Ok FINE! We're Making Flowcharts Over Here!

[@dudeydude77_clips]

Thanks for answering my question! To add timestamps, you just put the time and subtitle on a line in the video description, and the video autopopulates that information into the video timeline. For example: 0:00 Video Starts 22:10 Second Game Starts 27:04 Pete answers my question

[@Xeldin]

yes please do Pete

[@Code-Imp]

Lets put some thumbs up for visibility!

[@Tremblay343]

Would I ever be brave enough to run fixed capital settings? Not a chance. Will I watch Pete do it for 3 and a half hours? Most definitely.

[@FreePete]

🤣🤣🤣

[@allenlea4654]

Flow chart good. 👍 My sticking point is trusting the government enough to say it's appropriate for them to regulate guns. All historical evidence suggests to me that governments can't be trusted that much. The economic argument for gun freedom is effectively raising the cost of tyranny. Make tyranny just expensive enough that people in charge who would otherwise engage in tyranny not.

[@FreePete]

Yeah man the don't tread on me box is a very important conversation to have. If government is separate and distinct from the individuals it governs it's probably poorly designed

[@beansworth5694]

I am so jealous of you being able to sleep immediately! I've always struggled to sleep even when I was very little- In order to wake up rested, ironically, I need to force myself to only get in bed when I'm very tired because if I don't fall asleep within a short time window of getting in bed my body heat will make me unable to sleep for sometimes the entire night. I'm physically very sensitive, simply trying to ignore discomfort when trying to sleep stresses me out and pushes me into an almost manic headspace. I can ignore discomfort when I'm task-focused, but being task-focused when trying to sleep simply doesn't work which is a large part of the reason I tend to get into a stressful manic feedback loop when I'm in bed and can't sleep. When it's cold enough in my room I don't have this problem and sleep fine, but it's expensive to keep a room cold in summer since opening a window simply doesn't work as well

[@FreePete]

I'm very blessed!

[@Chadok89]

57:00 I can't remember where I've heard that, but I remember about an idea that being pacifist is cowardice if you can't kill your aggressors. If you choose not to kill when you can, then, there, actually consider it a choice. I kind of like this idea.

[@varger747]

I always envisioned this for people who say "violence doesn't solve anything." Always spoken by someone who couldn't possibly use violence to solve their problems.

[@jameskillalotthewarr]

I find it interesting with the gun topic that so many people disregard, repeatedly, the conversation that you want to have. Saying, "that's your position and I respect that, but I'm trying to have this conversation," is apparently not clear enough? People take that as an invitation to try and convince you to have a different conversation. There's a flow chart. I can't see how it could be clearer. Maybe the opening to the conversation you want to have is something like this: Hello, I would like to discuss guns only in the context of a tool that is a problem separated from other tools and human violence in general under the assumption that it is the responsibility of mankind to make guns not a problem. If you have a position that guns are not a problem or are not distinct from other tools or human violence then I respect that and don't claim to be correct, but that is not the conversation I want to have. Here is a helpful flow chart. I'm on the same wavelength here, so I'm not sure how else to put it. Great content, as always!

[@suspectv322]

Timestamps are put in your description. They're formatted like below. I've done timestamps for the first ½ hour of this video, with each game in less detail so you can see what kind of chapters you prefer. (You can even copy and paste this to this video's description to test, keep in mind this works better for videos that aren't 3 hours😅) 0:00 1st Game 1:53 Q&A - Where to ask? 3:00 Q: When to take Risks? 4:29 Q: Are Canadians "nice"? 5:56 Q: Is Risk on the decline? 6:10 EVERYONE TAKES RISKS 10:16 Q: Collaboration Protection 13:40 BOGO CAPS 15:18 Q: Is Pete an influencer? 16:14 RED EARNS 2ND 22:02 2nd Game 22:42 Star Trek Talk 25:08 History RePETEs Itself 27:35 Timestamps... Hi Pete... 29:47 Philosophy

[@FreePete]

Tried it out!

[@Fishpizza1212]

Hey it worked! Looking good!@@FreePete

[@connorallgood0922]

2:59:23 in the stream chat quaserptolemy said "saying there are alternatives for violence doesn't mean we shouldn't remove the most efficient choice for violence" implies we should first get rid of vehicles before guns as vehicles cause more deaths per year than firearms (whether self-inflicted or homicide, accidental, or not).

