Giant FAQ on The European Initiative to Stop Destroying Games
Giant FAQ on The European Initiative to Stop Destroying Games
"Giant FAQ on The European Initiative to Stop Destroying Games!" (Ross Scott/Accursed Farms)
13 comments
-
-
Disclaimer: not watched it all
Starting off with a false dichotomy, conflating that no one else is trying so you're their only hope. Makes me want to sit down watch it and pick out any falacies, but let's be honest, that's not likely to happen.
Tell me you don't understand fallacies without telling me you don't understand fallacies I guess.
-
Starting off with a false dichotomy, conflating that no one else is trying so you’re their only hope
I'm sorry, but who else is trying?
-
We are the only ones currently trying to do this, who have gained this much momentum and a serious chance of accomplishing it.
Is how I understand Ross wanted his message to be interpreted.
Starting off with a false dichotomy, conflating that no one else is trying so you're their only hope.
It might be incorrect, but I genuinely don't know of any other project trying to do the same. There's more, please read on.
Makes me want to sit down watch it and pick out any falacies
Would you also recognize its valid points when you noticed any, or would you just go hypercritical on it? I don't feel the latter is a healthy mindset in general, to be honest you with you.
You mention—and I appreciate that—that you didn't watch the entire video. I understand that, because it's lengthy and we all need to be judicious with how we spend our time. But in this instance, I think you're missing the forest for the trees, overly focusing on one specific fault to the point of disregarding the rest of the effort.
From your other comment:
I'm sorry, but who else is trying?
Doesn't matter, the false dichotomy is our way is the right way because no one else is trying.
I don't think that's the spirit. It's more along the lines of, "this may not be ideal, but it's the best we have right now, and it's unlikely you'll have other options, if any, before more avoidable damage is done to the industry." Which I find entirely believable. Momentum is a widely understood political tool, you see it every election.
It's not necessarily the right way, but it sure is your best shot.
Just like we don't always get to vote for the politicians we want, but the ones we need, among the ones we can.
Your focus on...
Best, not only.
...is not key to the discussion at large, and borders on pedantic.
-
Right, because I'm specifically talking about fallacies. You're currently exhibiting the fallacy fallacy, which is when you assume an argument is wrong because it's fallacious.
I have my judgement on this topic already (I'm not for or against it, but its more complicated than that too), I'm responding to people who are struggling to understand even the first fallacy that I found, which honestly makes me think this is actually really important to do.
If you can't see the flaws in the argument that "we're making the first bridge across this river, so we're your only hope for a bridge across the river". You're going to have some really tough times not being scammed.
I've spent more time in this comment section having to explain how that's a fallacious argument than I spent watching the video. This is utterly absurd that I need to explain that just because there's only one initiative doesn't mean it's the only possible initiative.
You lot are having an argument against a position I don't hold and a argument I'm not making.
-
-
13 comments
I appreciate Ross purely answering questions and not referencing any names in the community, even though it's quite clear where much of the noise and misunderstandings/misinformation originate from. Hopefully this helps people still on the fence realize the value of this initiative.
I didn't think I would end up watching the entire video, considering I already support the movement as much as I can, but it was interesting. Some of the questions caught me off-guard.