Feyd

It’s not puritan to not want children in a sexualized or naked setting

No, but it's Puritan to take something that isn't and assert that it is.

And it’s fucking crappy as shit seeing you defend it so vehemently.

And like every other puritan you accuse and insult reasonable people who don't want Puritans to misrepresent media and decide what everyone else gets to consume.

they are in fact expecting an unknown number to call them because they’ve applied for a job

I don't know why you think this is the case. It is not normal for professional jobs to call without scheduling and not leave a voicemail. It is in fact completely unprofessional.

You really probably aren’t doing anything so important

You literally have no way of knowing this. There are tons of scenarios where it is reasonable for someone not to answer their phone even of they are expecting a call.

1. There are jobs where people are straight up not allowed to keep their phone on them.
2. If you are working customer service and in the middle of a customer interaction (which is a very common job for people trying to get internships in their chosen field)
3. Taking an exam at school, working in something like a chemistry lab at school where you can't interrupt the task, etc
4. In the shower, on the toilet, changing a diaper, or any other myriad reasons to be temporarily indisposed.

Like it's really not hard a concept. Why defend this power tripping weirdo who refuses to follow social norms

You keep repeating that you know what was in the build that was rejected and that it was definitely sexual and involving a child. Maybe it was, maybe it wasn't. Valve hasn't said publicly what the content was and we have no way of knowing.

The scene that we do know about from the speculation from the developer, at least as described, was not sexual in nature.

I'm not defending child sexual material. I'm saying that what was described was not child sexual material. It obviously isn't unless you're some weirdo Puritan on a crusade.

Anyway, this is my last reply to you. I can't make this any more clear and you're obviously more interested in a witch hunt than the truth anyway.

And we're back to rolling my eyes

In actually professional interview settings, phone calls are scheduled in advance via email. Additionally, while it is ok but kind of weird for the person to call unscheduled, it is

1. Weird and unprofessional to not leave a voicemail
2. Completely out of touch to expect people to answer unknown numbers when they're not expecting some weirdo to call without scheduling when the norm is to schedule
3. Completely out of touch to assume they have nothing going on and can even answer the phone the 2 random points in time you decide to call

And now you edit the post saying you blocked me hahaha

you’re willing ignorant of context.

This is rich since you're the one willfully ignoring context.

1. The content they described was not sexual content. The entire point of the game is to be unnerving by having a set up where you are transparently treating humans the same way and as if they were horses. You can screech all day that it's a "fetish farm", but that really says more about you than it does about the game.

2. We don't even know what the offending content was. Steam hasn't publicly said and the scenario we're discussing (where a girl and parent treated a horse man exactly like a horse would be treated in real life, which is NOT sexual no matter how much you want it to be) is the supposed best guess of the developer.

LOL weren't you supposed to block me?

Do I believe that a studio that has existed for a while that makes weird games made a weird games and not a fetish game for pedophiles? Yes that seems pretty plausible.

I have nothing left but the biggest eye roll for you my friend

sigh the game is treating humans as if they're real horses to make a point/be creepy. You can fuck right off with this moral panic accusing everyone of being pedophiles bullshit

That doesn't sound remotely like sexual material.

I dunno that seems very compatible with the following that was said in the CEO statement.

AI should always be a choice — something people can easily turn off.

Also here is a link to the posts https://mastodon.social/@firefoxwebdevs/115740500373677782

Also, the dev says the following and I think they have a point.

I'm not asking for faith in our direction - the thing I love about the Firefox community is how open, honest, and technical it is.

But I do ask that you don't have the opposite of faith. Like, try not to be determined that we're going to do the wrong thing here.