[@martinstuvland8620]

6:18 *Pete sees cap hit* Pete "How can I caphitalize on this?"

[@FreePete]

Hahah

[@T3RR4212]

the flowchart was awesome, and I 100% agree that discussing the last box distinct from the others is really important. I'm stuck on the second box, I feel mental health and culture are deeply ingrained into gun violence, and since we as a society haven't really tried any meaningful way to address those issues it muddies the waters for the later boxes.

[@FreePete]

I've been using the lessons I've learned from this type of communicating to inform the types of messages I want to put out using this platform

[@coleeto2]

5:30 I would have loved a follow up on this as Pete lives in Toronto where over 50% of residents are foreign born, some regions there are 65% foreign born. So has Pete become more aware of his view over time or is it the people who have changed over time.

[@FreePete]

Right, given that I am from the most cosmopolitan and diverse place in Canada my view of Canadians and Canadian stereotypes might not be the most typical. As far as what has changed over the 40 years I've been here that's a much longer conversation.

[@spencermacdonald3028]

Such a great video to watch and listen to all the way through. Thinking about my responses to the gun problem in the manner of logic that you laid out helped me put where I stand into perspective of the real problem, and helped me see the flaws in many of the arguments of people around me use when it comes to the discussion on guns. Thanks for laughing at the cigarette comment, not even close to the same level of discussion needed there. Addiction to something that will kill you and the association of mental health and addiction is what I would want to lead to conversation towards in that matter.

[@FreePete]

Beautiful! I'm glad the effort I put in was worthwhile for you

[@jdoggy6192]

Hey Pete! I did not know you swapped your QA to this channel! Happy I refound it and good luck with Risk.

[@seansoccer100]

good GAWD man! 3+ hours of not only Risk strategy and tips, but REALLY GOOD philosophy. You are my hero! :D

[@FreePete]

Cheers! I'm glad some of it was a value to you!

[@jfast8256]

12:20 "of all the times you've reported players, has SMG ever gotten back to you saying you were correct?" Not directed at me, but I've only reported people on 1 game. Cap / Blizzard / Fog of War. On the very first turn a player gave up their cap to another player, then surrounded it with 4-5 troop territories so no one could attack the cap without going through the person who gave them the cap in the first place. I reported them both for collaboration. It's the only time I ever reported. I got a message back from both. For one it said something along the lines of "thankyou for the report, we have taken action against the player... yadayadayada". For the other it said something along the lines of "we found no evidence of collaboration or something like that." I don't know which report was for which. If I had to guess the guy who gave up his cap then defended the cap for the other player was the account that had action taken against it? I could see why the other account didn't have action taken against it. There wasn't a 100% chance they were collabing regardless of how likely, but taking action against the account that purposefully ruined their own game for last place to empower the other player is an easy decision because even if there wasn't collab, they ruin the game for everyone. Edit: 15 seconds later...... WOW..... the game literally gave an example of what I was talking about. Granted red didn't do that on turn 1 like it happened in my game, but it's a good reason as to why even though I was mad and reported the player who benefited, it doesn't mean they were actually cheating. Re-edit: Green got last in my game. I took 4th place that game to make sure he got last place. He didn't get rewarded the way red did this game.

[@djthechef8975]

2:52:15 before I get to my point that I marked with the time stamp I would like to say on par Pete has a fair, balanced, and unbiased way of analyzing game play, topics, etc. But this is my opinion from only little snippets of opinions and statements he's shared. To the time stamp, are guns distinct from human violence and other weapons? No, because if you remove the human element you have a gun, that just sits there and does nothing. You can't have a conversation about guns (as a problem requiring regulation) if you remove the human element. I feel like there are some questions missing in that flow chat but thats my opinion and its not my flow chat so I'm intrigued to see where this flow chat will go and would love to incorporate it with the gun debate. Pete, I love your content. Keep it going

[@zanedietlin7645]

Lived in minnesota most of my life. Basically Canada, most people would agree. What you said about the ‘nice yet smug’ really rings true to me. I wanna go

[@tommendham7686]

Me seeing its 3:20:00, then seeing it’s fixed caps; makes sense

[@steveblock3882]

I'm majoring in Psychology(science, might switch to arts) and Minoring in Economics, They are a great combination💪

[@FreePete]

It sounds like you will learn very practical things.

