My point though is that you talk about all of that as if it’s some sort of chore.

To me, it’s a lot of the fun.

I rarely even get to the point of having to stop and weigh choices in my inventory, since every time I come across something new, I have to stop and check it out and try to figure out what it is and what it does and what sort of advantages or disadvantages it might have. I enjoy that. So all along the way, I’m figuring out what I want to or think I should keep and what I want to or think I can get rid of, and not because a finite inventory demands it, but because that’s part of the point of playing in the first place.

Broadly, you’re asking if other people actually invest the time and energy to sort out how to play complex games. I’m saying that we not only can and do, but that that’s a lot of the point. That whole process of sorting things out is a lot of the reason that we play in the first place.

Yeah - I just jump in and wing it.

At the risk of inviting the internet’s wrath, when people talk about the difference between serious gamers and casuals, this is the sort of thing they’re talking about.

“Serious” gaming involves a particular set of skills and interests, such that the person is willing and able to just jump into some complicated new game and figure it out. And it’s not just that “serious” gamers can do that - the point is that they want to. They enjoy it. They enjoy being lost, then slowly putting the pieces together and figuring out how things work and getting better because they’ve figured it out. And they enjoy the details - learning which skills do what and which items do what, and how it all interrelates. All that stuff isn’t some chore to be avoided - it’s a lot of the point - a lot of the reason that they (we) play games.

You talk about your inventory filling up and then just selling everything, and I can’t even imagine doing that. To me, that’s not just obviously bad strategy, but entirely missing the point - like buying ingredients to make delicious food, then bringing them home and throwing them in the garbage.

As is generally the case, only a relative few have enough power to actually do something meaningful, and as the winners of the countless battles that had to be fought as they crawled their way up whichever hierarchy to the top of which they now cling, they tend to be ruthless, self-serving, dishonest, amoral and entirely heartless, hiding behind a convincing-enough veneer of principles and integrity.

So as is generally the case, the world can be roughly divided into those who could do something but won’t. those who would do something but can’t, and those who aren’t paying attention, for whatever reason.

Eien no Filena on the SNES/SFC (it was Japan-only but it's been fan-translated).

Not only is the protagonist a woman - that fact is repeatedly plot-relevant.

The one time I did that, I just switched my inbox from “Unread” to “All.” Problem solved.

I happened to run across a CD of the fourth one used, a couple of years after it released. I didn’t even know it existed before that, and definitely didn’t know it’d end up becoming my favorite. And I still don’t have a copy of the fifth. I do have the last two though.

25 On is sort of reminiscent of Tornado or The Good News and the Bad News - a return to form. It’s pretty good on its own, but sort of suffers by comparison. Monster Movie is odd but interesting. It feels kind of self-indulgent, but in a good way - just a bunch of guys sitting around playing what they want to play just because that’s what they want to play. It’s a bit disjointed, but I like it.

I happened on them when they put out their first album and have been a fan ever since, and that’s even without ever getting a chance to see them live. Bob Walkenhorst is easily my favorite songwriter.

Flirting with the Universe is their fourth album - after a bit of a recording hiatus after The Good News and the Bad News, and it’s far and away my favorite. It’s obvious that they took their time and carefully crafted an album designed to showcase their talent. It’s unfortunate that it still didn’t manage to bring them the recognition they’ve always deserved, but I appreciate it.

Off the top of my head…

The Presidents of the United States of America - The Presidents of the United States of America

Stan Ridgway - The Big Heat

The Rainmakers - Flirting with the Universe

XTC - Black Sea

Morphine - Good

Bloodhound Gang - Hooray for Boobies

Lloyd Cole and the Commotions - Rattlesnakes

The Mattoid - Great Lovers

Frank Zappa - Joe’s Garage

Was (Not Was) - What Up Dog?

…or something like that…

There’s a line in Nicholas Roeg’s movie Insignificance that has stayed with me for decades now.

There’s an obvious Einstein expy just called “The Professor.” At one point, he’s asked why he’s so cautious about his claims - why he habitually says things like, “I think that…” or “The theory is that…” or “One might argue that…”

His response is, “If I say ‘I know,’ I stop thinking.”

That, IMO, points to the primary answer to your question - don’t try to remove self-doubt. Nourish it. Revel in it. Because it’s the thing that will keep you thinking, and the more you think, the more likely you are to get to actual truth.

I browse on All almost exclusively, and if a community or poster is notably toxic or spammy I block them, but if they just don’t interest me, then I just scroll past them.

Honestly, I don’t even understand what the supposed problem is. The world is full of things that don’t interest me. That’s just the way it goes, and really it’s just background noise that I barely even notice.

One of my personal favorites, and technically an example of media universe crossovers though probably not quite what one would think of, is the Japanese manga series Saint Young Men, which is about Jesus and Buddha sharing an apartment in modern-day Tokyo.

3,000 - Oblivion

That’s spread over 40 or so characters, and dating all the way back to 2006.

