Bancheis

Just a gamer who occasionally finds his way to posts. I support free speech and platforms that allow it. Platforms like this are the new public square.

[Bancheis @Bancheis]

@GeorgeSchulte @ianmiles Speech is not hateful, nor is it offensive. If hateful or offensive by nature, it would impact everyone equally. For speech to be offensive, someone must choose to be offended. For speech to be hateful, someone must choose to feel hated.

Words only have the power you give them.

[Bancheis @Bancheis]

It's not the continuation of a story if you change the character. It is a new story.

The point people make here is that corporatization of games feels more comfortable virtue signaling rather than making good games. If someone wants to push a female character in gaming, most men won't have an issue with it. IF it is the original character.

But taking popular games with iconic characters and swapping them is low effort revisionism. Imagine if Doom Guy suddenly became Doom Girl. People would simply ask "Why?" and be in the right to do so.

If someone kills off a character at the end of the previous game, fair enough, they need someone else to take the lead on the next game. But if the character dies off screen, or is simply replaced for no reason, why do the gamers who enjoyed the first one owe anything to this essentially "new" story/game? They don't.

Game companies live or die on their market decisions. And right now, we have people artificially adding weight in marketing towards feminization of the industry. It is artificial, because we don't see more women actually playing the games with women in them. Men still dominate the player base of most games. Ignoring your existing fan base in favor of chasing a group who generally will never come around is a futile effort.

Not saying female gamers don't exist, but not at a scale that supports the level of marketing we see.

[Bancheis @Bancheis]

@RyanNea49752222 @frontfacez @Asmongold @singhisking1229 @McJuggerNuggets And yes I purposefully misdirected that insult. If you are going to make low effort insults towards people, expect low effort responses.

Not daft. Just a smartass engaging with people I shouldn't bother with for self-entertainment.

[Bancheis @Bancheis]

You only said "so you engage with it and boost the visibility and metrics of the poster" which was in reply to my response to a 3rd party, not a response to Asmongold. The person who posted what I replied to was not him.

Visibility and metrics apply to everyone, not just people you dislike my dude. You are getting visibility as well. Was that not also the purpose of posting your opinion on the matter?

[Bancheis @Bancheis]

@RyanNea49752222 @frontfacez @Asmongold @singhisking1229 @McJuggerNuggets I don't think @frontfacez is a grifter. I think people who post things publicly on a social media site designed for discussion is just that... discussion.

If you want to frame it as grifting instead of legitimate discussion, the onus is on you to prove that.

[Bancheis @Bancheis]

@frontfacez @Asmongold @singhisking1229 @McJuggerNuggets The language is supposed to make you feel uncomfortable, because the scenario is supposed to be uncomfortable. No one should feel comfortable with such an action.

So yes.

[Bancheis @Bancheis]

@not__vee @Kodiak_VT @onyxicca A one-sided grudge isn't worth keeping.

This is why it is always good to talk things over. Misunderstandings are cleared, and suffering over the "what if" situations can be clarified.

In this scenario, the disagreement wasn't big enough to be memorable. So no hatred is there.

[Bancheis @Bancheis]

@zaggrim @TTExulansic Has little to do with IQ, and more to do with impulse control. Even intelligent people can have poor impulse control. But you are still correct there are people who will do it anyway.

Exactly why it is better not to confront people directly. You never know who will snap.

[Bancheis @Bancheis]

@Joe29542361 @MagneticNorse To be fair, some human drivers are worse than Waymos. The bar is low, but they do exist lol.

[Bancheis @Bancheis]

@PatriotVato88 @NowPammsy @doj @POTUS @GovPressOffice They always claim it doesn't happen*
(*= on a wide scale)

The reality is if Governmental races are super close though, wide scale isn't necessary to tip the scales in favor of the other side.

[Bancheis @Bancheis]

@KhapaD79746 @thevivafrei Imagine India. A cow walks in the middle of the highway and lays down. You can't do this. You have to sit there and wait for it to move, even if it lays there for hours.

[Bancheis @Bancheis]

@DP_LTS @TTExulansic Fair point. Doesn't look like the face of someone with consistent and continued beatings. And it wouldn't be the first time some potentially unhinged individual lies to gain sympathy either.

That said, people are unreasonable. And while violence isn't acceptable, it is possible.

[Bancheis @Bancheis]

I think Pride really stands for one of the seven deadly sins. And I am saying that from the perspective of an agnostic.

The counter to persecution isn't superiority and persecuting others who refuse to agree with it.

Identity politics needs to stop. No "group" can claim to be 100% moral or right, just like no group can be 100% immoral or wrong.

Individualism is more important than group identity, and the flag stands for something not everyone who waves it believes anyway. Many who do wave it exclude dissenters as enemies, weaponizing group identity and identity politics to paint them as such.

[Bancheis @Bancheis]

@BrianBu25828007 Neither. Bad people exist everywhere, and in every ideology. Labels don't prove or disprove malicious intent.

But those with malicious intent will always flock to ideologies that cover for their actions. The more liberal ideologies grant access to a shield they can abuse.

[Bancheis @Bancheis]

There is no such thing as "stolen land". There is land that has been conquered, and there is land that has been defended. But land that was conquered was achieved by force, military might, conquest. Theft doesn't do it justice.

All lands that are conquered face one of three realities afterwards. They either;
1. Retain new ownership of the land by successfully defending against recapture
2. Lose the land to recapture, or to conquest by a third party
3. The land becomes barren and abandoned to nature, until another civilization resettles it

No nation that exists in 2026 was immune to this reality, this structure. All nations strong enough to survive the age of conquest have done so due to conquering their land's previous owners, defending their land against assaults, or reviving a bloody misfortunate land which had been abandoned. As a general statement, no one is "indigenous" or "native" if you go back far enough in history. Exceptions to this statement, if they exist, are extremely rare.

We are all born as ancestors of a mixture of conquerors and the conquered, likely with the blood of both flowing through our veins.

[Bancheis @Bancheis]

@Kodiak_VT @not__vee @onyxicca An assumption. You could be right, but we won't know until @not__vee chimes in on it. Call me naïve, but I still believe in redemption and coming together for common ground over blood feuds for something stupid from a year ago.

[Bancheis @Bancheis]

@Kodiak_VT @not__vee @onyxicca That's fair. But is a single disagreement more powerful than another separate agreement? Perhaps it is time to set aside the dislike over something you thought was stupid in favor of something you both think is legitimate.

[Bancheis @Bancheis]

@Kodiak_VT @not__vee @onyxicca The REAL question you have to ask yourself is... why do you dislike someone you agree with? Is it directed, manufactured, or manipulated opinions, or have you really read and watched enough to form your own opinions?

[Bancheis @Bancheis]

@evie_ @KimKatieUSA @MissDee1117 The video was edited by this race bait account who posted it, not the original owner of the video. Hence the "Katie's" part of the fatigue meter. Can we at least agree on that fact?

[Bancheis @Bancheis]

@evie_ @KimKatieUSA @MissDee1117 I would argue that she was the one who engaged with him, not the other way around. He would been happy to be left alone on a public sidewalk if she didn't approach him with a weapon. But again, the argument isn't that bird seed is bad. The argument is no one owns the sidewalk.