187
you are viewing a single comment's thread
view the rest of the comments
view the rest of the comments
this post was submitted on 03 Apr 2025
187 points (98.4% liked)
PC Gaming
10682 readers
507 users here now
For PC gaming news and discussion. PCGamingWiki
Rules:
- Be Respectful.
- No Spam or Porn.
- No Advertising.
- No Memes.
- No Tech Support.
- No questions about buying/building computers.
- No game suggestions, friend requests, surveys, or begging.
- No Let's Plays, streams, highlight reels/montages, random videos or shorts.
- No off-topic posts/comments, within reason.
- Use the original source, no clickbait titles, no duplicates. (Submissions should be from the original source if possible, unless from paywalled or non-english sources. If the title is clickbait or lacks context you may lightly edit the title.)
founded 2 years ago
MODERATORS
Because to the black and white people out there it's bad that a child can come to any amount of harm no matter how fictional those children may be. It's a similar trend to the old anti-game movement because these people believe the sort of person who picks up a digital AK47 and clip dumps some NPCs is the sort of person who would do the same in real life and thus shouldn't be able to in any capacity, as if removing an entirely fake playground stems true homicidal rage and definitely doesn’t point to failed parenting in teaching consequence or genuine mental illness.
These people also care more about what happens to fictional people than what happens to real people.
They want to restrict access to virtual guns, but actively fight any efforts to restrict access to real ones. It's so dumb
Precisely. It's easy to give oneself the moral high ground when the hill you choose to die on costs significantly less in time, effort and money. Helping real people is far too expensive but if you make yourself sound like a humanitarian by defending fictional people then that's pretty cost-effective.
Okay but what about people of other races
Take your upvote and get out.