Slashdot Mirror
'CandySwipe' Crushed: When Game Development Turns Nasty
Nerval's Lobster writes "King, the gaming developer behind the monster hit Candy Crush Saga, has attracted a fair amount of criticism over the past few weeks over its attempt to trademark the word 'candy,' which isn't exactly an uncommon term. The company followed up that trademarking attempt by firing off takedown notices at other developers who use 'candy' in the titles of their apps. But things only got emotional in the past few days, when indie developer Albert Ransom published an open letter on his Website that excoriates King for what basically amounts to bullying. Ransom claims that he published CandySwipe in 2010, a full two years before Candy Crush Saga hit the market, and that the two games bear a number of similarities; after opposing King's attempts to register a trademark, Ransom found that his rival had taken things to a whole new level by purchasing the rights to a game called Candy Crusher and using that as leverage to cancel the CandySwipe trademark. Ransom claims he spent three years working on his game, and that King is basically robbing his livelihood. King was not effusive in its response. 'I would direct you to our stance on intellectual property,' a spokesperson for the company wrote in an email to Slashdot, which included a link to a letter posted online by King CEO Riccardo Zacconi. 'At this time, we do not have any comment to add beyond what is outlined in this letter.' Zacconi's various defenses in the letter seem a moot point in the context of CandySwipe, considering how Ransom has already abandoned the prospect of fighting to protect his intellectual property. But the two developers' letters help illustrate how downright nasty the casual-gaming industry has become over the past several quarters, as profits skyrocket and people attempt to capitalize on others' success."
http://tangodropbox.com
DropBox trampled all over them; so they gave up.
Someone should write a game about Thieves, Lawyers and Thieving Lawyers.
and the stupid people who love them
A feeling of having made the same mistake before: Deja Foobar
I'd like to see a real candy company sue King for using the word "candy".
Hell, even funnier would be a real King suing him for misuse of the title "King" by a non-royalty.
Get free satoshi (Bitcoin) and Dogecoins
Just rated several of king's games 1-star, no idea if that helps, but made me feel better.
Next thing you know someone will attempt to trademark the name 'asdfgasdfgasdfg' which is part of my upcoming game titled 'asdfgasdfgasdfg world'
They suck and you know they do because they are sucking the fun out of everything for everybody.
A feeling of having made the same mistake before: Deja Foobar
;)
I don't think King could argue they have ownership of the game mechanic; just the trademark.
Seems like bullshit to me, but i once read King rakes in over $100,000 daily on this game. I guess they will do whatever they can to protect the golden goose.
you could just go back to playing Bejeweled for free.
It doesn't mean much now, it's built for the future.
probably because bejeweled is based on another game as well and it has enough differences to survive a court challenge. i played candy crush for a bit and it was a lot of things i found lacking in bejeweled
there used to be lots of board games made by different companies where the basic mechanic was to roll the dice, move, collect some card or so whatever and no one was ever sued because the differences are different enough
lots of Civ/Sim City clones in the app store as well. Clash of clans is one. they are all different enough since you can't make a civilization/city building game and sue people for the concept
Will just be people suing each other. All products and services will have long since stopped existing at all.
Are you going to make flappy asdfgasdfgasdfg after that?
To derivative.
I figured I'd do floppy asdfgasdfgasdfg, where you drop a pancake made of asdfg (with some zxcvb, thrown in for good measure) down a near infinite shaft, where irate birds try to peck at it, any contact with their beaks and you lose, so you have to glide to the left and right to get between successive beaks. The speed picks up gradually.
A feeling of having made the same mistake before: Deja Foobar
Candy Crush has made a TON of money.
Since there's another developer with a similar product and a similar name that shipped well before, you think he would have no end of lawyers offering up services just for a cut of the juicy Candy Mountain they can take a big chunk from.
If one side is going to play the legal angle then have no qualms about doing the same.
"There is more worth loving than we have strength to love." - Brian Jay Stanley
One of life's great mysteries is how achieving wealth tends to make people more greedy. For example, studies have shown that, as a percentage of income, charitable giving tends to be inversely proportional to income. Here you have a company that has found tremendous success, and in response to that success they become more greedy and try to shut everyone down.
I think human nature is not to just want success. Human nature is to want to win and stomp on the corpses of your competition.
You'll need to fight Strong Bad for that one.
Ascalante: Your bride is over 3,000 years old.
Kull: She told me she was 19!