[@austinpena426]

I kinda get the flowchart? it’s like the conversation with abortion everyone has a different arguments and reasons. Whenever I have it, I try to break it down to a singular point of where paths separate. Is the fetus alive/a life. Whenever I do nobody wants to give a yes or no, but rather jump ahead to somewhere else. For me doing that makes the conversation irrelevant because if we can’t agree at a point then there isn’t a conversation to be had. I do this for all arguments, I just use abortion as an example because that where I see it the most.

[@FreePete]

That's a good system for trying to establish a baseline for meaning in the face of confusion

[@Oxblood1987]

Pete, I think the thing that you ar ent being clear enough on is that you want to ASSUME all the "yes" are checked so that you can have a philosophical conversion at that bottom state regardless of whether someone else would normally stop higher up.

[@FreePete]

How would that be made clearer?

[@baldorthewizard]

Would love to see the grey gamers game! You could put out a google form where people have to put their birthdate (then have to verify the date if they are selected). Let me know if you need any help with google forms if you havnt used them :)

[@FreePete]

Like with so many of these great ideas if someone had the wherewithal to do the organizing and I just had to show up and play it would be way more likely to actually get done.

[@nureddinz]

Guns being easy to use and highly capable of damage should be enough to separate them from violence in general. Maybe an extreme example can help them understand. Imagine hand grenades being easily accessible to public. When people start to blow things up would we be talking about violence or why everyone has grenades?

[@FreePete]

I would have assumed this as well. There seems to be something else going on causing a barrier for communication

[@jaysnow701]

Pete, or anyone, if you like flow charts you should check the California assault weapon flowchart. And i fall into the no category on your chart, but can be swayed to have the (separate from human nature) discussion. We are not going to get firearms out of the hands of governments and the government will put them in the hands of criminals. Therefore, i feel, firearms in the hands of the people does more good than out of their hands.

[@novatala2070]

I don't have to imagine how horrible it is to take hours to fall asleep. My avg is 2 hours of laying down before I finally pass out. I have to push myself to total exhaustion to fall asleep quickly

[@FreePete]

Sounds like a struggle! I hope you sort it out

[@CaesarACT2]

Thanks for the flow chart Pete.📊 Next time make the flow chart with finger paints. Just trying to keep it simple for others. Great video must share.

[@FreePete]

HAHA, man, sometimes simplicity is elegant. This time it feels a bit exhausting

[@belshanaar6317]

I too numb the pain with alcohol, it's shitty days like these... Where my boss chews me out on a job, not optimally done. I come here on the youtubes drunk and watch Pete smack caps. It almost keeps the voices away, almost.

[@martinstuvland8620]

1:20:34 The haters never stood a chance 🫡 And a solid yabba.....dabba.....dooooo! Just for good meassure

[@connorallgood0922]

To go in with what was being said about the gun topic, most of the people talking about guns, who are for guns believe guns aren't the problem, people are the problem. So therefore there is no need to talk about guns, the issue we have is with people, the only way to get to the conversation on guns, or using that flowchart would be for people who think 1. guns are a problem, and 2. guns are a problem separate from human nature. At that point, what with guns are a problem? Without the humans guns on their own are nothing, therefore no problem.

[@invertz2157]

The flow chart makes sense and is easy to understand, I just disagree with the first 2 premises and half of the 3rd premise so I'm in the first box. The main problem is that people have become too pacified over the last few decades. We lie down while the government takes away our rights. Young people can't afford to buy homes or start families, everything is more expensive, government imports millions of people from cultures incompatible with our own that lower our wages, parents can't let their children go out on their own for fear of them being abducted or having the police called so they spend all day inside, and the media tells us to hate our history or we're intolerant. Instead of solving these problems, the government wastes tax money on foreign wars. No wonder so many people are depressed and full of hate, and they lash out by hurting their fellow citizens.

