Is .ee one of the ones with bad rep? I picked it randomly.

Is this whole instance like this? Like, is this another hexbear?

I actually am genuinely interested in that fellow’s reasoning behind believing both that his job of managing people is successful, and also that all the people he managed do not like being managed by him.

Anecdotally, I have encountered workplaces containing a manager or employee that was universally disliked, and it was never because they were doing an awesome job. They did appear to think that people disliked them personally but benefited from their results. Often they seem to also believe those results would be unachievable in ways that do not produce the distaste. I am not sure these contradictions are entirely defensible.

I feel you, I don’t have a lot of time either - more than that, but not a huge amount. That’s why I prefer having more viable builds. I could play Path of Exile, for example, but I don’t want to spend hours trying to learn how to even play the game this particular season so that I can make a character that won’t be a giant ball of crap. If there’s more build diversity, you’re more likely to do okay just doing whatever you want to do, without needing to research builds ahead of time.

D3 has builds that are far superior to everything else, but I don’t think D4 is any better - nerfs mid-cycle or not. Using a bad build is punished less in D4, but you’re still going to be on struggle street if you pick a shitty build. With D3 and D4 if what you want to do doesn’t just happen to be one of the good builds your character is gonna suck. It matters less in those games though, since gear is absurdly easy to get in D3, and respeccing is fairly accessible in both games.

In fairness to your point though, back when D3 was new and its hardest difficulty was borderline impossible, I found a mage build that could do it, and when I had finally gotten the gear I needed (NOT easy back then) it got nerfed the same day I was able to use it. That was super frustrating. I would argue they did that to help push the real money auction house though, not promote build diversity - don’t need to buy gear if there’s a class that doesn’t need you to. That’s the cynic in me I suppose.

Honestly, yes. I used to be in the “just buff other things” camp, and while Diablo 3 is fun enough, it already shows what happens when you do that.

Build diversity > screen go boom.

Last I read about this was years and years ago, and the claim at the time from the source I learned about it from was that the cause of this behavior is unknown. Is it known now?

What’s that from? The Simpsons?

Sure, but that’s not the end stage of the thought experiment. It’s not really even the start. How exactly is this larger group of people supposed to enact any viable change? I think we could agree that seems unlikely to be possible in an unorganized/uncoordinated manner. The solution to that is to get organized and coordinate, right?

Well what does that look like? That could take nearly as many forms as people you ask to agree - so you’d need an idea that enough people would fall behind to still out number. Once that is achieved… What? If the goal of the burgeoning group is violent revolution, they won’t get very far into the planning phase before being scooped up by security forces in some form or another. If the goal is nonviolent revolution, such as refusal to work, the system is constructed in such a way that those you would need to participate have a lot to lose, and little ability to withstand a protected protest/encounter/whatever, vs, presumably, a group that could easily outlast all of those things, as well as their children, and their children’s children.

That’s not to say nothing can work, but I think it might be just a bit reductive to suggest that things are as simple as suggesting it is total apathy in those who would need to unite to accomplish these goals that explains why the goals aren’t striven towards.

What could possibly go wrong with that. I heard the Russians have been very trustworthy in the recent past.