You don’t see how it’s rude to pipe in just to shit on a game for costing money? You could easily just… not.

You were the one who replied to me just to rudely dismiss my choice of games.

A few other names have been discovered that ChatGPT also will not output, and none of them seem to be anyone special.

I think the most plausible explanation is that these individuals filed a Right to be Forgotten request, and rather than actually scrubbing any data, OpenAI’s kludge was to simply have the frontend throw an error any time the LLM would output a forbidden name. I doubt this is anything happening within the LLM, just a filter on its output.

Electric heaters, trash compactors, juice extractors

It really depends on what games you play. Some of my favorite games are so niche that ‘matchmaking’ simply consists of Discord pings. The upside of that is that you will get a very close-knit community out of it.

It goes for both of you. It’s honestly just a pretty rude unsolicited reply.

Anything 2D should run on a toaster.

I’m legally obligated to shill CrossCode as the greatest RPG ever made.

Honestly, why even reply just to announce that you don’t wanna play a game? Don’t care, didn’t ask.

$20/year ain’t nearly as bad as PSN or XBL.

Steam:

• Them’s Fightin’ Herds
• Riichi City
• Slay the Spire
• Skullgirls 2nd Encore
• Blue Revolver: Double Action

Switch:

• Puyo Puyo Champions
• Under Night In-Birth II [Sys:Celes]
• The King of Fighters XIII Global Match
• Persona 4 Golden
• Splatoon 3

Arcade:

• Wacca
• Chunithm
• Chrono Circle
• Music Diver
• Sound Voltex

Browser:

• Mahjong Soul

There are definitely plenty of games, especially those with harsh skill curves, that do benefit from knowing what you’re getting yourself into.

Well if nothing is permanent, then I guess the word ban doesn’t have to be either.

Undertale, but at this point you’d have to have lived in a cave for the last decade to not know most of the spoilers by now.

Your question is built on a faulty assumption, so I simply answered with another question that would more accurately reflect what we’re discussing.

You gave me a word which only means temporary, which is very much not what I am looking for. Do you understand what the difference is?

You’re hung up on the assumption you’ve made that anything that isn’t explicitly defined as temporary must be permanent, failing to consider that a word could simply mean neither. This assumption is on you, no one else has made this assumption and a dozen people have all explained to you why that’s not so. No one else is having trouble with the word but you!

You made this thread to ask a question, got answered, and proceeded to reject every single answer given to you. Why make the thread at all if you’ve already made up your mind that the rest of the world is wrong?

‘Ban’ isn’t just a word for a temporary condition. Just as it isn’t just a word for a permanent condition.

Can you give an example of a word that could be temporary or could be permanent, and the definition explicitly points both out?

Neither is implied unless otherwise defined. I’m saying that it isn’t necessarily temporary either. It’s not explicitly defined as temporary because it doesn’t have to be temporary.

Back in my day we had both tempbans and permabans as two types of ban. If you wanted to explicitly specify, you’d use one of those terms.

It’s not redundant to have more specific terms. Assumptions like yours are exactly why disambiguation is useful.

Why would you assume anything at all? It also isn’t explicitly defined as permanent either.

It isn’t explicitly defined as temporary because it doesn’t have to be temporary. It isn’t explicitly defined as permanent because it doesn’t have to be permanent. The word could be used in either situation.

To my mind, Ban has always meant permanent.

I’m not sure where you got that association from. Even the dictionary definition you gave says nothing about permanence.

This is a question of prescriptivism vs. descriptivism. People might say they shouldn’t be used as such, but I’ll bet a lot of people who say that are guilty of doing it anyway.