I tell my friends that if this country had a straight up popular vote, we would never, ever again elect a Republican.
Except for:
George W Bush
William McKinley
Ulysses Grant
George H.W. Bush
William Taft
Ronald Reagan
Andrew Johnson
Dwight Eisenhower
Herbert Hoover
Theodore Roosevelt
Richard Nixon
Calvin Coolidge
Warren Harding
But hey, Abraham Lincoln lost the popular vote. So your theory might hold true... maybe.
Game mechanics can't be copyrighted.
You've actually got that backwards. If it was a straight up popular vote, Dems would be at a strong disadvantage.
Dems currently have California on lockdown, ensuring all 55 electoral votes go blue. If that split out, and California republican voters actually got a voice on the national level... well ...
This signature is false.
and their Cellbots project -- I scooped them by around six months, and even offer to share my code with them. What I got was a project manager telling me that I was just a hobbyist and my product didn't exist. What he got was me giving him one of my PCBs to him, then closing his hand around it, and asking him if this doesn't exist why is it causing you pain? When they started giving out the Google ADK board at Maker Faire 2011, I made the rounds to give my board to people half an hour before... including to the Google guys. If anyone was at the Bay Area Maker Faire, they probably will remember how the Robots Everywhere Antbot worked, and the Google Cellbot sat there victim of wifi overload. If something's bigger than you, and you want to win, bite the shins and punch the nuts. Only way.
Liberty - Security - Laziness - Pick any two.
That is why many call it Imaginary Property Rights, because it is neither intellectual, nor property, nor rights. Audio, Video, and/or Textual information can be represented as a number. To say someone somehow "magically" "owns" ones a particular sequence of bits is asinine.
--
Piracy == Disrepsect
Piracy != Theft
Yes the guys who made CandySwipe saw Candy Crush Saga, so they hopped in their time machine and went back to 2010 to create the Candy Crush Saga knockoff. :rollseyes:
while
genuinely curious.
Redneck Rampage already exists.
Betas are told that everything happens by accident, and criminals are only really found amongst the working classes. The reality is very different.
When casual gaming was discovered to be the new growth area for gaming, very serious criminals took interest in the market, and became their MOBSTER-IDENTICAL methods to gain control of the action.
Their experts noted that most casual games (at the time) were 'published' (to use the word very lightly) by individuals and tiny companies with no real clout. So, the experts advised the criminal thugs to simply STEAL the current games considered to have the best prospects. Steal the design. Steal the assets. Hell, even steal the code if possible.
The experts advising the criminal thugs argued thus. Focus on getting as rich as possible, as quickly as possible, by turning the 'amateur hour' of casual gaming into something as big as organised gambling or AAA console game publishing. "Use your lawyers to threaten the people you steal from, and then, if needed, to delay court action by as many years as possible."
"In the meantime, use your gigantic profits to buy off most of the people you steal from. After all, they were making pennies from their work, whereas you, using their stolen games, will be making so much money, a tiny fraction of your income will seem like an astonishing windfall to the people you may have to eventually pay-off. "
Now the criminal thugs have long since established themselves, and have the income to place politicians, computer companies and law enforcement into their pockets. America was built on such corporate criminality. America LOVES profit, not whining by little guys who never really made much money, but whose ideas and work had so much potential when illegally transferred to ruthless crooks.
The legal system, especially the civil side, is designed to reward successful criminality, so long as such criminality spreads the wealth to the 'RIGHT' people. Gaining general possession of the word 'Candy' was a simple consequence of money well spent. No legality, no justice, no morality- just money placed into the pockets of the 'right' people.
But the thugs at the top of casual gaming publishing are pikers compared to the people that run Microsoft, Yahoo, Google, Apple etc. Look what Microsoft intended to do with the Xbox One, before a massive backlash forced Microsoft to reverse every one of its obscene plans. Look at how Intel is PAYING companies to use its new Baytrail CPU, and PAYING legions of vile shills working for reputation management agencies to flood forums like this with the message that Intel's criminality is 'legal' and 'reasonable' (and this in the face of knowledge about how many times Intel has been successfully prosecuted in court).
Only petty criminals get punished. The big boys are always an essential part of the 'elite' that rule over you. Go read some history, if you are foolish enough not to believe this.
Candy Crush Saga isn't just the title of their game, it's a description of their business.
People will pass up steak once a week, for crap every day.