[@FreePete]

This is why every single person who protests or talks about political issues is wasting their time unless they're working on electoral reform. This is the only way we are going to even attempt to begin to fix what's broken with government. Every citizen needs to come together and demand electoral reform so we can actually have our say on every other issue.

[@jaysnow701]

I agree with a lot of it. Social media is amazing, but i feel it is very hurtful to our youth, and many not youth. The algorithm's that keep adults in bubbles and kids who have not learned to control intrusive thoughts. Then the hatred. It is remarkable, i brought up the very innovative way Ukraine used Australian drones to cripple Russian forces. And a few people piped in with a (good kill them all). I reminded them most are conscripted and put their against their will.

[@invertz2157]

@@FreePete Completely agree. Money and businesses have gotten too involved in government, so we need to massively change how our electoral system works. I'd also like to see more emphasis placed on government (how it works) and history in schools. I recently took an intro western history course in college from the Myceneans up to the Cold War and I feel that it has helped me understand modern politics far more than any of the political videos I've watched and most of what I learned in high school. In American public school, we learn almost exclusively about American history + world wars, so Americans don't know about the European politics that led to the current status quo. We aren't even taught about the important points like Constantine, Charlemagne, Peter the Great, Louis XIV, Napoleon, etc.

[@g0ldst0ne57]

I think one of the problems is that people care so much about their personal answers to the questions on your flow chart that they don’t find your conversation valid. Then they disrupt the conversation by trying to explain why they think the conversation is invalid.

[@FreePete]

I've noticed. That's why I tried to present the different category boxes in as logical of a process as I could find. Now at least I can pinpoint the different boxes people are in and understand what piece of the conversation they're trying to have.

[@baldorthewizard]

Great communication, great flow chart there pete. Honesty I would love a podcast where you just talk systems design with different guests.

[@FreePete]

I will be shooting another episode of the podcast next week. They're not very popular shows but I enjoy making them

[@FooX917]

Guns is an interesting one for sure, love the flow chart. My brain can't compute absolutes so im on the team of guns are both problem and solution (possibly a solution to the problem it created when invented). Clearly a problem because its use results in major injury or death and gives bad people a very easy way to inflict pain. Also a solution since it can help people defend themselves from stronger potential bad people. So i'm honestly not sure which side i'd lean on more, however i can see each side of the argument. obviously theres tons of examples and defenses for people to cling to on both sides. I don't care to entertain either. Love the videos pete ;)

[@FreePete]

Both problem and solution is the reasonable approach. As with so much it life it's a matter of degree

[@onwardsupwards4483]

I’m the same it takes my ages to sleep but I’ve never had a problem staying asleep once I’m a sleep it’s interesting to hear your thoughts on the topic

[@FreePete]

Perhaps I should talk more about it

[@briansanner]

The Risk in this game was hilarious. There were so many opportunities you could have won while you were just card skipping for the first hour or two. Then when you started to try to win it was stuck in a statement. It was kind of like someone sending a disaster save. Magenta had a lot of opportunities early on that they didn't take, too. Completely baffling play from both magenta and red lol

[@Chadok89]

1:13:00 science is a method to determine models that represent what is observable and tries to deduce what we have not yet observesd. Science isn't reality, it's models that describes them. And sometimes we thought we understood until realizing that more parameters were involved.

[@FreePete]

It's all models after all. We don't sense base reality. We sense a sliver of it via our imperfect sensory input

[@FP-ih1lu]

Do they not already have a system that detects if two players play multiple games with each other? That seems like the easiest way to detect cheating.

[@FreePete]

Detection is not sufficient. Prevention is needed. Having players report on players is no solution because it leads to all sorts of feel bad moments and suspicion.

[@FP-ih1lu]

@@FreePete I was thinking they could just program it so that you can’t join a lobby containing a player you played with in your last however many games

[@FreePete]

@@FP-ih1lu that is a thing the game needs and is long overdue

[@adnaneassif56]

If you thought that i would watch a man play a strategy game while talking about philosophy for 3 hours straight, you'd be absolutely right.