I doubt it, particularly because it’s almost certainly the case that the people who deride it when others do it do it themselves in other situations.

It’s far and away most common in partisan politics, and it happens because the simple fact of the matter is that most professional politicians and political parties are loathsome slimeballs, and the only thing a partisan can dependably say in support of their preferences is that they’re (purportedly) better than the alternative. So it’s nearly always the case that in attempting to defend or advocate for their preference, they’ll bring up the alternative and shift focus to them.

And then they’ll potentially turn right around and deride their opponents for doing the same.

That’s not uncommon in trades - plumbing, construction, auto mechanics and the like.

There are tricks and techniques that one can learn over time to make things easier or more efficient, but they’re often complex enough or require enough skill and experience that if you don’t know what you’re doing, you’re just going to unnecessarily screw things up trying. So new people are taught the standard, safe, dependable way of doing things, even if that’s not the way the old hands do it.

Edit to add: in a moral context rather than a practical one, I don’t think it ever is appropriate. IMO, the first requirement for any moral stance is that one abide by it oneself, and unless and until one has managed to accomplish that most basic of tasks, one has no standing by which to even meaningfully comment on other people’s behavior.

Tremors. It’s just pretty much flawless.

Yes - I know lots of childless genXers, including myself.

I think we were the first generation to see the bullshit fairly clearly, but we weren’t even close to being in a position to do anything about it.

The earlier generations generally didn’t see it, and the boomers only saw parts of it - they were too easily distracted by their own greed and self-indulgence. Stuck in the shadows as we were, and growing up right in the middle of it - in the world after the Kennedy/King assassinations and Vietnam and Watergate and OPEC and stagflation and Iran/Contra and on and on and on - we couldn’t really miss it. But we’ve never had any real influence (other than our brief but notable time at the vanguard of music, art and fashion), so it mostly just left us sort of cynical and detached. It’s fallen to the later generations to get fired up enough to maybe do something about it.

And yeah - my plan too has long been to mostly keep a low profile, try to share a bit of what hopefully amounts to wisdom, then slip off-stage before the inevitable shit hits the inevitable fan.

Invisibility is the defining characteristic of Generation X.

When Douglas Coupland popularized the term in his novel of the same name, that was an awful lot of the point. Generation X was the generation that just sort of fell through the cracks, lost in the shadow of the baby boomers.

Over the years, we’ve just adapted to it, and really, at this point, it’s sort of nice to be forgotten. We can just sit on the sidelines, munching on popcorn, offering up a bit of snidely cynical commentary and reminiscing about great music, great times and great hair.

I would assume that first and foremost it’s that, as the old saying goes, the squeaky wheel gets the grease. And disabled people and their advocates aren’t squeaky enough.

Cynically, I think there’s another explanation…

I think a lot of activism doesn’t actually generate meaningful results. To some significant degree, it just serves as something for people to fight over and politicians to fundraise and campaign on.

To serve those purposes though, it has to be controversial - there has to be a basis on which one party can take a stance in favor and the other a stance opposed. And another handy feature of that sort of activism is that it doesn’t have to actually be enacted, and in fact, it’s better for the politicians if it’s not. That means that the ones who supported it can fundraise and run merely on having supported it and on the need to counter the evil other party who opposed it, while those who opposed it can fundraise and run merely on having opposed it and on the need to counter the evil other party who proposed it. And since no money was spent on any program, that’s that much more money the politicians can funnel to their cronies. It’s basically free publicity with a bit of “Let’s you and them fight” mixed in.

And LGBT might as well have been tailor-made for that exact purpose.

But with something like advocacy for the disabled, there’s no basis on which either party could dare oppose it, so there’s nothing to fight over, and worse yet, if it’s proposed, there’s no excuse for not passing it, which means they’d have to pay for it, and that’s money that they’d rather be funneling to their cronies.

So politicians mostly just ignore it.

Ah… I love this thread full of people smugly congratulating themselves for not being the sort of people who would smugly congratulate themselves for being intelligent.

To the question:

The three broad alternatives available to me are to present a simplified version of a thought, which will potentially fail to do it justice and will likely fail to really communicate it anyway, since understanding it will require background knowledge the listener likely doesn’t possess, to present a full explanation of the thought, which will be long and ultimately dull, or to keep my mouth shut.

I used to do a fair amount of the second, with predictable results - either listeners grew quickly bored, or they were genuinely interested, which would encourage me to continue until they grew bored.

Now I mostly do the third, and would that I had started sooner. It’s far and away the better way to live. As a general rule, people just don’t want to know about, for instance, my proposed method for reconciling the need for some measure of absolutism in moral judgments with the reality that moral judgments are necessarily highly subjective and situational or my assertion that institutionalized, hierarchical authority is fundamentally illegitimate since there is no nominal justification for it that isn’t arbitrary, self-contradictory or self-defeating.

When I want to communicate those sorts of ideas, I write them out in long posts that are likely not read. Day to day, I just smile and exchange pleasantries and otherwise keep to myself.

I can’t even quite visualize how that could happen.