First, honestly when I look at the comparisons, I see no confusion. If King actually cloned Candy Swipe, they did so at such a high level as to not require any litigation. "A game about candy that uses a touch screen." Beyond that, what is the same? The colors are similar... shapes are wildly different. Count of the # of objects is different. The gameplay is different. Candy Crush has far more content. The list goes on.
So I'm curious... who here was actually confused by the games? Who here played Candy Crush for a while before realizing "omg, this isn't Candy Swipe"? I honestly do not believe any readers here were confused.
Second, look at Candy Crusher. Make a little comparison pdf of screenshots between the three games. Any claim Runsome makes on King's game can be done by AIM Productions on Runsome, continuing the chain of trademark confusion back a little further, making Runsome's entire claim bubkis. Runsome "cloned" AIM's Candy Crusher just as much as King "cloned" Candy Swipe.
Just because you lost an argument, doesn't mean you were bullied.
You know, "charitible" foundations that somehow make your company MORE money without being taxed. Need to deduct those from your total charitable tally for the rich.
This guy was on eof the more famous- but hardly an anomaly.
http://www.bloomberg.com/news/...
Hasbro should fight King's "trademark" with Candy Land. That game has been around well before King even existed.
They really should, especially considering there was an officially released Candy Land video game.
This space unintentionally left blank.
You're an ignorant buffoon if you believe this is limited to Republicans.
Make sure no one you know plays their games. If you see someone playing one explain to them whats going on and suggest alternatives. If that fails turn to ridicule make it so no one would be caught dead (isnt this happening already?) playing their games for fear or persecution.
I honestly do not believe any readers here were confused.
Why are you limiting the data set to just readers of Slashdot? That's exceptionally dishonest.
People will pass up steak once a week, for crap every day.
Actually, the Dems won the "popular vote" in the congressional elections as well.
And the Republicans have Texas as well.
It's sixes of one and half a dozen of the other to be honest, but there are reasons to believe that the Dems would have the advantage (hence why only Democrat controlled states are represented in the National Popular Vote Compact. If the Republicans thought they would win,, they would want the popular vote "by hook or by crook", and they would support that initiative. Unless you believe that the Republicans believe in the constitution so much that they are not willing to do an "end run" around certain constitutional provisions if it would suit them.
" neither intellectual, nor property, nor rights. "
don't be daft.
Writing software isn't intellectual? writing a book? making a movie?
Property is something that belongs to someone. IN this case the legal right to distribute works.
Conseptually, It's good and needed. Implementation is a little out of whack, but that's a different issue.
"Audio, Video, and/or Textual information can be represented as a number. To say someone somehow "magically" "owns" ones a particular sequence of bits is asinine.
That reasoning is..well.. stupid.
You can be represented as a number, does that mean you have no rights?
Oh, and it's not the number, it's the actual work.
The Kruger Dunning explains most post on
So when does software become comparable to a novel? What criteria should we appropriately apply (hint: it isn't "it's all free")? Margaret Mitchell et. al. deserve better than that, don't you think? These rights aren't imaginary - they're tied to real money (and I mean REAL money). If I sequelize the best seller from this week's NYT list very few people would argue that the original author has no right to sue me. If I sequelize The Martian Chronicles, I doubt that Mr. Bradbury's interests will come after me (after all this time, they shouldn't. I doubt they would, although their laughter at my idiocy might be amusing). If I sequelize Mario Bros. (hey, pick just about any side-scrolling shooter, really), should Nintendo have a right to bust my chops, or should they just accept that they've made all the money they deserve from the Mario franchise and let me make a fool of myself? If I make money at it (i.e., people read Chronicles II or buy Luigi's Plumbing), should Nintendo be allowed to change their mind and say "oh, that's ours. Too bad, so sad, you lose."?
That's only a little of the muck we collectively need to strain through. Those were fairly trivial examples. There are lots of more complicated examples to be contrived, many of which are actually really happening right now.
I guess I shouldn't make a new game named Apple Candy Drop Box then...
You have to be alive to run for President. Bush Sr is the only one of those guys could run for President again.
Yes, that's how it works. You can win the popular vote and lose the election because the election isn't decided on popular vote. There is a popular vote because you can simply add all the votes. It isn't that confusing.
Learn to love Alaska
For Valentine's Day, my new line of Crushed Candy Cock Rings!
You are welcome on my lawn.
I'm a bit skeptical about this claim about tangodropbox. If I check their website from archive, what it gives are snapshots beginning from 2011. [archive.org] Okay, perhaps there weren't any snapshots taken before then.
