a single unarmed soldier. If the North Koreans somehow manage to overpower the driver and commandeer the bus, and drive it to wherever they please… “Well, shucks, guys, we did what we could.”

The issue here is that I, as a gamer, want to know if developers espouse opinions that I strongly disagree with, because I don’t want to give them my money. So if a developer was (for example) in the Epstein Files, I would want to know that before buying their game. Reviews are an effective way to communicate that information, and I’d be rather upset to see them go.

You can’t reasonably allow reviews outlining some developer behavior and disallow others - that’s straight up censorship. As much as I disagree with the 'I will downvote games by someone who celebrated Charlie Kirk’s death" stance, I think it’s their right to take that stance. I’m not really sure how you reconcile those two things without just banning them both.

What Steam could do is have a separate review category (from ‘normal’ ones and ‘off-topic’ ones) to categorize character profiles of the developers, and let people opt in or opt out of having those included in the aggregate score. Alternately, they could categorize reviews by the reason (e.g. “Performance / crashes”, “Unfun”, “Too hard”, “Too Woke”, “Developer is a horrible person”), and let people choose which categories they care about.

You like following rules, don’t you?

Oh, interesting - it seems you are right; I stand corrected.