It's more complex.

This is a general comment about cancel culture after reading Terry Crews's recent tweet . I agree with some paragraphs, not with others, and will explain some of the concepts/problems related to cancel culture . Ambiguous or Unclear Definitions. To some degree I consider valid the criticism of this term's abuse, precisely because of the lack of an official definition/ambiguity of the definitions. As you see, different definitions are suggested by people from different fields: Even if we could discuss about the overlapping, it's obvious that they can be significantly different, leaving too much room for abuse. For example, some people can use the term as reflex because of its negative connotation to instantly reject coherent arguments from a collective. Also some of the comments under Terry's tweet seem to imply that cancelling only takes place when that person has lost his/her job, influence (would be hard to operationalize), etc., regardless of the intention of the

Introduction. The idea for this experiment was suggested in the middle of a friendly discussion with SkyArt and Blossom in Turtle's server. SkyArt's stance was that inertia is irrelevant for casual players who are unfamiliar with high level gameplay in DMC4/5, because they could not even identify it in high level clips or understand how it works. And probably that's why it was dismissed in DMC5. The summary of my own stance was that it's most probably (perceptively) relevant even when people don't know DMC4/5 and don't understand said mechanic. Because it still provides a more complex structure that affects the visual stimuli (like a combo or gameplay clip). In other words, one shouldn't need to understand how inertia in DMC4 works to perceive the difference between Dante remaining relatively static and Dante moving in relation to an enemy in a way that makes sense  in terms of structure. And even to enjoy said structure. The main question for the experimen

Gonna use some colors this time. Maybe by some miracle people will focus on key points and stop lying. Or they won't, but this will stay for the record anyway. Lies and hilarious assumptions. Replying first to the more obvious BS: 1) I never manipulated Dinocrusher emotionally to make him dependent in any way . It would imply intention. All I did was a dissection and counter-argumentation of some of his tweets and opinions. Then he thanked me in DMs and I considered commendable the fact that he admitted he was wrong. We didn't even communicate frequently. I never knew he relied on my judgment to such extent, and I DMd him asap after reading his tweet. I explained I consider he may have BPD, at least going quickly and informally with him through DSM5's criteria, and it would be a good idea to visit a therapist for a proper diagnosis and therapy. Along with explanations to design his own strategies to identify incoherent emotional reactions and what not. Precisely to be ind