Again, there is the question of lack of google search results.
OTOH, I do see an archive for candyswipe (which is actually taken on Jan 2nd 2011, with a copyright showing 2010).
and quickly became annoyed, and eventually uninstalled it. The first annoyance was that it was shilling for money, but the deal breaker was that it wanted me to sign up for facebook so it could spam other people to play the (*&(& game. It was easier to uninstall the game.
In modern schools, fighting back just gets you both suspended or expelled. And in court, fighting back just bankrupts you from legal fees.
"Used to be", first to market could get the patent. A large chemical corporation chose to keep their product proprietary on the gamble no one would figure the process out until well after the patent would have run out. Another large and well known corporation finally figured out the process and applied for a patent. They then sued the original company who had been selling the product line for something like 50 years. It was thrown out of court. Strangely, not too long after that the law was changed from first to market to first to patent. I don' know, but it may be that way for copyright now days. They aren't "supposed" to be able to copyright common, or name that are generic.
Rename it to lollyswipe, problem solved, assuming lolly is not a trade mark
The controversy about the 2000 election isn't about popular vote totals. It's about the election results in Florida.
This is the abridged version of events.
1. Bush won the initial count but the margin was so slim, an automatic recount was triggered by Florida law.
2. Bush won the recount but buy a slimmer margin.
3. Al Gore's campaign requested another recount and Florida agreed.
4. Bush won that recount, but by an even slimmer margin.
5. The Gore campaign requested another recount.
6. The state of Florida refused because the results of three counts of the vote confirmed that Bush won.
7, The Gore campaign files suit to force recount, which a low court orders.
8. Florida and the Bush campaign appeal and the Supreme Court agrees to hear the case immediately.
9. Supreme Court rules that the lower court didn't have the authority to force Florida to recount again.
10. Florida certifies Bush as the winner, Bush gets the electoral votes and wins the election.
11. Whiny little crybabies all over the world don't like that their guy lost and invent a false narrative about Bush being selected rather than elected.
12. Idiots who are too lazy to look into the events for themselves repeat this false narrative.
The votes in Florida were later counted again by journalists who confirmed that Bush won.
In FOUR separate counts of the votes cast in Florida it was confirmed that Bush won. Get over it.
LK
"Hi. This is my friend, Jack Shit, and you don't know him." - Lord Kano
there was an officially released Candy Land video game.
Tagline: "The only winning move is not to play"
The people vote. The people's vote counts for something. That's popular vote. That the popular vote doesn't determine the winner doesn't mean it is necessarily meaningless, as most polls are national (at least as presented, the analysits go to state level for predictions).
Learn to love Alaska
"What are “common law” rights?
Federal registration is not required to establish rights in a trademark. Common law rights arise from actual use of a mark and may allow the common law user to successfully challenge a registration or application. "
"GET / HTTP/1.0" 200 51230 "-" "Mozilla/4.0 (compatible; Setec Astronomy)"
Well, you know what you do when someone pushes you around. You FIGHT BACK. Punch them in the face if you're on the school yard, or ridicule and sue them if you're in the corporate world.
A bully is someone who picks on someone because they know that they can't/won't fight back. If your problem is the latter, then it's simple to do as you say. If you simply *can't* fight back, because the other party will destroy you if you try, then that's a different story. What you advocate is simply self-destructive stupidity in the name of pride.
Fighting back in court isn't free, and King's victims simply can't afford justice.
If it's for-profit but free, you're not the customer -- you're the product (e.g., the Slashdot Beta's "audience").
George W Bush lost the popular vote in 2000, and many of the people on your list bear almost NO resemblance to a modern Republican in terms of political views (e.g. Roosevelt, Eisenhower).
Still, the GP's argument is almost as bad for much the same reason, because if the current Republicans kept getting drubbed in the polls, they'd very quickly become a different party. The parties change their mix of positions about once every 2-3 generations or so -- sometimes much faster. Heck, just look at how different Republicans were today and in the 1990s, the 1970s, the 1950s, and the 1930s.
If it's for-profit but free, you're not the customer -- you're the product (e.g., the Slashdot Beta's "audience").
Yeah, I'll be candy-assed enough to admit I had it on my iPhone. An enjoyable diversion for the 'I'm too brainded for anything else,' times.
After the initial trademark story broke, I deleted it from my phone. Yep, King, you might not feel my tiny backlash, but I'm never downloading another of your games again.