[@FreePete]

Hahaha, thanks! I'm glad you liked the show

[@meritfocus]

1:01:00 dont smack him like that!! 😂😂😂😂😂😂 ahh i know it's soft and he likes it, just cracks me up in a weird way lol

[@FreePete]

Oh he loves it!

[@LimitBreakr424]

Flowcharts are tight

[@nureddinz]

Second game, imo purple should have aimed for black cap while stacking near you without scaring them :)

[@sortacasual]

Spoiler Blocker Flowchart

[@ZytphenA]

Gotta love it when 2/6 of comments are spoiler blocks❤

[@McHorsesCreations]

Your patience is incredible! I would probably quit 40 minutes in 😂

[@McHorsesCreations]

@@ronnieballs8145 that's true! Pete was objectively winning, and the guys should've either team up or resign (or whatever it's called when the player leaves and their territory becomes dotted).

[@FreePete]

🤣🤣🤣 it's growing

[@coolorphans]

I like the long fixed cap games. Keep them up

[@AI-cp1jg]

"You're a funny guy Sully I like you, that's why I'm going to kill you last"

[@FreePete]

When I said I would kill you last I lied!

[@Meowmeow.age.6]

If I was superman for a day... I would be more like Homelander than superman especially if I didn't know my powers lasted for a day only 🤣

[@FreePete]

Hahah, I dunno man. Homelander is kind of a dick

[@leosack9718]

I used to take an hour to sleep, but now i’m a GM in sleeping and fall asleep withing 20 seconds

[@Meowmeow.age.6]

White is that guy. That guy that caps next to your cap for no reason.

[@jaswilko1314]

Hey Pete I answered no to all 3 of your questions, so the third box is something that isn't really worth us chatting. The first no is because guns elevated us above other animals and allowed us to build civilisation(I know we were on track for it already it just sped it up) The second box I answered no to as I don't believe that guns are the problem, people do violence not guns. The third box the government is made up of people and I personally believe that people are fundimentally selfish. So there isn't really any coversation to be had with people that don't already agree with you and at that point your just patting one another on the back about your beliefs.

[@FreePete]

Ultimately with my example I'm not talking about guns. I'm talking about the structure in which communication takes place. If you occupy those other boxes that is your prerogative and we are able to see that immediately and move quick to the place where we can converse. You can't get to the bottom left box, you don't have to. You're not obligated to have the conversation on the topic that I'm trying to have. So many people were posting confused and angry KZbin comments who thought they were. So this interaction between you and I is positive because we are able to just disagree without name calling and wasting eachothers time.

[@DeadInside-ew8qb]

Quakers, who are by definition pacifists, may still join the army if they want to in a non-combatant mos.

[@FreePete]

How are they able to reconcile that with pacificst ethics, knowing that their work directly contributes to violence and death?

[@DeadInside-ew8qb]

@@FreePete They do not hold themselves accountable for the actions of others, i.e. fighting, declaring war, etc.; only their actions as individuals. By acting in a nonviolent manner, some may choose to participate in what others may see as violent conflict.

[@95Probie]

Pete, you are loved and appreciated

[@jaysnow701]

HOLY CRAP 3 hours. Just dropped the kids off at school. I will have to pick them up before it is done.

[@JD2jr.]

I know you're sick of it, but... there's nothing wrong with the flow chart. It's a great visualization. The problem is you're going down the chart making assumptions that are not true and expecting everyone to agree (in the past it has been "if you don't think guns are a problem, you are stupid"). You're able to 'steelman' the 'other' sides, so it just makes it more frustrating when you can't see that the conversation has to, according to your chart, move to the point that you have labeled as "violence/ "not guns". Except even at that point you're shutting down the conversation saying "it's not about guns" when... that's the entire crux of the "gun debate". Again, sorry if this is more annoying than informative/entertaining, it's just that you're virtually always so well-spoken and reasonable that this major jump is breaking our (or at least my) mind.

[@FreePete]

Not annoying. And I'm not telling anyone what conversation they have to have or not have. I'm showing the different boxes the conversation takes place in and trying to show with a visual aid how people tend to conflate those categories. It's not that people who don't think guns are a problem are stupid. It's that people who don't think guns are a problem aren't talking about the problem with guns. The point of the exercise is to show how people in that box aren't actually talking to those in another box about the same thing. I hope this is clear? I'm not even really talking about guns, I'm talking about logic and the way our minds seem to be categorizing/miscategorizing information.

