Yeah guys. 1 month free time is going to have to happen

[Haseno]

Meanwhile, attempts to use government to pass laws that violate liberty. Oh yes, try and tell me my haves and haves not. Tell me, do you keep your pinky out while you sip on your drink, as you attempt to grandstand?

Some people believe such laws serve to protect the liberties of others from aggressors . Your perspective is only one of them. And yes, I am use to being the smartest person in the room, and hated for it. Libertarians excel in that regard.

[Yahallo]

Other MMO's you can typically get passed the Start button at 5pm(CST) on a Thursday even with an expansion launch without the client crashing. This is just busted. I could get if it put you in a queue but straight up crashing the client is just really bad design.

You could put me in a 13k queue for all I care as long as the client does not crash it would not concern me but the constant crashing and relogging in just really bad. They literally cannot provide the service to their customers with it being so bad right now.

What I find insane is with all of the queue issues inside the game is running flawlessly.

The client isn't crashing. It actually purposely closes upon 2002. If I had to guess, it is probably some fail safe that requires it to close. The 2002's in queue from their explanation is caused by network instability and packet loss which leads me to believe that network collisions due to the insane amount of traffic they are receiving is causing this. It sounds like it is more of a fundamental network issue than something specific to FFXIV. The only real solutions are less people player or more servers, but both aren't practical, the former because the game is amazing and popular and the latter because the chip shortage is really that bad (doesn't matter how much money you have if there is no supply).

As for why the game inside works flawlessly, that's because the login servers and game servers are mostly separate and nearly all of the stress is on the login servers. This way, once you are in game, you don't have to worry about the congestion affecting gameplay; you only have to worry about it during login.

[Velnora]

Some people believe such laws serve to protect the liberties of others from aggressors . Your perspective is only one of them. And yes, I am use to being the smartest person in the room, and hated for it. Libertarians excel in that regard.

"Some people believe such laws serve to protect the liberties of others from aggressors". Which again, lack principle. Laws are an opinion with a gun. So, by attempting to pass said laws, you are attempting to push your opinion onto others by force.

"And yes, I am use to being the smartest person in the room, and hated for it. Libertarians excel in that regard" Oh, lord. Lmfao.

[Haseno]

"Some people believe such laws serve to protect the liberties of others from aggressors". Which again, lack principle. Laws are an opinion with a gun. So, by attempting to pass said laws, you are attempting to push your opinion onto others by force.

"And yes, I am use to being the smartest person in the room, and hated for it. Libertarians excel in that regard" Oh, lord. Lmfao.

Not all libertarians are anarchists. Some are minarchists who believe that the role of government is to protect natural rights. Which is what the US is founded upon. One of those rights being the natural right to life. Thus, laws which criminalize the taking of innocent life would be permissible under libertarianism, but not necessarily under anarchist thought.

Your knowledge of libertarians, and libertarianism, and liberty as a whole is surface level at best

[Velnora]

Not all libertarians are anarchists. Some are minarchists who believe that the role of government is to protect natural rights. Which is what the US is founded upon. One of those rights being the natural right to life. Thus, laws which criminalize the taking of innocent life would be permissible under libertarianism, but not necessarily under anarchist thought.

Your knowledge of libertarians, and libertarianism, and liberty as a whole is surface level at best

Right. They are anarchists-Lite. Anarchists actually have principle. It comes as no surprise many libertarians come off as the biggest bootlickers. This doesn't even entail the complete lack of scientific ignorance.

[Haseno]

Right. They are anarchists-Lite. This doesn't even entail the complete lack of scientific ignorance.

There's no such thing as anarchist-lite.

Only libertarians who want to abolish the state entirely, or reduce it to a very small scale so it doesn't have the power it has today.

Also, libertarians believe force is justified in defense of the natural rights of the innocent from aggressors. Hence why we follow the non-aggression principle, which is a core moral principle of liberty.

[SieyaM]

Not all libertarians are anarchists. Some are minarchists who believe that the role of government is to protect natural rights. Which is what the US is founded upon. One of those rights being the natural right to life. Thus, laws which criminalize the taking of innocent life would be permissible under libertarianism, but not necessarily under anarchist thought.

Your knowledge of libertarians, and libertarianism, and liberty as a whole is surface level at best

Yet for all of the intellect you two see to have neither of you seem to know how to keep things on topic or when to cease an argument because nothing will be gained.

[Velnora]

There's no such thing as anarchist-lite.

Only libertarians who want to abolish the state entirely, or reduce it to a very small scale so it doesn't have the power it has today.

Also, libertarians believe force is justified in defense of the natural rights of the innocent from aggressors. Hence why we follow the non-aggression principle, which is a core moral principle of liberty.

A cop pulling someone over for speeding, or forgetting to use their turn signal, isn't defending the natural right of others. The NAP? Lmfao, that directly contradicts you.

[Haseno]

Yet for all of the intellect you two see to have neither of you seem to know how to keep things on topic or when to cease an argument because nothing will be gained.

People comment, and I respond. The natural evolution of free speech.

[Haseno]

A cop pulling someone over for speeding, or forgetting to use their turn signal, isn't defending the natural right of others. The NAP? Lmfao, that directly contradicts you.

Bad analogy. A cop pulling over someone and extorting them would be a NAP violation. A victimless crime cannot be a crime.