Anyone else do the same thing? (And, btw, I'm fucking amused to be able to fucking say I'm trying to Fuck King.)
In your narritive, every recount Bush got fewer votes. Had there been another recount or two, Gore would have won. That is the problem, and why the Supreme Court stepped in. It was almost discovered that *every* election is rigged. We are voting for the winner of WWF matches.
Learn to love Alaska
You've obviously never been bullied. Hitting a bully back doesn't work. The two times I did, one got me suspended and disciplined (no "charges" for the bully) and the other time, the bully came back with 5 others and cornered me. Fighting back doesn't work, and those that suggest it were annoyed with people but the people annoying them weren't bullies.
Learn to love Alaska
Part of the reason for the electoral college system was to make elections actually slant more dramatically one way or the other.
No it wasn't. The electoral college was not designed with a two-party system in mind (the greatest evidence of this is the elections of 1796 and 1800). No, it was designed with Congress as a backup in case no one won a majority, because they expected that to happen quite often once Washington was no longer in the picture. In fact, the framers were more worried about a couple of large states ganging up than what we would now think of as issue-driven parties. (This is the main reason for the large state/small state compromise showing up against in assigning electors by Congressional + Senate seats). They expected most elections to have to be decided between more than five candidates since electors from multiple states would have difficulty colluding before sending their votes in.
So dramatic, magnified consensus was not one of the design goals for it. In pretty much every way, it was designed without the opinions of the public much in mind. It turns out that you don't actually have any Constitutional right to elect the President. States can choose to pick the electors without you. (In fact, South Carolina did that all the way up until it seceded from the Union.)
You can read more of the history of the debate in the Constitutional Convention here. Also some really great history of the foundation of the first political parties in the years leading up to and after the ratification of the Constitution.
If it's for-profit but free, you're not the customer -- you're the product (e.g., the Slashdot Beta's "audience").
The foul was having a vote system where fraud is allowed and encouraged. It's time we went back to open voting to end the fraud.
Learn to love Alaska
You've obviously never been bullied. Hitting a bully back doesn't work. The two times I did, one got me suspended and disciplined (no "charges" for the bully) and the other time, the bully came back with 5 others and cornered me. Fighting back doesn't work, and those that suggest it were annoyed with people but the people annoying them weren't bullies.
This.
People keep pretending that bullies have some kind of code of honour, that if you stand up to them they'll just give up and accept you are the boss.
This is bullshit from people who've never lived in the real world, of course a bully is going to come back with 5 of his mates once you've bloodied his nose. In fact they will almost never start bullying unless they have a serious numerical advantage (well they are cowards, but cowards in numbers are still dangerous). You've embarrassed them, they need to make an example of you.
There are really only two ways to deal with bullies.
1. Just ignore them. This works better with adult bullies in the workplace, on the road, in shops, etc... They end up looking like the douchebag and the harder they try the worse they look.
2. Get more friends than they have. I was bullied in highscool... but one day it all stopped. I didn't figure out what had happened until years later but it turned out I'd developed a sense of humour (well I always had it, I just didn't show it) and people started to like me. Enough people so that bullies were afraid of becoming persona non grata themselves if they did anything beyond simple name calling (in which case I'd just call them something back, I was usually the better smart arse). The worst idiots still tried to start fights, but would never actually touch me because then they'd earn the ire of our peers.
Friends are really the biggest defence against bullying because bullies are inherently cowards.
Calling someone a "hater" only means you can not rationally rebut their argument.
Same experience here. I was bullied by a group of six or so kids. I could have probably fought them one on one, but their friends would have no doubt joined in. Had I been foolish to fight all six at once, I would have been beaten up and then they would have bullied me over that as well. Sometimes fighting back might help, but doing so in the wrong time can get you in trouble at best and seriously injured at worst.
What people who are bullied need to do is find people to side with them and help them. (Even if it's just someone to talk to.) In the case of the developer of CandySwipe, getting information about Candy Crush's bullying tactics out means that people might be less likely to play Candy Crush. And less players means less money for Candy Crush.
My sci-fi novel, Ghost Thief, is now available from Amazon.com.
I'm unsure of what you mean by "open voting".
LK
"Hi. This is my friend, Jack Shit, and you don't know him." - Lord Kano
Who the fuck cares? Do you seriously think there would have been ANY difference between the 2 of them? Obama has expanded every program liberals hated about Bush including his wars, and Obama is certainly more liberal than Gore. They all want the same thing... power... and they all do the same god damned thing once they get it: Whatever it takes to keep that power.