[@JD2jr.]

@@FreePete Sure, but the only problem "with guns" is the "not guns" section so it makes no sense to say we can't talk about it. What problems do you have with them that are not allocated "we don't talk about it because that's not guns" part of the chart? You're skipping that part of the flow chart and jumping down to the next layer (which should be under the other side too/only). And I'm kinda jumping around a bit here, but I think you've also misidentified the path to the furthest bottom right on your chart ("don't tell me what to do"); again, I would say that at least most of the people arriving at that point are taking the rightmost path above "government" as well. There is a problem we can discuss the solutions to, but it is on what you have defined as the "not guns" path.

[@gamers_1]

nice game pete as always

[@martinstuvland8620]

37:40 Although I agree with what you're saying about Magenta. The addition of "We have to agree. If you guys don't understand what I'm saying we don't agree. This is Wittgenstein" left a bad taste in my mouth, not sure if I agree with and don't think was necessary to add. To me it came off as slightly arrogant and pretentious. I get the impression you have a tendency to phrase yourself that way every now and again. But I do appreciate you as a person regardless. And most definitely believe you have the heart in the right place! And your good qualities strongly outnumber the negative ones. Though I mention this because I mean I heard you say that you appreciate the possibility to improve and admit where you may be at fault. This criticism aside. I tried to phrase myself as respectful as I could. As I , again, do appreciate you as a person and the empathic humility and compassion you uphold. Though maaaaybe apply a bit more intellectual humility when discussing philosophy and intellectually engaging topics. With that said. Still think you're a great person and hope you don't take this the wrong way if you read it. Love ya man!

[@FreePete]

You don't have to step on such eggshells, what is the criticism of Wittgenstein's philosophy that you have/or the criticism of my take? Or am I completely misunderstanding what you're saying?

[@martinstuvland8620]

@@FreePete People don't have to agree. You said it yourself. It's a shade of pink. So it's perfectly understandable if it's referred to as pink. However. If it's described as magenta in the game, and saying magenta is the norm. Then I have nothing to add. If not. I think you're inadvertently putting yourself on an intellectual pedestal based on how you phrased yourself. Nothing wrong with 'what' you're saying. Or Wittgensteins philosophy. But rather the necessity of adding those prefaces as adding them changes the character of the overall message. With that said. It's quite possible it's a me issue and that something in me is getting triggered. And I'm perfectly open to that being the case. Hopefully this was clearer. As I tried to follow your three points on communication.

[@FreePete]

@@martinstuvland8620 sorry. I don't understand the criticism or the nature of what you found triggering

[@martinstuvland8620]

@@FreePete First off. Is the name of the color in-game magenta? Cause if that's the case. Then I take no issue and my whole problem with it would go *poof* and I would feel a bit silly investing so much into a non-starter! This is something I didn't know and wasn't clear to me through the video.

[@FreePete]

@@martinstuvland8620 ah I see what you're talking about. The game calls the colour pink Magenta is a subset of pink I'm being more specific which you take as arrogant because it's pedantic. I like being as precise as possible when I speak and I'm aware that people can and do misunderstand as well as I can misspeak which is my failure as a communicator.

[@frankgiambrone9117]

The peteman loves the ❄️

[@FreePete]

Acid!

[@hadleigh01]

I don't think its confirmation bias at all. I've only been playing for a few weeks and you would have to be pretty dumb to not realise you've been cheated. Happens far too often. What even happens when someone gets reported?

[@daveocutter]

Guys I fell asleep at the gun discussion. What did I miss? Did Pete say anything controversial!?

[@FreePete]

🙀

[@theinacircleoftheancientpu492]

Lol at pink.

[@martinstuvland8620]

3 hours?! What have we done to deserve this decadence!

[@FreePete]

Hope you enjoyed!

[@spiderjoe7681]

So, the discussion is how 🤔 the government/ community should regulate guns? Ok, and my question: How did you come up for the Nick names for reggy.

