Them saying Joe Rogan’s podcast is “toxic, diseased, and damaging to society” is not better critique than the other poster calling this comic dog shit. Both are just statements that provide no argument or reasoning behind the statements. Sure they could back it up with examples why it is so, but so could the other commenter, which would make either of those comments valid criticism, but without they are equally good (or bad) criticism.
Providing 2-3 lines of explanatory context is hardly a research paper, but enough to illustrate reason behind a simple statement.
AFAIK, the author of this comic is somewhat of an asshat that exercises varying degree of censorship on a comic strip subreddit, based on their personal beliefs.
like i replied to the original comment that person is complaining about, she’s had some really dumb takes but is usually in the right ballpark. those dumb takes were also cases where she doubled down and yeah, that subreddit is basically a safespace for their superusers/content creators.
there is no substantive difference between my comment about rogan and that guys comment about this comic. only your opinion is coloring how you take it.
you and every single person upvoting you are just lemmings wearing a different team’s jersey than the idiot lemming above.
if anything, we need more haters at this point, because y’all dumb af.
Exactly. The NSFW stuff came about from demand, not because she was pushing it. It ended up being very successful, so she kept doing it. It’s weird how angry people get that someone would post nudes.
Removed by mod
now now. that’s just a stupid stance to take. you don’t have to make media to be critical of it.
or do you have to make a podcast to say joe rogan’s slop is toxic, diseased, and damaging to society?
“This is a dog shit comic” is not a critique, though, is the thing. It’s just jerking off in public.
Removed by mod
Them saying Joe Rogan’s podcast is “toxic, diseased, and damaging to society” is not better critique than the other poster calling this comic dog shit. Both are just statements that provide no argument or reasoning behind the statements. Sure they could back it up with examples why it is so, but so could the other commenter, which would make either of those comments valid criticism, but without they are equally good (or bad) criticism.
Removed by mod
Providing 2-3 lines of explanatory context is hardly a research paper, but enough to illustrate reason behind a simple statement.
AFAIK, the author of this comic is somewhat of an asshat that exercises varying degree of censorship on a comic strip subreddit, based on their personal beliefs.
like i replied to the original comment that person is complaining about, she’s had some really dumb takes but is usually in the right ballpark. those dumb takes were also cases where she doubled down and yeah, that subreddit is basically a safespace for their superusers/content creators.
exactly.
there is no substantive difference between my comment about rogan and that guys comment about this comic. only your opinion is coloring how you take it.
you and every single person upvoting you are just lemmings wearing a different team’s jersey than the idiot lemming above.
if anything, we need more haters at this point, because y’all dumb af.
Removed by mod
Removed by mod
Exactly. The NSFW stuff came about from demand, not because she was pushing it. It ended up being very successful, so she kept doing it. It’s weird how angry people get that someone would post nudes.
So what? Are you such a prude that this insults you?
Removed by mod
I don’t think simping for online personalities and influencers is particularly healthy, and it’s one of the last things I’d defend.
It ain’t about the porn, more the intent to sell porn behind the guise of a reddit comic.
Kinda like when SrGrafo was making loli art. (don’t make me post it)
Removed by mod
You’ve made a point. The fanboyism and simping is so deep, there’s nothing you can do but block the content.
Removed by mod