Bullies sense weakness. When I went to a new school after years in the same one with untouchable bullies (son of the dean). Somone grabbed something of mine and they were playing keep away. I ran to get it, and it would be thrown to someone else. I told the next guy to give it to me, "or else". He laughed, so I ran towards him, like I wanted to intercept it. He threw it to someone else, but I didn't stop, and I laid him out flat. I turned to the person he threw it to, and said "may I have it back please?" He put it on the ground and walked away. I wasn't bullied in that school.
Yes, bullies do respond if you hit back, but only before they are bullies. "trained" bullies would have no issue starting a fight, then turning you in for starting a fight. Then getting 4 friends to start a fight with you, then turn you in for starting a fight. When you have 6 reports against one student and no more than 1 report each against the others, the bullied student will be punished, but not the bullies.
I have 4 years of bully stories from before then, but as you say, fighting back never helps. And where I was, I could get no friends. I had "friends" that we'd play together, and such, but when it was school time, they pretended not to know me because to know me was to get in trouble with the professional bully. Who was the dean's son. He ended up in jail, but not for many years. This was at an exclusive private school. They solved the bullying by essentially expelling me. They told me I shouldn't come back the next year, or I'd get expeled if I was in a fight, regardless of how it started. This was at St. Mark's School of Texas.
The irony is that I was put into private school because I was being bullied in public school, by the teacher (locked in a closet for lunch, beat for doing assignments in ways she didn't like). That, and she put me in the retarded class, despite my 140+IQ (the reason I got into the most exclusive private school in Texas, though it's major draw was that it was one block from my home so I could latch-key it, and the academics was secondary). She didn't know what to do with me. If I were born 10 years later, I'd I'd have been Asperger's, dyslexic, ADD, ADHD, and probably 10 other things. The labels were invented to explain the teacher's failings.
Learn to love Alaska
Verified traceable non-anonymous voting. It's how the country was founded, and it worked better the first 100 years than the most recent 100 with anonymous voting. It only had a problem when there was open violent revolt, and the polls weren't physically safe places. As the Civil War is over, open voting, once again, would result in the best result for the country. Lower fraud, easier error correction. Florida's lesson was "anonymous voting allows massive systemic fraud, and no traceability in the system." There are precincts with more votes cast than humans in the area. Ballot stuffing happens every year. Intimidation, if it were a problem, would happen today with absentee ballots. It doesn't. So there are no downsides for open voting in a stable mature country. But lots of negatives for anonymous voting.
Learn to love Alaska
Read lots of copyright evilry being perpetrated by King lately... Candy, Saga, they want to own all the words related to everything they use - beyond trolling. Would LOVE to see someone 'oust the king', behead that monster.
Yes. There would have been several differences between Gore and Bush. Gore would not have restored the Mexico City policy, Bush did. Gore would have pushed to make the Clinton Gun Ban permanent, it was allowed to lapse under Bush. Gore would not have cut marginal tax rates, Bush did. Gore would have not been able to muster support to invade Iraq and Afghanistan, Bush was.
LK
"Hi. This is my friend, Jack Shit, and you don't know him." - Lord Kano
2004.
One should not be confused by words. The gamer is the only thing casual about "casual games". The rest of it is a cut-throat business, predatory and in many, many, many cases (Zynga is just the top example) outright evil.
And not just towards the gamers^H^H^Hvictims^H^H^Hmarks. If you want to get some of the lowest salaries in IT, go work in the casual games industry.
It's an exploitive industry that I can't wait to see implode and be replace by actual, you know, games again, instead of carefully engineered addiction machines in the disguise of a game.
Assorted stuff I do sometimes: Lemuria.org
I think the point is that upon closer and closer scrutiny Bush seemed to be losing votes rather than the figures staying roughly the same. The question is therefore whether further fraud was being uncovered each time. Statistically after 3 counts if there are no fraud and counting was done reasonable each time you would expect it to increase in his favour once or twice such that it stayed roughly the same as an average across 3 counts. If it goes down every single time then it's a pointer to the fact that something might be wrong which should be more closely investigated, but the Supreme Court stamped out any chance of that.
That's the problem. Yes you're right Bush won in all those areas you suggested, but it doesn't change the fact you're trying to gloss over the downwards trend of Bush's votes over each recount.