[@FreePete]

The Schmopus Malopus Man

[@spiderjoe7681]

@@FreePete yes how did you come up with it

[@spiderjoe7681]

@@FreePete I want the story

[@RichardGeresGerbil]

Politics is business mate in the real world anyway.

[@FreePete]

Indeed

[@Indian0Lore]

Oh hey, you figured out chapters just like you asked

[@WalkitHof]

great game, enjoyed very much

[@andreadimeco4858]

Blocker of Spoils

[@mootjw]

❤ love from morocco ❤

[@FreePete]

🇲🇦🇲🇦🇲🇦

[@ruthlesace]

So the problem with your flow chart Pete is that you're discussing that guns are a problem without human violence, but we cannot discuss this without knowing WHY they are a problem without the violence. Take the violence away and guns are a tool for hunting that is actually much more humane. So please tell us why they are a problem without human violence, then we can discuss with you the point you want to get to.

[@FreePete]

Both boxes are acceptable conversations. I'm not yet talking about guns with my example. I'm talking about logic and the structure of arguments. And I seem to keep failing at talking about this because using guns as an example is so fraught.

[@ruthlesace]

@FreePete so the discussion you wish to have is what our not the structure you used is a good valid way to have a debate and / or conversation?

[@FreePete]

@@ruthlesace I was attempting to show how difficult it was to come to agreement on even simple things (are guns a problem?) And how 'arguments' can be taking place between people who disagree about reality in a fundamental sense and those sorts of arguments are obviously not going to be productive.

[@ruthlesace]

@FreePete ah I see, that explanation right there might just be the best way to say it. I think it gets jumbled up in the context otherwise.

[@baldorthewizard]

Would you sleep in a box with a fox?

[@jaysnow701]

Spoiler...spoiler below Spoiler...spoiler Spoiler...spoiler Game 2, why purple never just took the black cap i will never know. Then he could hsve still taken revenge when you least expected it.

[@khaosarts2089]

Seriously wth happened this game? We were debating human nature and getting lost in philisophocal conversations about not pissing people off. And litterally everytime we looked away from the board to debate the exact opposite was going on with everyone with everyone being overly agressive. You literally won the game before it even started.

[@robertbowen6610]

If government regulations cause you to lose your other freedoms then no it is not a solution look at Great Britain and Australia not outlawed firearms and both after outlawing firearms had a spike in melee attacks

[@johnnybgood5008]

Be great if you can post on rumble. Almost done with YT so oppressive to content creators

[@getcoolb]

"a country was 'mean' to another country?" that's not a very good way to describe the situation..

[@FreePete]

War is terrible. How does a company removing content that people enjoy help end that war?

[@getcoolb]

​@@FreePete while I do agree that this one game changing its content might not affect the issue at all, my comment was not in regards to that. I found it a bit distasteful in how you seemingly underplayed the sheer atrocity of Russia's acts by referring to it in that manner. Shortest answer to your question I could muster: Money talks... and we are in a world economy. The financial impact on Russia has been immense. The collective stance by many companies across the world has definitely impacted the situation, but only time will tell if it did so in a significant enough way. Also, I think we should've (and with this "we" I mean the entire world) directly addressed Russia instead of empowering it by going with the "let's not poke the bear" attitude. The bear was way beyond that by that point -- the bear is already attacking. I think this is partly why it ended up landing on businesses to address it in whatever miniscule way they can -- because people are righteously angry by what has been happening.

[@coolorphans]

12817

[@mattdaraitis4253]

I disagree on the flow charts first premise. If guns are not a problem, the conversation doesn’t end, the following would be WHY then are they not a problem. Which I am perfectly willing to defend.

[@FreePete]

The conversation about the problem with guns ends. The conversation about whatever you'd like to have continues with whomever would like to have it with you.

[@mattdaraitis4253]

@@FreePetewell you’re making a leap here because you are making a claim that there is a problem with guns, I would say there is not a problem with guns, the conversation would in theory begin here where a case would be laid out. The flow chart implies a conversation could not be had. If you’re saying the conversation you Want to have begins if you accept your first 3 premises then that’s fine. I simply disagree that the conversation ends after a disagreement between whether guns are a problem or not.

[@FreePete]

The first box is a question not a claim. @@mattdaraitis4253