They should have been forced to do it the other way. “You advertise as free, so you have to provide this for free.”

Imagine thinking a straw man argument matters…

They didn’t say anything about drinking and driving, why do you think it’s okay to assume it?

You started by asking the definition of boomer shooter, which I responded to. Then you added the fact Doom 3 came out in 2005. Since your context was, “what’s the definition of a boomer shooter.” I responded to that.

Maybe next time frame your question better to get the information you’re looking for?

A game is called a boomer shooter based on several criteria. Usually they’re first person. Does that mean a third person shooter can’t be a “boomer shooter”? No.

Quake III is just one game that boomer shooters are based on. Doom (1993) is a game that boomer shooters are based on too. Neither one is a boomer shooter itself. A Boomer Shooter is a modern creation meant to replicate past play style, video style, and audio style too… It’s more than just “pixelated/voxelated…”

I’m providing a best guess on that. I may be wrong. Who knows maybe it’ll be “xtxt” or xt^2 pronounced “extasy.”

Each one of the graphics in the article is linked to a demo of a boomer shooter with a female protagonist. I even mention a few in the article. I talk about female leads, and then apply them to boomer shooters. I didn’t think it would be that unusual…

Nope, regret to inform you it was written by a human. Was this commented by an AI?

We whole heartedly support blasphemy!

This definitely gives you one.

I’m not positive what combination prevents bots from being dumped in to databases. There may even be an exploit that makes using everything irrelevant. I don’t know. For right now, I am vigilant about checking our database looking for sudden large changes.

Glad to be of service.

Glad to be of service.

Thanks for the good news. I’ll let rotarykeyboard know. He’ll be ecstatic.

Boomer Shooter is my community, you have made my night!

Glad to be of service.

Glad to be of service.

This is answered in the comments.

It’s cute how you think I’m going to take legal advice from you. You do you, have a nice evening.

I’m basing what I have said off of work I have done with attorneys in similar situations. I don’t know evidentiary law, but I wouldn’t want to be accused of destroying evidence of something. But my question stands. Why should someone who has doxed someone get away with it by deleting their account? How is that ethical?

I’m at a loss. You’re saying that things that you said publicly are private? Or you’re saying that they become private because you delete your account? Assume you dox someone. I need to find out if that happened. As an admin I’d be able to see that

1. you
2. publicly posted
3. their data

I would need to be able to provide this to authorities if they provided needed legal documentation. Why do you think that privacy dictates you should be able to commit a crime, and get away with it by deleting your account?