FWIW I'm not American, I certainly don't like Bush, but I'm not exactly a fan of Obama nowadays - at least Bush had the courtesy to treat us (the British) with respect for backing you on so many controversial issues, whilst Obama expects us to back you and still acts like a condescending cock to us.
I do think you're being a bit hypocritical in suggesting people are just being bitter about the vote and they should just accept it because the very declining vote count you point to is problematic in itself so your argument effectively comes down to "Yes, there was a worrying statistical trend in the vote count but I don't care because supreme court blah blah blah".
C.S. Lewis could craft a clever allegory here.
Ignoring the (purely coincidental of course) disenfranchisement of far more than a couple of hundred people as felons in Florida 2000 later found to be incorrect. Not to mention the other oddities in the voting process (like the "Jews for Buchanan" thing). All in a state not only run by the Republicans, but by Dubya's brother.
Of course news about a fake are Fake News.
The issue of incorrect disenfranchisement is certainly a valid concern.
The rest are nonsensical.
After all, the people of the state supported Jeb Bush, why not George? That same phenomenon is the foundation for Hillary Clinton's political career.
LK
"Hi. This is my friend, Jack Shit, and you don't know him." - Lord Kano
I have the opposite experience. I moved schools a fair bit when young and each time there was a new set of bullies to deal with. Bullies usually come with at least one sidekick, and usually a few. I faced down packs of as many as ten at some times, but usually it was a trio.
Simply throwing a few punches back isn't enough. You need to knock them to the ground, stand over them and humiliate them in front of 'their' peers. The bullies need to know that they can't win against you, that's the real key to making them stop.
The first step is to identify the alpha male. Don't wait for him to dominate you and push you around, ramping up to the obviously incoming violence. Straight out the gate, once it's obvious the person is a bully smack them fair in the face and don't stop till they are down. A few direct punches to the nose will stop most anyone in their tracks. Do the same to anyone on his side who is stupid enough to step in, they almost never will - none of them want to risk taking a beating. Don't play the game of push, shove and tossing insults while they build up their courage, jump straight in and go as hard as you can.
Most bullies only ever tried it on once. They knew well enough to steer clear of me after that and go after the easy prey.
I was sent to the office a few times, and I guess times were a bit different back when I was younger (also, I don't live in the litigious USA), but most trips to the office were a 'he said, she said' affair, followed by at worst a bit of essay writing or detention.
All those moments will be lost in time, like tears in rain.
Oh, you mean like in the last election, where many precincts in several states reported that over 100% of registered voters voted (which should be impossible)? Or where some other precincts reported that a full 100% of the vote for that district went to Obama (which is statistically improbable)? Or the cases where after the election, where some voters have come out and claimed publicly that they voted for Obama multiple times?
You are right, the foul IS having a vote system where fraud is allowed and encouraged. Now lets see, which party adamantly opposes Voter ID laws which would curb this problem. As I recall, one party was trying to get VoterID laws passed several times over the last several years, only to be called racists by the other party that is usually benefits from voter fraud the most.
I even recall the current DOJ suing and stopping several states, including Texas and North Carolina, from implementing versions of these laws, again all while calling them racists.
Simply throwing a few punches back isn't enough. You need to knock them to the ground, stand over them and humiliate them in front of 'their' peers. The bullies need to know that they can't win against you, that's the real key to making them stop.
Sounds like someone just watched Ender's Game. But what about those unable to win against the group sent after? They didn't line up in order for me, as they do in the movies, where it's possible to fight 6 people one at a time.
Learn to love Alaska
Oh, you mean like in the last election, where many precincts in several states reported that over 100% of registered voters voted (which should be impossible)? Or where some other precincts reported that a full 100% of the vote for that district went to Obama (which is statistically improbable)? Or the cases where after the election, where some voters have come out and claimed publicly that they voted for Obama multiple times?
Yes. Why are you trying to turn a non-partisan issue into a partisan one?
Now lets see, which party adamantly opposes Voter ID laws which would curb this problem.
That wouldn't curb the problem at all. There wasn't a report of a single case where a Republican showed up to the polls and was turned away because they had already voted that day, and the precinct went to Obama, was there? Even if you increase the number of hurdles, the problem doesn't go away. But yes, the Republican Voter ID laws are anti-vote because they are a poll tax. You must pay $$$ to vote. Even if that $$$ is in time off work, not cash. Where are the Voter ID laws that fund 24 hour ID stores with free IDs? Nope, still limited hour DMVs with massive lines that are impossible to get in and out of over a lunch time, and some fee associated with the ID. Much like the original poll taxes were deliberately anti-voter, I've not seen a Voter ID law that wasn't as well. Not that it'd be hard to craft one that was legal, but the Republicans don't even try.
