this post was submitted on 04 Nov 2024
76 points (69.2% liked)

Games

32534 readers
781 users here now

Welcome to the largest gaming community on Lemmy! Discussion for all kinds of games. Video games, tabletop games, card games etc.

Weekly Threads:

What Are You Playing?

The Weekly Discussion Topic

Rules:

  1. Submissions have to be related to games

  2. No bigotry or harassment, be civil

  3. No excessive self-promotion

  4. Stay on-topic; no memes, funny videos, giveaways, reposts, or low-effort posts

  5. Mark Spoilers and NSFW

  6. No linking to piracy

More information about the community rules can be found here.

founded 1 year ago
MODERATORS
 

I'm looking forward to 10 year old White boys doing this in broad daylight, and seeing Twitter flip their shit 🍿

you are viewing a single comment's thread
view the rest of the comments
[–] Vespair@lemm.ee 12 points 1 week ago* (last edited 1 week ago) (3 children)

I believe the objection is not to Snoop for his gang affiliation, but rather to the dance specifically which is being claimed as a more overt gang symbol, sort of like if they added the blood hand sign.

Of course I don't think this is even remotely an issue of concern for most of the reasons others have already commented on this post (it's a pop culture thing now, essentially), but I do think it's worth acknowledging the distinction between person and symbol here to be able to have honest discussion of the topic.

[–] lobut@lemmy.ca 6 points 1 week ago* (last edited 1 week ago) (2 children)

I mean I think I understand the argument for your distinction. I don't play either games, I just watched VFX artists reaction and saw Snoop Dogg in it so I was wondering why it's such a big deal with Tencent. As he does seem to "dance" in CoD: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=EdhPvXhXoUM.

I may take slight issue with your last statement. To be clear, I'm not trying to have a "dishonest discussion", I genuinely don't understand the distinction and there isn't really an article or anything here for me to clarify.

Thanks for your reply on it though it does clarify a bit more to me.

[–] Vespair@lemm.ee 9 points 1 week ago (1 children)

I may take slight issue with your last statement. To be clear, I’m not trying to have a “dishonest discussion”, I genuinely don’t understand the distinction and there isn’t really an article or anything here for me to clarify.

I apologize, I sincerely wasn't trying to imply you were being willfully dishonest or disingenuous, I was just trying to offer the correction to ensure clarity. I promise, I intended no offense and did not mean to imply anything about your character. I hope this clears that up and am legitimately sorry if you felt wronged.

[–] lobut@lemmy.ca 9 points 1 week ago

lol, it's alright, it's cold communication on the Internet. I also genuinely thank you for both replies!