But if the problem is ballot stuffing, not ineligible voters, how doe Voter ID address the problem? How can more than 100% vote? Where I vote, the voters are checked off as they give their name, and when the 101%th person shows up, the book would be full. What name are they giving to vote under? How could that problem be caused by anything other than ballot stuffing?
Learn to love Alaska
DropBox "dropped a word" from the title and trampled the existing product with lawyers. First doesn't mean you get the trademark, the one with the most lawyers gets it.
So in cases like this Law does equal Theft... LAW = THEFT.
Below the speed of light Special Relativity is one of the most accurate theories in physics - above the speed of light..
After all, the people of the state supported Jeb Bush, why not George?
Because Dubya is a moron?
Of course news about a fake are Fake News.
He has managed to acquire degrees from Harvard and Yale.
How about you?
LK
"Hi. This is my friend, Jack Shit, and you don't know him." - Lord Kano
It's called fight or flight for a reason.
Even if you can't win, the goal is always to do so much damage to them they they don't want to come after you. If you stand there, let them push you around, then cry like a little girl afterwards they are coming back for more. If you show no fear, attack first, attack hard, they won't come back, even if you take a few hard punches that day...they're going to go after something easier next time.
If you're fighting multiple opponents, 9 times out of 10, most of them will be standing out of harms way while just one or two engage. In the rare case a few are willing to fight - position yourself so the alpha male is between you and the other opponent(s) who are trying to engage. Keep on your feet and move around using him as a shield.
If you don't know how to fight, join a local gym with martial arts classes and start training. No one else is going to do this for you.
All those moments will be lost in time, like tears in rain.
That wouldn't have worked in the situations I was in. And no bully would ever fight by your rules. They circle and all attack at the same time (all are arms length *1.5, and any move to dodge one swing will get you hit from the other side). You can't keep one between you and the rest, when they act in unison. Your advice would have made it worse, not better.
Were you ever actually bullied, or are you just making up shit based on how you think it "should" work, or what you saw on TV?
Learn to love Alaska
It worked for me, and not just once.
All those moments will be lost in time, like tears in rain.
Then you were never bullied, you just had run-ins with bullies. There's a difference, but never having actually been bullied, you don't know the difference.
Learn to love Alaska
Right, the invasion of Iraq which had no basis in reality to be implemented, and was only done to finish what daddy started and get the oil. Yep, good thing he was able to get support for that one.
Which is precisely the fucking point. Both parties are NOT identical.
LK
"Hi. This is my friend, Jack Shit, and you don't know him." - Lord Kano
I've found your nightmare: Cookie Clicker. Now with candy hearts!
where you drop a pancake [...] down a near infinite shaft, where irate birds try to peck at it, any contact with their beaks and you lose, so you have to glide to the left and right to get between successive beaks.
In other words the second level of Battletoads.
We are voting for the winner of WWF matches.
World Wildlife Fund won the WWF match back in 2001.
Lifetime of an individual could be argued. Beyond the lifetime, the "plus", though, is absurd.
I always imagined that PMA copyright terms, such as those of the Berne Convention, were intended to reduce the perverse incentive to murder authors in order to force their works into the public domain.
As far as "lifetime+" for not-individuals goes, that should be a non-issue: if the copyright is owned by a corporation, it's assigned for a fixed period, full stop.
This is how current U.S. law operates: copyright in a work made for hire expires 95 years after the end of the Gregorian calendar year in which the work was first published.
Creative works should be relinquished to the public domain after a not-overlong, reasonable period within which the creator reaps a reward for the creation.
Agreed. But when the major movie studios own the major news media that help legislators get elected, how will legislators entertain any idea of a "not-overlong, reasonable period" other than the movie studios'?
Game mechanics can't be copyrighted.
Tell that to anyone who has faced The Tetris Company. It managed to convince a district court judge that the use of pieces made from four squares was not an "idea, procedure, process, system, method of operation, concept, principle, or discovery" excluded from copyright's scope under 17 USC 102(b).
Nope, but filling your hands full from your bloody nose and then covering the entire front of their $20 sports jacket in blood works wonders.
Doh, that should have been $200...
I think all we really need is a deep husky-voiced man's voice that tells women what they just did was "delicious."